Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys Mordus Angels
2028
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:58:00 -
[211] - Quote
Rhes wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:If this is true than I have one thing to say: f*ck this game. It deserves to lose all the subs it's been losing. I understand that it must be very frustrating to be in MoA these days but these kinds of comments aren't helpful. Being in moa has nothing to do with it. I've had the same stance on siphons long before my corp joined moa.
Siphons were designed for "guerrilla-style warfare" involving smaller groups engaging larger ones. That's their whole point. As an added perk, the owners of vast swathes of territory would have to actually live in their space or at the very least have alts to check up on their vast holdings. But f*ck it, who cares about occupancy, right?
Anyway, CCP knew they had to have API immunity lest the entire thing be rendered completely useless. But lo and behold, in that same thread the larger entities (CFC, N3, PL) all complained, bitched, and moaned because *gasp* the proposed mechanic might actually hurt them.
It is unclear what happened next, however if this is true:
Mallak Azaria wrote: Let me tell you about how I reported it as soon as I realised that the API was not in fact lying to me, and was told "Don't worry about it" by CCP.
Then CCP caved fully and completely to the entities against whom the siphon was designed. Not only this, but they did so quietly. They didn't say "oh hey, you know the API will tell you within an hour if you're being siphoned, so LOL at the suckers wasting their time with the worthless junk." There was no communication about a critical change to a given mechanic. Absolute sh*t tier communication, even by ccp standards.
So here we have an eve where the larger entities lobby for changes that favor the larger entities, and ccp demonstrably acquiesces. Everyone and their mother are currently bitching about a bipolar eve. Well, what do you expect when ccp makes changes to favor the larger entities? If this is the design paradigm that will govern eve, than no new sov system will change this bipolar stagnation. People will continue to be bored, and people will continue to unsub in boredom & disappointment, something we both know is happening already.
So yeah, I stand by my statement. If true, this behavior from CCP is fundamentally disappointing. F*ck this game. It deserves to lose all the subs it's been losing. |
Xuixien
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1452
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 00:02:00 -
[212] - Quote
It's not an "exploit" if enough people do it, it's "emergent gameplay". Epic Space Cat |
Guttripper
State War Academy Caldari State
509
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 00:30:00 -
[213] - Quote
Retar Aveymone wrote:if you npc-corp highsec-dwelling scrubs seriously think you're going to be able to outlaw the goons always beating you because we know more than you in this game where knowledge is power, i have a bridge to sell you For me at least, it is only a silly computer game. So you know more than me for a video game - want a cookie? |
Rhes
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1033
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 00:35:00 -
[214] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:Then CCP caved fully and completely to the entities against whom the siphon was designed. I didn't realize that we were so powerful that CCP designed things specifically for us!
EVE is a game about spaceships and there's an enormous amount of work to do on the in-space gameplay before players (or developers) are ready to sacrifice it for a totally new type of gameplay - CCP Rise |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
11068
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 00:43:00 -
[215] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:Then CCP caved fully and completely to the entities against whom the siphon was designed. Or they realized how much of a bad idea it was. No, this isn't it at all. Make it more... psssshhhh. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6364
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 00:47:00 -
[216] - Quote
GOOOOOONNNNSSS
Why you little.. well actually big.
Goons are fat joke. ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers. |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys Mordus Angels
2028
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 00:57:00 -
[217] - Quote
Rhes wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:Then CCP caved fully and completely to the entities against whom the siphon was designed. I didn't realize that we were so powerful that CCP designed things specifically for us! From the siphon page.
Quote:Imagine a seemingly untouchable alliance readying to invade new territory. The CFC, N3, and PL are the larger entities of eve. Siphons were designed for use against larger entities. These entities also represented the bulk of the individuals opposed to the api immunity in this thread.
