| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
203
   |
Posted - 2012.06.23 19:33:00 -
[1] - Quote
Insurance fraud probably was an exploit in the sense that a flawed game mechanic was abused in an obviously unintended way.
However,
* it didn't affect one of the flagship features of CCP's most recent expansion
* the impact on the market (increasing demand for minerals) may have been considered beneficial by some; there was considerable uncertainty how far mineral prices would drop (and what this would do to mining) without it
* it created a price floor that was hit after a "natural" decline of mineral prices, not a price ceiling that is only 5-10% of the current market price pre-exploit.
* tutorials and detailed guides on insurance frauds were published early on - leading to massive use of the exploit by a many of players
* the scale of organized insurance fraud by single players was not widely advertised outside of trade channels, people didn't brag about their profits (discussion was centered around ways to make the fraud more efficient - using station guns instead of self destruct, salvaging the wrecks, ...). |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
203
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 19:56:00 -
[2] - Quote
Fix Lag wrote:Also, CCP does not set market prices.
That should be "EyjoG usually doesn't approve of fixed market prices."
Only after he was hired did CCP seriously start to remove the price floors/ceilings which had existed for years (remember POS modules? shuttles?).
By controlling the supply of ISK and the supply and quality of goods CCP does of course control market prices.
The recent decision to seed some of the new items only as BPCs should show you that CCP appreciates tight control over the supply-side in some cases.
Fix Lag wrote:Oh, so because people bragged about being richer than you, it's an exploit. I think it's pretty obvious why so many people are upset that this was done--they wanted in on it, but didn't make any money. Jealousy does not make something against the rules.
Just because a rule exists does not mean it has to be enforced at all times - it just means CCP has the option to enforce it (e.g. the ban on account sharing is a great example for a rule that is only enforced selectively).
The general reaction of the playerbase (which is of course influenced by bragging and how many players are part of the culprits) can influence whether a rule does actually get enforced or not.
A service provider does not operate in a vaccum. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
203
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 19:59:00 -
[3] - Quote
Fix Lag wrote:Vera Algaert wrote:Just because a rule exists does not mean it has to be enforced at all times - it just means CCP has the option to enforce it (e.g. the ban on account sharing is a great example for a rule that is only enforced selectively). That one is not enforced because it can almost never be proven. What a horrible example.
the quality of the example does not affect the substance of my argument, the example is merely an illustration of the argument.
edit: also why are you so angry? I agree with you. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
203
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:09:00 -
[4] - Quote
Innywuhne wrote:for this project you talk about on the first page, did you have your alts shoot you and salvage? or did you do something to trigger a response from other players to speed things up? did random people blow you up? or always someone under your control? i'm just trying to wrap my head around what must have been required to blow up hundreds of ships. if you were able to do it totally solo with alts, well thats amazing. with help from friends its slightly less impressive, but still a pretty massive undertaking.
usually: get GCC, then undock the battleships one after another and have an alt ready on undock to salvage.
some people used FW alts to kill the battleships for additional profit (LP payouts). |
| |
|