Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Orogaldeo
Amarr Extreme Solutions Frontal Impact
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 00:10:00 -
[1]
WE really need one. a HUGE list, an OFFICIAL list, an UP-TO-DATE list.
What we can't do in the game or what is the limit for X or Y while doing Z. it's that simple.
The reason is simple: those pushing the boundaries of the so called "Game Mechanics" right now might or might not be banned, on the sole decision of CCP's devs and GMs, without a guideline about it.
If CCPs gives an Upper limit:
- We will know WHEN we should stop
- It's Easier to Petition those bannable offences in case they ever show up
- Better gameplay overall?
Yep, That's pretty much like it. ________________________________
|
Orogaldeo
Extreme Solutions Frontal Impact
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 00:10:00 -
[2]
Support ________________________________
|
Gone'Postal
Aztec Industry
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 00:48:00 -
[3]
Would be good to know
Buy My Mines!
|
Martin Vaun
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 01:03:00 -
[4]
Yup. |
evilphoenix
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 01:17:00 -
[5]
Bet this makes topic of the week. --------
|
Hesod Adee
KDS Navy
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 01:41:00 -
[6]
This thread is an example of why a list is needed. Lots of people remember seeing that it is an exploit, but none of them are able to prove it. Add in a couple of people who don't think it is an exploit and people reading the thread just get confused.
But if we had an official list of exploits, one person can simply link there as proof to quickly end the discussion. ---------------------------------------------- I support skill queues |
Cyprus Black
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 03:11:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Cyprus Black on 24/12/2008 03:17:42 Fully supported.
There's nothing worse then trying to figure out if what you're about to do ingame is either considered an exploit or clever tactics. CCP and GMs should not be taking action against players when the rules are not clearly defined.
After all, how can we avoid doing the wrong thing if we don't even know what that is? "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" is one thing, but when that law isn't written down nor is accessible, it becomes a different situation altogether.
I understand bugs happen and that's ok. If there is something in question, CCP should put out an official statement about it and whether it's ok or considered an exploit. ______________ Some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn. |
Pliauga
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 06:26:00 -
[8]
Yes
---------- DRONE love rulez!! 'mkay?! . |
Treelox
Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 07:01:00 -
[9]
Either this or a list of what IS NOT a bannable offense.
--
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 07:21:00 -
[10]
This has no chance of passing for same reason CCP never allows discussion of exploits
think about it
|
|
Dasfry
Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 07:46:00 -
[11]
We're suppose to magically know what not to do.
We're suppose to be able to read minds.
but seriously a list is good for something to reference too, *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation
Military Tactics |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 08:12:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Naomi Knight on 24/12/2008 08:11:43 Yeah how should we know if something is an exploit if there is no list of those.
|
Orogaldeo
Amarr Extreme Solutions Frontal Impact
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 10:18:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Ephemeron This has no chance of passing for same reason CCP never allows discussion of exploits
think about it
the more i think about it, the more i see the need of a "not to do" list. ________________________________
|
Orb Vex
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 13:21:00 -
[14]
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 15:33:00 -
[15]
Good idea. - Lottery - Golem! Cruiser BPC Store |
Boomershoot
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 16:50:00 -
[16]
Supported ______________________________________________
|
John'eh
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 19:25:00 -
[17]
Supported
|
Hesod Adee
KDS Navy
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 22:00:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Hesod Adee on 24/12/2008 22:03:06
Originally by: Ephemeron This has no chance of passing for same reason CCP never allows discussion of exploits
think about it
Yet CCP does tell us when things will be considered an exploit. For example, I remember an announcement saying that entering FW complexes with ships other than what the gate allows is an exploit. But I can't find that announcement again, meaning I don't have any proof to someone who doesn't believe me.
All we are asking if for CCP to put all of those in the same location so that we can refer people to it. If the code gets changed to prevent an exploit, leaving it listed as an exploit covers people who find another way to do it, and anyone who wants to exploit can't be sure which exploits will work.
The only time we would wand CCP to remove something from the exploit list would be if CCP changes their mind over it.
CCP only needs to give information about the results of the exploit, not details on how to do it. ---------------------------------------------- I support skill queues |
Orion GUardian
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 23:05:00 -
[19]
Yeah I never know if something that is done to/by me is allowed
|
Fahtim Meidires
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 23:43:00 -
[20]
The first time I saw this, I was against it because it indirectly encourages players to find things not explicitly on the list. However, a list of all actions classified as exploits, grouped with the appropriate sections of the EULA, wouldn't be a bad resource.
