EVE Search - Exploit - Multiple Log off and On during Emergancy Warp.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Assembly Hall

Exploit - Multiple Log off and On during Emergancy Warp.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Tara Vaio	Posted - 2009.09.13 17:22:00 - [61] Indeed, this is seriously lame
Stacy's Mom	Posted - 2009.09.13 17:24:00 - [62] I seriously don't think that the game was designed to alow this :\
Kita Radeon Hakata Group Blade.	Posted - 2009.09.13 17:26:00 - [63] Yeah, I can't tell you how frustrating it was to lose out on even the chance of titan killing due to this ****. ---- All my opinions are poorly thought out and do NOT represent my Corp, Alliance, or self when I am Sober.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.09.13 17:50:00 - [64] Read this http://wiki.eveonline.com/wiki/Fix_To_Loggoffski Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
Maekor Stormborn H A V O C Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.09.14 12:56:00 - [65]
Ralian Gelain Gallente Best Path Inc. Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.09.14 22:21:00 - [66] I have also petition such antics multiple times. These are the responses I have gotten. "Hi, I'm afraid this is not something we can assist with as this falls within normal game mechanics. It is allowed for players to log in or out of the game whenever they wish to do so. Best regards, GM Zhainius EVE Online Customer Support" So, I decided to continue to argue: "Players may log in or out of the game when they wish to do so. We can not force people to stay logged in, nor can we force them to stay logged off when they wish to play. Best regards, GM Zhainius EVE Online Customer Support" I asked that it be escalated: "I have escalated your petition and your case will be reviewed by a senior member of our staff as soon as possible. Note that there may be some delay and we would like to apologize for the wait in advance. Best regards, GM Zhainius EVE Online Customer Support" response from Senior GM "Thank you for your update. I can only confirm what has already been stated by GM Zhainius. We can not pretend to dictate when people may or may not log on or off from the game. They may do so in as organized manner as they wish or they can do so one by one. We can not intervene in any cases such as these as we do not restrict logging in or out from the server in any way, shape or form. Best regards, Senior GM Spiral EVE Online Customer Support Team " v0v [url=http://ed.evekill.org/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=39174] [/url]
Noskill McCheese	Posted - 2009.09.14 22:39:00 - [67] Hey not that I'm a rule*** or e-rat but someone will probably report you for posting gm correspondence. Oh and fix logoffski
Ralian Gelain Gallente Best Path Inc. Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.09.14 22:58:00 - [68] Thanks for the warning.. Wasn't aware of that one. [url=http://ed.evekill.org/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=39174] [/url]
Maaxeru	Posted - 2009.09.15 00:53:00 - [69] Without going into the pros and cons of the logoffski thing, this argument brings up a valid side note and potential solution: Let Supercaps dock. And take out the e-warp mechanics for all ships. Some of you are going to cry foul on the supercap docking thing I know, but think about it. You can have an unlimited number or dreads, carriers, freighters etc dock in the same station and no problem. While supercaps (titans especially) are the size of a dozen or so dreads, nothing stops a 50-ship strong cap fleet from docking at once. There are even modules already in game that can store supercaps. So my suggestion: Allow all stations a certain amount of space for ships to dock. Make that number big enough that one or two supercaps can dock (though presumably to the exclusion of space for many other ships in that station). And allow, as CCP is apparently considering, multiple stations in 0.0 space systems. You could still camp the station hosting the titan of course. It might allow the supercap pilot more time to wait you out, but it would also stop a number of e-warp abuses.
Triiniity Point of No Return	Posted - 2009.09.15 10:01:00 - [70] Originally by: Ralian Gelain Thanks for the warning.. Wasn't aware of that one. lol lies; the titan's alt even posted in local afterward about how happy he was for messing up our day by exploiting and getting the titan out "happy camping"

Tjarish Point of No Return	Posted - 2009.09.15 11:48:00 - [71] As for the "scan them down" thing, you have 30 seconds to scan them down before they login again and repeat the process. Generally they are not agressed so they disappear after 30 seconds
irion felpamy HellJumpers Corp Indecisive Certainty	Posted - 2009.09.15 12:37:00 - [72] Support it is abused to much, players can't have nice things.
Cheekything Gallente Fallen Angel's Blade.	Posted - 2009.09.15 16:22:00 - [73] Originally by: Maaxeru Without going into the pros and cons of the logoffski thing, this argument brings up a valid side note and potential solution: Let Supercaps dock. And take out the e-warp mechanics for all ships. Some of you are going to cry foul on the supercap docking thing I know, but think about it. You can have an unlimited number or dreads, carriers, freighters etc dock in the same station and no problem. While supercaps (titans especially) are the size of a dozen or so dreads, nothing stops a 50-ship strong cap fleet from docking at once. There are even modules already in game that can store supercaps. So my suggestion: Allow all stations a certain amount of space for ships to dock. Make that number big enough that one or two supercaps can dock (though presumably to the exclusion of space for many other ships in that station). And allow, as CCP is apparently considering, multiple stations in 0.0 space systems. You could still camp the station hosting the titan of course. It might allow the supercap pilot more time to wait you out, but it would also stop a number of e-warp abuses. This is barely related and they can dock you just need a capital SMA, you just shouldn't have Super Caps if you can't hide them in a sov 4 death star.
