These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

GMs - Please weigh in on the boomerang maneuver. Exploit (y/n)?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mattadore
Doomheim
#181 - 2012-03-30 16:00:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Mattadore
Your killmail links are from 2007 and bugged.

Nevermind they work now wtf.
BolsterBomb
Perkone
Caldari State
#182 - 2012-03-30 16:07:40 UTC
xxREDNUTTERxx wrote:
......

also there is a JUMP freighter in there, I'd like ecplain that at no point are these ships pointed....... meaning if the pilot is there
he can jump out at any time. ( if he lost that JF while afk in lowsec or null he would be considered an absolute idiot, why should hi sec be diferrent, you should NEVER be able to sit 8 bil of isk and walk away)
.



QFT this is why it should stay. I was scanning ships last night and could not believe the auto piloting morons out there carrying the stuff they are.

I saw at least 3 freighters carrying 3-5b in goods just autopiloting.

Brig General of The Caldari State

"Don" Bolsterbomb

Traitor and Ex Luminaire General of The Gallente Federation
Brita
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#183 - 2012-03-30 16:13:28 UTC
bumping is still stupid and should have been fixed 7 years ago.

they could easily create some code to prevent it and to prevent evading concord if they wanted too.

maybe make bumping a criminal act and make you flashy red for anyone in local or in gang....

that could be entertaining too.
GM Homonoia
Game Master Retirement Home
#184 - 2012-03-30 16:13:46 UTC
We adjusted the wording slightly to make it less ambiguous. See the full text here:

http://community.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=4972&tid=1

I also have to restate that we value the spirit of the law over the letter of the law. Also avoiding CONCORD in any way is simply not allowed, attempts to find loopholes in the wording will not fly.

Senior GM Homonoia | Info Group | Senior Game Master
Broxdude1
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#185 - 2012-03-30 16:14:55 UTC
Tornados eh? OHH boy. Heh
Destination SkillQueue
Doomheim
#186 - 2012-03-30 16:15:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Destination SkillQueue
GM Homonoia wrote:
We adjusted the wording slightly to make it less ambiguous. See the full text here:

http://community.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=4972&tid=1

I also have to restate that we value the spirit of the law over the letter of the law. Also avoiding CONCORD in any way is simply not allowed, attempts to find loopholes in the wording will not fly.


But finding the loopholes took time and effort and other people are too spacerich. Surely those are good enough reasons to continue exploiting?
Commander Lojak
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#187 - 2012-03-30 16:23:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Lojak
GM Homonoia wrote:
We adjusted the wording slightly to make it less ambiguous. See the full text here:

http://community.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=4972&tid=1

I also have to restate that we value the spirit of the law over the letter of the law. Also avoiding CONCORD in any way is simply not allowed, attempts to find loopholes in the wording will not fly.


Just saying, but maybe before knee jerk reactions and news releases, you should take some time and consider your response, and proof read it. People should be playing to the letter of the law, not the spirit. People should be exploring this game, expanding, creating new methods, new ideas. Your job as game masters is to say yes or no in unambiguous terms.

LETTER OF THE LAW, NO LAZY, HALF ASS, ILL-CONSIDERED, IRRISPONSIBLE "spirit of the law" BullS**t.

YES OR NO

NOT MAYBE
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#188 - 2012-03-30 16:34:49 UTC
So that means if you stay on grid it's perfectly legal.
Red Frog Rufen
Red Frog Freight
Red-Frog
#189 - 2012-03-30 16:38:19 UTC
there's a difference between emergent behavior and exploiting.

the line is thin, but in the end it's the owner of the game that has the final word on that.

we would have adapted to a different ruling, a lot of our pilot might have stoped and our price rised, but we would have accepted or left.

if you don't agree with a game ruling, just stop playing the game, money is your only power, as we've seen last year!
Ophelia Ursus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#190 - 2012-03-30 16:38:29 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
So that means if you stay on grid it's perfectly legal.


Quote:
‘If you gain a Global Criminal Countdown by committing an illegal action in high security space, it is considered an exploit to attack a target after you warp away from the grid, or warp within the same grid, where you gained that GCC; even if you later return to that grid while still affected by that GCC.
Red Frog Rufen
Red Frog Freight
Red-Frog
#191 - 2012-03-30 16:39:58 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
So that means if you stay on grid it's perfectly legal.



yes but you can't warp to evade concord.
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#192 - 2012-03-30 16:42:04 UTC
Ophelia Ursus wrote:
Ammzi wrote:
So that means if you stay on grid it's perfectly legal.


Quote:
‘If you gain a Global Criminal Countdown by committing an illegal action in high security space, it is considered an exploit to attack a target after you warp away from the grid, or warp within the same grid, where you gained that GCC; even if you later return to that grid while still affected by that GCC.


Strange the news article is worded differently:

Quote:

‘If you gain a Global Criminal Countdown by committing an illegal action in high security space, it is considered an exploit to attack a target after you warp away from the grid where you gained that GCC, even if you later return to that grid while still affected by that GCC.
Ophelia Ursus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#193 - 2012-03-30 16:44:06 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
Strange the news article is worded differently:

It got updated: http://community.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=4972&tid=1
Lady Mariko
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#194 - 2012-03-30 16:45:42 UTC
Why is this game so suck now? I just get the alt account to use for ganking. Now so many new rules stop the ganking. Think about quit. Would not waste money on new character if I know 2 days later new rules of play. Sucks. CCP sucks for making game so stupid. I think my head explodes now! Ka-booom!!!!
Henry Haphorn
Killer Yankee
#195 - 2012-03-30 16:46:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Henry Haphorn
Regardless, Concord can still be lured away using the tried, tested, and effective method known to many as shown below.

1. Orca Alt warps to safespot and dumps fully-fitted gank ships into space.
2. -10 ganker hops into one of the ships and warps out to bookmarked target.
3. -10 ganker kills target and loses his ship to Concord.
4. -10 ganker warps back.
5. Repeat from step 2.

As soon as you board a ship with a GCC, Concord will move away from the belt to chase you in your safespot. When they see that you left the safespot they will warp again and chase you down.

But I have a very important question to the GM:

Based on the wording of the community bulletin, does this mean that it's perfectly ok to do the steps I mentioned above because the GCC was acquired in that once specific grid on the belt? Either way, Concord will chase the gank as soon as a ship is boarded in space.

EDIT:

Another question, does boarding a ship with an outlaw status incur only the attention of the Faction Navy or does that include Concord? ...before ganking a target.

Adapt or Die
Dead Loss
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#196 - 2012-03-30 16:57:55 UTC
I can't wrap my head around the fact that trying to evade Concord is an exploit.

Concord represents the justice in the game and a lot of players aim at avoiding justice because they are criminals (pirates etc).

So how is that helping the sandbox concept ?

Maybe it's time for CCP to make a public announcement on the fact that they have renounced to the sandbox concept and that due to their recent corporate friending with other video games companies they need to turn this game into a player-safe environment.

Maybe it would be better for a lot of players if you were upstraight honest for once.
54a
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#197 - 2012-03-30 17:02:22 UTC
Skippermonkey wrote:
CCP DEV #1 - "How do we encourage more PVP in nulsec and losec?"
CCP DEV #2 - "By removing it from hisec"
CCP DEV #1 - "Brilliant!"


If shooting an afk freighter with a boomerang tornado is your idea of PVP that is pretty sad tbh....

Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#198 - 2012-03-30 17:02:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Skippermonkey
i dunno, maybe CCP should fix concord instead of whining at players who know how to 'beat the game'

54a wrote:
Skippermonkey wrote:
CCP DEV #1 - "How do we encourage more PVP in nulsec and losec?"
CCP DEV #2 - "By removing it from hisec"
CCP DEV #1 - "Brilliant!"


If shooting an afk freighter with a boomerang tornado is your idea of PVP that is pretty sad tbh....


Its not lies, it is PVP, i was just injecting some topical humor on the general theme of CCP intervention in hisec since INFERNO was announced

edit - leaning out the window of your thrasher after killing a pod and sticking two fingers up at concord officials that warp in as you warp out to another belt is highly amusing, its delaying the innevitable, but highly amusing.

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION
Tarsas Phage
Sniggerdly
#199 - 2012-03-30 17:10:05 UTC
54a wrote:
Skippermonkey wrote:
CCP DEV #1 - "How do we encourage more PVP in nulsec and losec?"
CCP DEV #2 - "By removing it from hisec"
CCP DEV #1 - "Brilliant!"


If shooting an afk freighter with a boomerang tornado is your idea of PVP that is pretty sad tbh....


Get off the worn out "what is real pvp" high horse. I swear, it's the equivalent of of being a dull-brained knuckledragger and spouting "no u!" when trying to formulate a comeback to something said.

It does not matter where you are in Eve - your ship is vulnerable when in space. PERIOD. Boomeranging a freighter certainly takes far more piloting skill and a perfect sense of timing than autopiloting your spacecows day in and day out. I swear, Jin Fel is a bot if you ask me.
Katarina Reid
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#200 - 2012-03-30 17:16:28 UTC
GM Homonoia wrote:
We adjusted the wording slightly to make it less ambiguous. See the full text here:

http://community.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=4972&tid=1

I also have to restate that we value the spirit of the law over the letter of the law. Also avoiding CONCORD in any way is simply not allowed, attempts to find loopholes in the wording will not fly.



That is bs tbh. As long as in die in the end there is no exploit. Concords job is to kill u in the end if u warp and kill others its ok as long as u die in the end. if u want to change concords job thats up to up. Dont pretend it was its job all along and we are doing something out of the rules. Can we target and kill other targets on same grid with no warping? Is concords job now to makesure u stay in the same place and only kill 1 target per gank. Im sure i heard concords job was to kill your ship if u gank to provide consequences not to makesure u die on grid or before u kill someone else.