Even if it does help players find more exploits by reverse engineering the list, it should also help CCP find those new exploits quicker.
|
|
Buga Buga
Hecate Inferno
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 23:56:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Buga Buga on 24/12/2008 23:56:29 Started doing an unoficcial one
|
ITTigerClawIK
Amarr Galactic Rangers Galactic-Rangers
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 23:58:00 -
[22]
this would be a great idea couse know that ive been woundering if an entire corp hopping from corp to corp to avoid a war was an offence sevral time but CCP kept giving me compleat different answers from different CCP members
Sig space reclaimed in the name of me -courtesy of Tiggy ([email protected]) |
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers Galactic-Rangers
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 00:03:00 -
[23]
whoops forgot to support
Sig space reclaimed in the name of me -courtesy of Tiggy ([email protected]) |
Karath Piki
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 00:16:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Karath Piki on 25/12/2008 00:16:15 I go away, I come back, I go away, I come back. I see how others are disoriented by the lack of documentation on bannable offenses. Since I typically start a brand new character when I return, I see the frustration that others have regarding limits that they can't find posted anywhere. And often there is confusion, it is a matter of oral tradition and that is rarely a good thing on the internet.
The main problem, though, is that it seems that a majority of Eve players never visit the forums. I've met people who have been in the game for a year and never went back to the website after activating their accounts.
Having a record of what is and is not a bannable offense, perhaps maintained on the Evelopedia, would be good just to dispel rumors and serve as a reference point for new pilots on a going-forward basis. This list does not have to be all-inclusive, and it doesn't have to say step by step how to reproduce the bug-- for example simply stating that duping or producing materials from an invalid source is bannable would cover the POS ferrogel problem as well as any similar bugs. Specific tactics that are contextual such as can-baiting in starter systems should be mentioned, however, because it remains possible and is a valid tactic in other situations.
I understand the whole "we don't want to tell the world how to cheat before we fix it" line, but a list of bannable offenses doesn't have to be a how-to guide.
|
Vernieu
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 00:18:00 -
[25]
Fully support, am interested to know if some of my tricks are dangerous to use.
|
Sockdolager
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 01:22:00 -
[26]
This is crazy talk.... far too reasonable for CCP to consider this, it'll never happen.
But if it does, it has my full support :D
|
Grustar
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 02:47:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Grustar on 25/12/2008 02:49:47 Edited by: Grustar on 25/12/2008 02:48:58 So... when someone does something that isn't on an "official" list you are opening the door for folks to exploit things not on that list and give them the ability to go "Well, it's not on the official list, so it must be allowed!"
No support here, I can see something like this doing much more harm than good, at least as currently suggested.
|
Roymundo
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 04:48:00 -
[28]
|
Valorous Bob
Slade Gravelpit Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 05:51:00 -
[29]
/signed _______________________________________________
Originally by: Faekurias Edited by: Faekurias on 12/11/2008 18:25:39 What, you get to write **** now? Sweet!
Edit: I see what you did there |
Hesod Adee
KDS Navy
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 07:09:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Hesod Adee on 25/12/2008 07:11:11
Originally by: Grustar Edited by: Grustar on 25/12/2008 02:49:47 Edited by: Grustar on 25/12/2008 02:48:58 So... when someone does something that isn't on an "official" list you are opening the door for folks to exploit things not on that list and give them the ability to go "Well, it's not on the official list, so it must be allowed!"
At the top of the list put something like the following: This list only includes declared exploits. If CCP declares something that is not on this list an exploit, they may still chose to punish players involved if they believe those players to be deliberately exploiting even if those players exploited before the exploit was declared.
Then place a definition of an exploit, and tell players to contact CCP through the petition system if they are unsure of anything.
If anyone then tries that argument, CCP can just point to the above text to show that the argument "it's not on the list, therefore it's legit" will not be accepted.
Quote: No support here, I can see something like this doing much more harm than good, at least as currently suggested.
What harm would this idea cause ?
The current system allows people to say that they thought something was just clever gameplay for some things declared an exploit because they never saw the announcement. But if a page of known exploits exists, CCP can also alter the EULA to require people to read it, thus preventing the ignorance argument.
As an example, I'll use the exploit that allows people to enter FW plexes with ships bigger than the acceleration gate allows. That description gives enough information to let people know if they are performing it, without saying anything about how to do it beyond it being possible. And it gives enough information for anyone seeing the exploit to know that it has happened.
The announcement about it was only on the character selection screen for a few days (maybe a week). If someone wasn't online then, they would of missed it. Then they could of easily thought that this specific method (I think I know what it was) was clever gameplay, not an exploit. In fact, I'd probably be doing it by know had I not seen the notice.
You may also note that by not giving the specifics of how to perform the exploit, only the results of the exploit, they also include other potential exploits under the same notice if they have a similar effect.
So what harm could this cause that would outweigh the above gain ? ---------------------------------------------- I support skill queues |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |