"This should be considered cheating"...by whom, exactly?

I consider it logging on at a very opportune moment, not cheating.

So now it's against the rules to LOG off of Eve? HAHAHAHAHHA o dear o dear o dear.

I actually think it isn't the goons that want to destroy eve, it is the carebears that ARE destroying EVE.

Logging off when being attacked is an equally opportune moment to log off and save your ship, even though that is considered cheating. Your logic is flawed.

CCP.

Is logging off in the middle of battle really cheating? I don't know about you, but EVE really struggles with my dial-up connection (yes really) when any sort of battle or grouping of players comes onto grid. Very occasionally, the connection is dropped. Am I cheating?

Why on earth would they, when you know perfectly well there's no way to determine when people are logging on/off for legitimate and 'other' reasons?

I once heard log in trap was against the rules and could be petitioned... but perhaps the people who ruled that back then have been fired since then

How many people have jumped on a gate, seen maybe one other person on local and nowhere in site, attempts to warp, suddenly bubbled and suddenly 5 people log on into system and come on grid immediately?

This should be considered cheating. Something should be done to fix this. Please do.

According to CCP's fix, yes you are.

[quote=Selinate]

Logging ON to catch you unaware, however, is not an exploit, cheating OR design flaw. It is a way to counter those who think "Local Chat" is supposed to be an intel tool.

However it is also abused in wspace because the proper intel tools(probes, dscan and scouts) are used.

Logoffski was not cheating nor an exploit. It happened because the game mechanics allowed it to happen. CCP changed that because they didn't think a supercap would survive more than 15 minutes being attacked. It was a design flaw.


Logging ON to catch you unaware, however, is not an exploit, cheating OR design flaw. It is a way to counter those who think "Local Chat" is supposed to be an intel tool.

CCP designed the Local Chat for people on local to .... chat ... locally....


You should know better than to presume things and then act as if the opinion you create based on those presumptions were supposed to hold any sort of value. Check your information and then you're allowed to criticize something.

Where does it say that is so (I am genuinely interested)?

According to CCP's fix. What part of that was hard to read?

I am not presuming anything[...]

Logging off when being attacked is an equally opportune moment to log off and save your ship, even though that is considered cheating

According to CCP's fix, yes you are.

How many people have jumped on a gate, seen maybe one other person on local and nowhere in site, attempts to warp, suddenly bubbled and suddenly 5 people log on into system and come on grid immediately?

This should be considered cheating. Something should be done to fix this. Please do.

So people wan't to make logging on illegal now. Interesting...

James seems to have a point, carebears actually do want EVE to become BOTS Online.

Yes, the log-ofski is now toast, and screw the log-onski.

What i want to know is whats being done about the log-leftki and log-downski.

and DONT get me started on the log-rightski.

So now it's against the rules to LOG onto Eve? HAHAHAHAHHA o dear o dear o dear.

I actually think it isn't the goons that want to destroy eve, it is the carebears that ARE destroying EVE.

Get rid of local, problem solved?

How many people have jumped on a gate, seen maybe one other person on local and nowhere in site, attempts to warp, suddenly bubbled and suddenly 5 people log on into system and come on grid immediately?

This should be considered cheating. Something should be done to fix this. Please do.

That's never happened to me. You log in from a random point, align and warp to the gate if that's where you logged out. It doesn't take me that long to warp away.

It wasn't hard to read, but it was hard to make any sense out of. You're not explaining how you reach that conclusion; you're also misinformed about the policy around this issue.

He's asking you where it says that because you're wrong about the policy, and therefore he knows you can't point to anything that backs up your statements.

Listen, rather than razz you about how wildly misinformed you are I'll just lay it out for you: reconnection and disconnection are never exploits. The realities of networked communication admit no other workable line to be drawn.

Complaining about this is like complaining about rain -- you can either walk around soaked and miserable, or you can get an umbrella.