Nidhiesk	Posted - 2009.09.15 17:07:00 - [74] curiously, is the logoffski used more when someone is escaping someone (hunting) or when a guy gets in a system and theres a gaycamp.. I mean gatecamp ?
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.09.15 18:00:00 - [75] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto The first time I heard about this mechanic, it was from a guy talking about how he killed the guy anyways. Any idiot with a scan probe launcher can find the person trivially, since you know he's within a million or two km of where you saw him last. This doesn't seem like a problem to me - it's a tactic more interesting than it is powerful. I like it, personally. Ok here's the problem. It is extremely easy to catch some sure... but how often do you have that scan probe launcher ready? On top of that... you find the person... you warp ur team on them. You have what? 2mins to kill em? It's very short. The person logging off has to log off with agression in order to get the full 15mins. On top of that... lets now say they are a freighter. 2mins to kill a freighter is fairly long. Pretty sure Darknesss' current nyx survived using logoffski. I have an old vid of Tyraxx thork's aeon logoffski; pretty sure anyway? Frankly. The system leads to less destruction of ships. As a carebear who profits from destruction of ships. I dislike this. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
Cheekything Gallente Fallen Angel's Blade.	Posted - 2009.09.16 10:54:00 - [76] Originally by: Jason Edwards On top of that... lets now say they are a freighter. 2mins to kill a freighter is fairly long. Actually it's 30 seconds and the problem is those 30 seconds you are invulnerable due to the nature of the abuse.
Gehnster Gallente RED SUN RISING	Posted - 2009.09.16 20:11:00 - [77] Originally by: RedSplat Read this http://wiki.eveonline.com/wiki/Fix_To_Loggoffski That solution solves no problem, lol. It just makes their new warp point take longer to make. Plus you don't need a new solution the emergency warp is designed great, it's just bugged. We need to make that distinction people. I feel that emergency warp is there for really when the player is logging back in. For the people with the slower connections they won't be having their ship appear in space before they can control it. The emergency warp gives you time to log back in while your ship is already "known" to the server. The bug is a new destination is created if you log out during the emergency warp. The solution would be to check "was this person in emergency warp when he logged out? if so, don't change destination, else change destination point.
Blastil	Posted - 2009.09.17 14:57:00 - [78] Originally by: Maaxeru Without going into the pros and cons of the logoffski thing, this argument brings up a valid side note and potential solution: Let Supercaps dock. And take out the e-warp mechanics for all ships. Some of you are going to cry foul on the supercap docking thing I know, but think about it. You can have an unlimited number or dreads, carriers, freighters etc dock in the same station and no problem. While supercaps (titans especially) are the size of a dozen or so dreads, nothing stops a 50-ship strong cap fleet from docking at once. There are even modules already in game that can store supercaps. So my suggestion: Allow all stations a certain amount of space for ships to dock. Make that number big enough that one or two supercaps can dock (though presumably to the exclusion of space for many other ships in that station). And allow, as CCP is apparently considering, multiple stations in 0.0 space systems. You could still camp the station hosting the titan of course. It might allow the supercap pilot more time to wait you out, but it would also stop a number of e-warp abuses. Supercaps should be a major risk. Eve always has had a risk vs reward system, and the risk of a super cap is that it can be camped into its home starbase, that starbase could run out of fuel, or could be destroyed. Making a supercap dockyard strikes me as removing the risk from an inherently risky 60 bil investment. ED has weaseled their last titan out of danger. Fix this now CCP. and also, move an Avatar and an Erebus into CL-1 planet 5 moon 12 and make sure it has no fuel in its fuel bay and can't move. and is officer fitted. screw you ED for being ****s and not taking your titan losses like men.
Lusulpher Blackwater Syndicate Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.09.21 05:10:00 - [79] Edited by: Lusulpher on 21/09/2009 05:13:18 Originally by: Tjarish As for the "scan them down" thing, you have 30 seconds to scan them down before they login again and repeat the process. Generally they are not agressed so they disappear after 30 seconds Whoa, they are deagressed, if they log/DC and get time to think about dying, fine, as long as they didn't fire on/kill you they should not be scannable or scrammable. But hit them with stacking time penalties for multiple intel relog. If they aggressed, ship scannable for 15mins, no invincibility. PERIOD. They chalk that dc up as a loss IF the enemy brought probes. *IF they don't relog in 15, they don't get to relog for an hour, they need to fix their connection anyway.* Relog, relog, relog, SAFETY , that's an exploit. Support for relog fix. Which is simply, make sure E-warp 1 has to complete before E-warp 2. No hop-scotching through space while seeing enemy force and being invulnerable. 7
Dirty Wizard	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:54:00 - [80] Originally by: Cheekything Hard code the coordinates of the log off location and until the player reaches that location via the re-entry warp (which should also still be in effect even if the player logs off again) should only warp into that location. I fully support this* idea. All other alternative idea posters in this thread can shove it.*

Ancy Denaries The Confederate Navy Forever Unbound	Posted - 2009.09.21 13:16:00 - [81] Logoffski needs to be tended to. A ship that disconnects in ANY way should: 1. Be scrammable and NOT ignore scrams (as they sometimes do when logoffski during gate-cloak) 2. Not disappear from space IF they are agressed (ie you are being scrammed or shot at) 3. Warp to a safespot 1 mil Km away and NOWHERE ELSE regardless of amounts of login/logouts and ALWAYS warp back to the exact same spot they left if you log back in (even if you instantly log out again. You simply land in your original location and then the game initiates a new emergency warp, with align and all that jazz). This would lead to that a logoffski that is agressed is screwed regardless. A logoffski that does get away has no way of warping to several spots. A logffski that logs off and on and off in order to make a new warp will find himself back at the origin point (pirates or whatever) before doing another align and warp. That would solve it for logoffskis without hurting people that legitimately disconnect or log off in space for the end of a gaming session. Thoughts? ----- Why doesn't anyone ever read the forums before posting? EVE is a game of adaptation and planning. Adapt or die.
Murrior Amarr Black Serpent Technologies Atropos.	Posted - 2009.09.21 15:21:00 - [82] 2 things, first its a bit hypocritical to raise this as an issue just because you missed your titan kills, and second what happens when you've logged off in a pos in 0.0, and due to rl stuff/whatever you log back on after 2-3 days and the friendly POS has being replaced with a hostile pos? How in any way is it "fair" to the person who logs back on to not be able of taking any other action but being warped to the spot he logged off? The warp-to-safe and disappear exists since this is a game and people should (and/or) have a life outside of it.
Cheekything Gallente Fallen Angel's Blade.	Posted - 2009.09.21 23:11:00 - [83] Originally by: Murrior stuff Erm if you'd taken the time to read the thread you'd understand the fact that this is an exploit as it makes your ship immortal, so firstly we didn't miss the titan kills we denied them by a flaw within the games design. Secondly if you log off in a 1-2 Bill "destroyable" POS in space while in a 70 bill ship your an idiot, any decent titan pilot has a) alot of friends, b) sov 4 c) warps to an off grid 300+au safe to log off. Eve is not fair it is cruel get over it, 2 titans should of died but they didn't because they choose to start use an exploit that they know is a "Grey Area" with CCP, thus will do nothing. Hence forth we are trying give them an easy programming solution that will fix the problem so that logging off wont make you teleport around while being immortal. So I understand that being moronic may fall hand in hand with people who sympathise with blatant cheaters, however all I've asked for is reasonable why make a big deal against it hmm?
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2009.09.21 23:21:00 - [84] Supported. This should've been called an exploit long ago.
Cheekything Gallente Fallen Angel's Blade.	Posted - 2009.09.25 02:11:00 - [85] Bump for great justice!
SirxAmoc Joint Ventures Limited	Posted - 2009.09.25 16:53:00 - [86] Some players will do a log off to keep from getting killed that is just a factor. But a good hunting crew can normally find these guys and kill them anyway if they persist in playing. But if you limit this then should those that like to use the log off trap be penalized also? If you log off to surprise someone then shouldn't your ship not be able to lock a target for at least 5 minutes? Oh and if your cable company just happens to interrupt your service because numb nuts down the street got caught pirating cable and they are having to fix his mess and you just happen to be in your Dread getting ready to cyno and now you dont know what happened. So then is that fair?
Cheekything Gallente Fallen Angel's Blade.	Posted - 2009.09.26 15:53:00 - [87] Originally by: SirxAmoc Some players will do a log off to keep from getting killed that is just a factor. But a good hunting crew can normally find these guys and kill them anyway if they persist in playing. But if you limit this then should those that like to use the log off trap be penalized also? If you log off to surprise someone then shouldn't your ship not be able to lock a target for at least 5 minutes? Oh and if your cable company just happens to interrupt your service because numb nuts down the street got caught pirating cable and they are having to fix his mess and you just happen to be in your Dread getting ready to cyno and now you dont know what happened. So then is that fair? Your points are valid but your misunderstanding like many that this may effect players with a bad internet connection. This is entirely about people who exploit a game mechinic that allows them to cheat their way out of their ships destruction. Also CCP does not reimburse you because your internet is crappy... trust me I've tried once or twice.
Tatiana Valenko Quam Singulari Cult of War	Posted - 2009.10.01 22:47:00 - [88]


Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.