The CFC and PL definitely lobbied to have the siphons effectively castrated, and if indeed ccp intentionally forwent the api immunity, than that is demonstrable acquiescence to the petitions of larger entities to modify mechanics to further increase the already considerable existing advantages of larger entities. This goes contrary to the advertised goal of the siphon in promoting "guerrilla style warfare" and contrary to the notion of guerrilla warfare itself which emphasizes smaller entities engaging larger entities.
If the statements from your fellow members are true, than I find CCP's behavior on the topic of siphons to be extraordinarily disappointing.
This isn't about goons, if you guys weren't here someone else would take your place. Hell, PL isn't all that different from you lot. It's about larger entities not needing additional mechanics to help them. Eve already predominantly favors larger entities which leads to the bipolar stagnation of which you are so fond of complaining.
The possibility that ccp is unwilling to do something as trite and insignificant as giving siphons API immunity in order to curtail the influence of the larger blocs by the most microscopic of margins would, in my eyes, be evidence of a fundamental and disappointing flaw in the direction eve online is taking. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6364
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:18:00 -
[218] - Quote
Siphons are definitely most useful against smaller entities. ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8810
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:21:00 -
[219] - Quote
Potato, I don't think they "caved" so much as they aren't actually able to spoof the API like they thought they could.
That's what this sounds like to me. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8810
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:23:00 -
[220] - Quote
Oh, and as for you two anklebiters.
If you can't tell the difference between someone who uses a player corp posting alt because he got doxxed, and a worthless troll of the week NPC alt, then you're both beyond redemption. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
|
Lothras Andastar
Associated North American Lovers of Dolphins
69
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:24:00 -
[221] - Quote
If this is an exploit then so is ISBoxer Because the Legacy Code has too much Psssssssssssssssh, nothing will ever get fixed until CCP stop wasting money on failed sparkle MMOs and instead rewrite the entire backend of EvE from scratch. |
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
694
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:26:00 -
[222] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Siphons are definitely most useful against smaller entities. This is the important point they fail to understand. With enough numbers, we don't need to tower every moon. We can just leech the goo on everyone else's fuel dime, and then own every moon in all but name. |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys Mordus Angels
2028
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:37:00 -
[223] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Siphons are definitely most useful against smaller entities. This is the important point they fail to understand. With enough numbers, we don't need to tower every moon. We can just leech the goo on everyone else's fuel dime, and then own every moon in all but name. Yeah, no. But you're welcome to try. Hint: The difficulty for you is that the CFC, N3, and PL own most of the moons worth siphoning, and the CFC and PL have a treaty thereby limiting your potential targets further.
Additionally, while small entity reaction towers can be siphoned, the intel on the location of those towers is pretty nonexistent. You have to go and physically find them. The intel resources on R64s and R32s are massive and ever improving, which again, makes R64 and R32 moons owned by the CFC, N3, and PL the primary targets.
Which is why I find this type of behavior from ccp (if it isn't an oversight) quite disappointing, as elaborated here and here. |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys Mordus Angels
2028
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:42:00 -
[224] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Potato, I don't think they "caved" so much as they aren't actually able to spoof the API like they thought they could.
That's what this sounds like to me. I certainly hope that is the case. That is far better than the alternative.
In that event I would simply suggest that they remove typeID 14343 from the API pull. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8810
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:44:00 -
[225] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Potato, I don't think they "caved" so much as they aren't actually able to spoof the API like they thought they could.
That's what this sounds like to me. I certainly hope that is the case. That is far better than the alternative. In that event I would simply suggest that they remove typeID 14343 from the API pull.
While I'm not super well versed in this, wouldn't that also remove legitimate functionality? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Angeal MacNova
LankTech Masters of Flying Objects
157
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:44:00 -
[226] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:It's not really an exploit, it's another case of CCP being wrong.
Taking advantage of a developer's screw up is an exploit. |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys Mordus Angels
2036
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:47:00 -
[227] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Potato, I don't think they "caved" so much as they aren't actually able to spoof the API like they thought they could.
That's what this sounds like to me. I certainly hope that is the case. That is far better than the alternative. In that event I would simply suggest that they remove typeID 14343 from the API pull. While I'm not super well versed in this, wouldn't that also remove legitimate functionality? It would remove the functionality in showing how much is currently stored in a given silo. In effect, you would have to log in on an alt (or main) to check how much goo is stored in a silo.
I suppose actually logging on and checking a silo is pretty hard, occupying your space doesn't seem to be particularly popular these days... |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8812
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:49:00 -
[228] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote: It would remove the functionality in showing how much is currently stored in a given silo. In effect, you would have to log in on an alt to check how much goo is stored in a silo.
I suppose actually logging on and checking a silo is pretty hard, actually occupying your space doesn't seem to be particularly popular these days...
Regardless of what functionality it is, I don't think throwing good after bad is worth salvaging this. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1191
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:51:00 -
[229] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Potato, I don't think they "caved" so much as they aren't actually able to spoof the API like they thought they could.
That's what this sounds like to me. I certainly hope that is the case. That is far better than the alternative. In that event I would simply suggest that they remove typeID 14343 from the API pull. While I'm not super well versed in this, wouldn't that also remove legitimate functionality?
It probably would which is why I think the siphon should "hack" into the tower and cheeze up the numbers so you think you are getting all the mats you should while you don't. The tower would have the wrong info but your API would do what it does right now which is give you what the tower assume you have in. The siphon obviously "hack" into the tower system to be able to pull stuff out of it so it would not be that much of a stretch to make it also play a bit with the inventory system. Of course as long as you don't state the siphon actually do that, there is no reason for the tower to not know it's inventory is not at the intended level.
Now if that is actaully possible to implement, I have no idea at all but with the current implementation, since they didn't think it was worth the effort or for whatever other reason, it seems it was never done. :CCP: I guess... |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys Mordus Angels
2036
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:52:00 -
[230] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote: It would remove the functionality in showing how much is currently stored in a given silo. In effect, you would have to log in on an alt to check how much goo is stored in a silo.
I suppose actually logging on and checking a silo is pretty hard, actually occupying your space doesn't seem to be particularly popular these days...
Regardless of what functionality it is, I don't think throwing good after bad is worth salvaging this. I would dispute the assertion that being able to know how much is stored in any given silo at any given time at any of your thousands of towers that a given entity may own is a good thing. It just lets you take space and moons without living there, but since occupancy doesn't really matter in eve, maybe you have a point.
At any rate, it's for CCP to decide, assuming the preferable situation that this IS unintentional. |
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
11068
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:57:00 -
[231] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:It's not really an exploit, it's another case of CCP being wrong. Taking advantage of a developer's screw up is an exploit. Oh I guess we should just pretend we didn't see the numbers our own API was telling us.
Exploits are how CCP defines them to be. Recently they mistakenly multiplied most of the material costs of mobile warp disruptors tenfold. A lot of people made money off of this temporary oversight. Was it declared an exploit? No.
After Rubicon 1.3 nerfed drone assist to 50 drones per assistee, players discovered that the limitation wasn't actually working and continued to use it as before. Was anyone banned for this? No. No, this isn't it at all. Make it more... psssshhhh. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8812
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:58:00 -
[232] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote: I would dispute the assertion that being able to know how much is stored in any given silo at any given time at any of your thousands of towers that a given entity may own is a good thing. It just lets you take space and moons without living there, but since occupancy doesn't really matter in eve, maybe you have a point.
At any rate, it's for CCP to decide, assuming the preferable situation that this IS unintentional.
Personally, I would just remove them from the game, give their fair market value to the owners, and shelve it until a better implementation can be devised.
Having them remain in the game, toothless, really doesn't do anything but cause friction. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Angeal MacNova
LankTech Masters of Flying Objects
157
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 02:21:00 -
[233] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:It's not really an exploit, it's another case of CCP being wrong. Taking advantage of a developer's screw up is an exploit. Oh I guess we should just pretend we didn't see the numbers our own API was telling us. Exploits are how CCP defines them to be. Recently they mistakenly multiplied most of the material costs of mobile warp disruptors tenfold. A lot of people made money off of this temporary oversight. Was it declared an exploit? No. After Rubicon 1.3 nerfed drone assist to 50 drones per assistee, players discovered that the limitation wasn't actually working and continued to use it as before. Was anyone banned for this? No.
