|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:13:00 -
[1]
Normally I would direct anyone with specific question to our petition system. However, we get this question a lot and a large part of our players seem to think that this is an exploit; thus let me answer this question as clear as possible:
No, this is not an exploit and is fully allowed.
Using debris to decloak ships is a perfectly valid strategy. You can use cans, drones, and any other object that decloaks a ship. This is simply a clever use of normal game mechanics.
The Exception: The only thing you may not do is deploy so much debris that it causes lag.
How much debris will cause lag? Well, there is no hard answer for that as this is highly dependent on too many factors to formulate a definition that can always be applied. Common sense will need to be applied (and GMs have certain protocols to use to determine if it causes lag or not, to make sure that all GMs use the same benchmark).
|
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:26:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Ghoest Changing the rules again I see.
This has always been a valid tactic. As a player I have been using this since 2006 as a legal tactic.
|
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:36:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Sadayiel
Also thx for finally answer the never answered question (the there is an equal benchmark for everyone) about this issue.
P.S: adding this thread to my adressbook to link whenever ppl comes up with this complain again.
Well, it is quite simple, really. All GMs use roughly the same hardware (there are a few exceptions, but these GMs ask others who do have the hardware that falls within these standards to check it instead) and the very best way to check this is to simply go there and experience it (there are other options, of course, but going through the actual experience is always the best indicator). On top of that, even though we have these protocols in place, a second opinion is almost always part of the process.
|
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:42:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Smoking McPot with the term LAG do you mean real lag, like increasing network latencies, or does it also include stuttering graphics which is often also related to overstrained hardware?
The number of static items on a grid rarely causes actual server side lag (unless ridiculous amounts are used or the node itself is already under a heavy load from other causes). The lag we are talking about in these particular cases are usually client side lag. This usually manifests itself as all objects or models loading slowly or controls not responding for a few seconds as the grid loads.
|
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 00:01:00 -
[5]
Edited by: GM Homonoia on 24/07/2011 00:01:13
Originally by: Siigari Kitawa
Originally by: GM Homonoia
Originally by: Smoking McPot with the term LAG do you mean real lag, like increasing network latencies, or does it also include stuttering graphics which is often also related to overstrained hardware?
The number of static items on a grid rarely causes actual server side lag (unless ridiculous amounts are used or the node itself is already under a heavy load from other causes). The lag we are talking about in these particular cases are usually client side lag. This usually manifests itself as all objects or models loading slowly or controls not responding for a few seconds as the grid loads.
I didn't know you guys were capable of detecting client-side lag.
I have a bunch of petitions to file now, thanks.
We cannot detect if YOU have suffered from client side lag. That is on your PC and the internet gods have not bestowed me with the authority to snoop around in your PC. I can, however, detect if MY client suffers from lag.
|
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 00:06:00 -
[6]
Originally by: The Pteradactyl
I petitioned a situation in which an alliance had put over 200 bubbles on one gate to protect it (it was a dead end system). My thought was that the only reason to put that many bubbles up was to lag out anyone that came in (the lag was massive).
In the response to my petition I was told that the bubbles provided a tactical advantage and so it was not an exploit despite the lag. Has that changed so that lag is considered an exploit? Or is the lag fine if it comes from objects that also provide some other advantage?
Bubbles are somewhat of a special case. No amount of deployed bubbles is considered an exploit. Overlapping bubbles are often needed to keep a fleet in place by preventing them from simply quickly destroying a few bubbles and leave.
|
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 00:33:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Chissie
I don't think this has always been the case, I remember few years ago, IT alliance deployed about 100 or so large bubbles around a gate, with extremely heavy overlapping (all of the bubbles were in an area that could have been covered with about 10 or less bubbles), this was deemed exploit (for causing excessive lag) by GM and all of the bubbles were destroyed by the GM.
Correct. This is one rule that was changed. Pretty much the way fleets battles were fought changed and we needed to update our policy in that regard in order to keep them in line wit reality.
|
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 01:02:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Ghoest It looks to me like we have GM drastically reinterpreting(effectively changing)the rules based her preferred play style when she was a player.
I can assure that this is not the case. Although I guess I should not be feeding the troll.
|
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 02:13:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Ghoest
Originally by: GM Homonoia
Originally by: Ghoest It looks to me like we have GM drastically reinterpreting(effectively changing)the rules based her preferred play style when she was a player.
I can assure that this is not the case. Although I guess I should not be feeding the troll.
If you are going to start calling names based on people pointing out you effectively changing the rules - then you shouldnt be posting under a dev account.
Oh dear
|
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 03:43:00 -
[10]
Originally by: KaarBaak
My question to Homonia would be:How do you determine what causes the lag?". Is it a simple 'order of precedence thing?'
Example- Gate camp fleet deploys bubbles and cans to catch cloakies. No lag...all is good. Ship jumps in and holds cloak....still no lag... All still good and legal. Cloaky dials up mates and they jump in...addition of players on grid and lag starts...cloaky calls 'foul' on the cans. Campers claim incoming fleet caused lag, not the cans.
Does the decision go to player-controlled object(ships) over the cans? Or is it based on the cans were there first? The campers didn't intend to cause lag and there wasn't any when they were set.
We are talking about gate camps here (usually), which do not tend to involve large fleet engagements (usually). What usually happens is this:
1. We are informed that there are an insane amount of cans/drones/shuttles/whatever on a gate. 2. A GM goes to the gate in question (which is why, if petitioning this, you should always mention the actual gate, not just the system) and has a look. 3. Does warp in cause client lag for the GM? Does a second GM agree? If yes, offending items are destroyed. If no, no action is taken. 4. Exceptions, fringe cases, etc: - A big fight is already going on -> We almost never take action (there may be exceptions, but those fringe cases are too complicated to explain here). - The node the system is on is under a heavy load or is otherwise causing issues -> then it all depends on the situation and it needs a judgement call, usually taken by a senior or all GMs present. - Truly exceptional and unique circumstances -> then it all depends on the situation and it needs a judgement call, usually taken by a senior or all GMs present.
In the end the following question needs to be answered: Is the debris present in such amounts that it is a significant factor in causing lag?
|
|
|
|
|
|