You see it, you report it. IMMEDIATELY
CCP then fixes it in a timely manner.
In the mean time, sure, use the info. It'll be up to the users to hold off using them until the situation is resolved.
Pretty sure the word "Exploit" predates computers, never mind computer games or CCP for that matter. I'm also pretty sure that if I dig through the EULA, I'd find something that covers this. CCP shouldn't have to come out and say it directly for each and every occurrence when they already have a blanket statement on the subject. It's not CCP fault if some are ignorant to these rules and what they mean.
Ignorance is no excuse.
But don't go sitting there and say that between the time these units came to be and this bug reaching light, you or anyone else hasn't noticed it.
Now I don't agree with taking moon goo away from one party to give to another. More like, CCP should reimburse the smaller corps and individual players the siphons they lost to the big null sec alliances.
Setting examples with temp bans to key individuals (as opposed to entire alliances) would be smart of CCP as well. Otherwise they just come off as lap dogs to the big null sec alliances.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8814
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 02:26:00 -
[234] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote: You see it, you report it. IMMEDIATELY
You missed something. Apparently a bunch of people did, and were told, to paraphrase, "it's all good". "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Randy Roid
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 02:45:00 -
[235] - Quote
POS code, too stront!! |
Glathull
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
587
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 02:53:00 -
[236] - Quote
I wouldn't say that there's any situation that would make it impossible to make the API lie. But there are several I can think of where it would be a terrible pain in the ass.
One common thing that Python developers do for web apps--particularly distributed ones--is create one API and one only. Not different stuff for external clients and internal stuff. Just one API for a given object. You just treat everything like it's on a network because, well, it really is, in a multi-node situation.
I'm not saying that this is how CCP does things. They are probably running something a lot more efficient with a lot less overhead for messaging between nodes and the game client than JSON over http. But the bottom line is that I can see how it would be a difficult challenge to pull out this one object and create an entirely new and fake API just for external endpoints and not mess up the rest of the system.
Impossible? No. More trouble than it's worth? Almost certainly. Turrents |
Garandras
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
224
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 03:07:00 -
[237] - Quote
So someone is very mad at the reason their awesome.. lets plant siphons plan didn't work..
because some smart cookie decided to put 2 and 2 together about why their pos wasn't pulling in as much goo as expected |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1191
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 03:30:00 -
[238] - Quote
Garandras wrote:So someone is very mad at the reason their awesome.. lets plant siphons plan didn't work..
because some smart cookie decided to put 2 and 2 together about why their pos wasn't pulling in as much goo as expected
People are mostly mad because at some point, CCP said you could not know your POS was not pulling as much goo as supposed so you would have to go out there and check the silo. It's like you steal stuff froma warehouse and somehow the inventory numbers get updated. I'm starting to think it's impossible to do otherwise with the way POS work but they just never told anyone directly. |
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
671
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 04:56:00 -
[239] - Quote
Is it an exploit, its an error in code that was "abused" and used by many.
Is it something that can be bannable? no. There is 0 retribution that can be done against anybody who used to api to track these modules as everything originates on CCP's side.
It is a knucklehead move to not notify CCP.
Should something be done about this? Yes but it should not be taken on by the players, but by CCP.
Update the module so the API doesn't show it anymore, and I would probably change it so that it doesn't show up on Dscan anymore either (does it I don't know never used any of them).
Its not something actionable against the player base. They knew, and either did or did not notify CCP. It is not something they can take out on players though. Yaay!!!! |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8819
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 04:59:00 -
[240] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote: It is a knucklehead move to not notify CCP.
They did.
Read the whole thread. And taking the OP at face value reflects poorly on you, by the way. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |