Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
mPistoleroZ
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 14:21:00 -
[1]
Ok CCP wants that game mechanic to exist so you can easily CHEAT and escape a battle you would probably loose if you were doing anything else... but.. WHY the hell ship is unlockable when you jump on a gate and then log out????? (you know what comes next... log in, log out, log in, log out).
|
Marketing Bob
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 16:04:00 -
[2]
you mad~?
|
JDawg1290
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 16:09:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Marketing Bob you mad~?
is it just me or is there a broken record in here? |
Kijo Rikki
Caldari Swarm of Angry Bees
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 16:15:00 -
[4]
I wonder how they could fix this without screwing people who are legitimately disconnected in dire straits. Can the internets people tell if a connection has been properly closed or if it was an actual dc? > WHILE SIG<AWESOME DO LOOP there is no escape from my crappy sig. |
NoLimit Soldier
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 16:25:00 -
[5]
Somewhat, CCP could script it to on disconnect ping the source IP. If it replies, you're out of luck.
Of course this isn't to good of an idea as you could just block ICMP or if your game crashed you would still reply.
Yea sorry, no good ideas from me.
|
Tarhim
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 16:26:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Kijo Rikki Can the internets people tell if a connection has been properly closed or if it was an actual dc?
You do know that even if they can, you can just create "improper" disconnect by unplugging cable?
|
Jerreye
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 16:27:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Kijo Rikki I wonder how they could fix this without screwing people who are legitimately disconnected in dire straits. Can the internets people tell if a connection has been properly closed or if it was an actual dc?
You don't. Get a decent internet connection or do not play multiplayer games. It works like this in every other online multiplayer game. You lag, you lose. There is no reason EVE should be any different.
|
Kijo Rikki
Caldari Swarm of Angry Bees
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 16:38:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Kijo Rikki on 17/02/2010 16:40:59 Ah, but in this case it appears CCP errs on the side of the crappy internet connection!
ED: to tahrim, yar, but i dunno bout you, im on dsl and disconnecting random cables sometimes causes huge problems taking me hours to fix. Wouldnt be so bad but im on a router behind the bellsouth modem and getting logged back in from the router suuuuuucks. > WHILE SIG<AWESOME DO LOOP there is no escape from my crappy sig. |
Earl Comstock
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 16:42:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Jerreye
Originally by: Kijo Rikki I wonder how they could fix this without screwing people who are legitimately disconnected in dire straits. Can the internets people tell if a connection has been properly closed or if it was an actual dc?
You don't. Get a decent internet connection or do not play multiplayer games. It works like this in every other online multiplayer game. You lag, you lose. There is no reason EVE should be any different.
Most other games don't have (almost) entirely player-driven economies on persistent nodes with nearly unlimited player counts, with non-consentual pvp where your stuff can get jacked by anyone that wants it.
I like all that stuff in eve, it's why I play it and no other MMO for the past half dozen years, but your comparison is hardly apples to apples.
It would be fairly simple though for them to monitor IP blocks/ISPs and if a bunch of people on the same system disappear at once, assume the worst and start the invuln timer -- everyone else gets the shaft.
Sounds fine to me. Don't fly anything you can't afford to lose means, by definition, don't fly anything you can't afford to lose through no fault of your own.
|
Jerreye
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 17:04:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Jerreye on 17/02/2010 17:07:38
Originally by: Earl Comstock
Originally by: Jerreye
Originally by: Kijo Rikki I wonder how they could fix this without screwing people who are legitimately disconnected in dire straits. Can the internets people tell if a connection has been properly closed or if it was an actual dc?
You don't. Get a decent internet connection or do not play multiplayer games. It works like this in every other online multiplayer game. You lag, you lose. There is no reason EVE should be any different.
Most other games don't have (almost) entirely player-driven economies on persistent nodes with nearly unlimited player counts, with non-consentual pvp where your stuff can get jacked by anyone that wants it.
I like all that stuff in eve, it's why I play it and no other MMO for the past half dozen years, but your comparison is hardly apples to apples.
It would be fairly simple though for them to monitor IP blocks/ISPs and if a bunch of people on the same system disappear at once, assume the worst and start the invuln timer -- everyone else gets the shaft.
Sounds fine to me. Don't fly anything you can't afford to lose means, by definition, don't fly anything you can't afford to lose through no fault of your own.
I've seen people lose entire vanq sets in UO to lag. I've seen teams lose 3000$ Quake TDM tourneys because a worldclass player with high latency couldn't hit over 30% rg. I've seen players lose lvl90 d2 hardcore characters to lag.
You make the sad mistake of assuming EVE is the only multiplayer game you can actually lose stuff in.
Other players having an awful internet connection isn't and should never be my problem.
|
|
nantaki
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 17:28:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Jerreye Edited by: Jerreye on 17/02/2010 17:07:38
Originally by: Earl Comstock
Originally by: Jerreye
Originally by: Kijo Rikki I wonder how they could fix this without screwing people who are legitimately disconnected in dire straits. Can the internets people tell if a connection has been properly closed or if it was an actual dc?
You don't. Get a decent internet connection or do not play multiplayer games. It works like this in every other online multiplayer game. You lag, you lose. There is no reason EVE should be any different.
Most other games don't have (almost) entirely player-driven economies on persistent nodes with nearly unlimited player counts, with non-consentual pvp where your stuff can get jacked by anyone that wants it.
I like all that stuff in eve, it's why I play it and no other MMO for the past half dozen years, but your comparison is hardly apples to apples.
It would be fairly simple though for them to monitor IP blocks/ISPs and if a bunch of people on the same system disappear at once, assume the worst and start the invuln timer -- everyone else gets the shaft.
Sounds fine to me. Don't fly anything you can't afford to lose means, by definition, don't fly anything you can't afford to lose through no fault of your own.
I've seen people lose entire vanq sets in UO to lag. I've seen teams lose 3000$ Quake TDM tourneys because a worldclass player with high latency couldn't hit over 30% rg. I've seen players lose lvl90 d2 hardcore characters to lag.
You make the sad mistake of assuming EVE is the only multiplayer game you can actually lose stuff in.
Other players having an awful internet connection isn't and should never be my problem.
blah blah blah people are escaping my blob of death NO FAIR blah blah blah CCP doesnt respect me and my perfect internet connection! blah blah blah emorage quit next time someone escapes your gate blob of death and can i haz ur staff?
|
Jerreye
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 17:34:00 -
[12]
Originally by: nantaki
blah blah blah people are escaping my blob of death NO FAIR blah blah blah CCP doesnt respect me and my perfect internet connection! blah blah blah emorage quit next time someone escapes your gate blob of death and can i haz ur staff?
Never had anyone do this to me.
Also, way to contribute to the argument.
|
Earl Comstock
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 17:38:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Jerreye Edited by: Jerreye on 17/02/2010 17:07:38
Other players having an awful internet connection isn't and should never be my problem.
And CCP not having the hardware to support the number of accounts they've sold should not be mine.
GG ignoring proposed solution though. Par for the course with a member of the status-quo brigade.
|
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 17:46:00 -
[14]
If I am fighting someone and i get a disconnect I die.
If i have been recently in any aggression i will stay 15 minutes in space when i disconnect.
Yet when i jump through a gate and exactly at that moment happen to have a *cough* disconnect i am invulnerable.
|
Jerreye
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 17:46:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Earl Comstock
Originally by: Jerreye Edited by: Jerreye on 17/02/2010 17:07:38
Other players having an awful internet connection isn't and should never be my problem.
And CCP not having the hardware to support the number of accounts they've sold should not be mine.
CCP caused outages allow you to bypass gatecamps?
And I ignored your... "solution" because it wasn't one.
|
Earl Comstock
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 18:02:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Jerreye
Originally by: Earl Comstock
Originally by: Jerreye Edited by: Jerreye on 17/02/2010 17:07:38
Other players having an awful internet connection isn't and should never be my problem.
And CCP not having the hardware to support the number of accounts they've sold should not be mine.
CCP caused outages allow you to bypass gatecamps?
And I ignored your... "solution" because it wasn't one.
Moo.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 19:51:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Future Mutant on 17/02/2010 19:54:48 I dont have a solution to logoffski. I do have a solution to double logoffski. Its simple- ive heard at one time it worked this way till a patch changed it back.
Log off once- warp to a safe spot (alpha) from original location (x)- log off twice- warps from the safe spot (alpha) to another safe spot (delta)-avoids x when you log back in because when you relog you warp back to alpha
My solution is to have the second log off have him warp to a safe spot like normal- but when logged back in warp to the original location (known as x above) You should always warp to x when logged back in.
C/d?
|
Kijo Rikki
Caldari Swarm of Angry Bees
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 20:00:00 -
[18]
Quote:
You should always warp to x when logged back in.
agreed > WHILE SIG<AWESOME DO LOOP there is no escape from my crappy sig. |
Niclas Solo
Amarr GANKsTers's inc. R.E.P.O.
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 00:21:00 -
[19]
I don't understand why it work like it do :/ If someone pointed you, you shouldn't get away with a logoffski.
|
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 00:32:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Kijo Rikki I wonder how they could fix this without screwing people who are legitimately disconnected in dire straits. Can the internets people tell if a connection has been properly closed or if it was an actual dc?
You know, the fun thing is every time I had a legitimate disconnect I got tackled and killed, since apparently it takes the server some time to realize I've dropped and I'll still be there when my gatecloak expires.
Fix would be easy, if you ctrl-q you are still lockable until your ship warped out. Doesnt change anything for legitimate disconnects, and removes "tactical" disconnects.
|
|
Leviathan Tank
Universal Army Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 00:44:00 -
[21]
this way they dont have to deal with the petitions, standard.
|
AnnaPP
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 00:48:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Jerreye
Originally by: Kijo Rikki I wonder how they could fix this without screwing people who are legitimately disconnected in dire straits. Can the internets people tell if a connection has been properly closed or if it was an actual dc?
You don't. Get a decent internet connection or do not play multiplayer games. It works like this in every other online multiplayer game. You lag, you lose. There is no reason EVE should be any different.
Dude even UBAR super ISP's arent 100% times up, it will never ever be 24/7/365 internet connection up and running. Im talking about ISP's which we public have access to. Even RL traders who trade online operate on servers which guarantee 99,999% times up. And they pay more for their ISP than average gamer does. So unless you can recommend ubar always up and running ISP at a dicent price think twice before judging someones elses ISP. Btw is urs always UP?
|
Gladys Pank
Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 11:34:00 -
[23]
Stop gate camping like a lameass and you won't have to QQ about this. ~ Soar Like a Penguin |
Heccie Thump
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 12:06:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Gladys Pank Stop gate camping like a lameass and you won't have to QQ about this.
Are you being serious here? Stop gate camping? You do know how this game works, don't you, or are you suggesting that corps at war stick to a strict honour system and meet up at a designated place and time to have a 'fair' fight, or that pirates are not permitted to lay traps to catch their prey?
"I say, old boy, I think you will find we weren't meant to be using Falcons in today's fight"
Anyhow, on topic, I would imagine it would be fairly straightforward for CCP to monitor the petition system and pick out repeat offenders of Loggofski claims, check the logs to see if there is a pattern of multiple logging off and back in over a short period of time in each case, then deal with the CHEAT.
People that genuinely DC either log back in and carry on playing or can't get back on for some considerable time. I have yet to come across anyone who DC'd then had another genuine DC immediately on logging back in.
|
Fumitsugu
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 14:18:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Gladys Pank Stop gate camping like a lameass and you won't have to QQ about this.
Agreed.
|
mPistoleroZ
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 15:04:00 -
[26]
stop gate camping??? when you roam and someone jumps to you and you wait behind the gate, is this considered gate camp?
|
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar Final Agony B A N E
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 06:54:00 -
[27]
Went on a small roam Amamake -> Evati, not in Evati yet and already had a Huginn, Drake and Geddon pull the logoffski under cloak.
To put that in context, 6 encounters, 3 of them logged off under cloak
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 08:22:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Gladys Pank Stop gate camping like a lameass and you won't have to QQ about this.
Are you suggesting he take risks and work for his killmails? You must be MAD!
PS: In before the lock. Ranting and cross-posting not allowed.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 08:42:00 -
[29]
Quote:
Somewhat, CCP could script it to on disconnect ping the source IP. If it replies, you're out of luck.
Of course this isn't to good of an idea as you could just block ICMP or if your game crashed you would still reply.
Besides an added cost of bandwidth for CCP (they are incredibly exaustive about saving any droplet of band), all you'd prove with the test is that:
- A socket and a protocol which are not those used by the game are working. Doh.
- The guy is bad and does not know to disable remote ping, with the possible consequences.
Quote:
Get a decent internet connection or do not play multiplayer games. It works like this in every other online multiplayer game. You lag, you lose.
Yes, you lose 20 silver in repairs, great loss compared to EvE.
Quote:
You make the sad mistake of assuming EVE is the only multiplayer game you can actually lose stuff in.
Other players having an awful internet connection isn't and should never be my problem.
You pretending to be all perfect and hard inside should never be their or CCP's problem either.
Quote:
If I am fighting someone and i get a disconnect I die.
If i have been recently in any aggression i will stay 15 minutes in space when i disconnect.
Yet when i jump through a gate and exactly at that moment happen to have a *cough* disconnect i am invulnerable.
That's a game limitation, due to a full reset of the situation after any inter-system jump. It has to be some mega-obscure extra-ancient code, of the kind that CCP's programmers fear just to be vaguely mentioned in their worst nightmares :D
Quote:
You know, the fun thing is every time I had a legitimate disconnect I got tackled and killed, since apparently it takes the server some time to realize I've dropped and I'll still be there when my gatecloak expires.
Even with a manual TCP keep alive (and more with the default one, not sure if EvE uses it), there's a timeout before you are recognized as disconnected and that timeout is quite appreciable.
Also, I don't think it makes economic sense for CCP to go and risk breaking their already shaky old code (and break the game for all and for months, like for the laaaaag PvP) to make so that 1 ship every 1000 is not spared a blob camp.
- Auditing and consulting
Before asking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h and http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 08:51:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Omara Otawan on 19/02/2010 08:52:31
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Originally by: Gladys Pank Stop gate camping like a lameass and you won't have to QQ about this.
Are you suggesting he take risks and work for his killmails? You must be MAD!
Way to miss the point, or did the game change last week in a way that sitting at the same spot for hours without moving is suddenly safer than ganking something and immediately disappearing into a safespot?
Not even mentioning the fact that organized gatecamps have ways to work around the logoffski, which small roaming gangs and solo pvpers have not.
Eve is based on risk versus reward, where is the risk in jumping through a gate when you can just ctrl-q on the other side?
|
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 11:30:00 -
[31]
If you are in a roaming gang you are in a light, quick force. Don't expect to alpha freigthers and similar.
Or bring more forces - you know they manage to alpha the big stuff even in hi sec.
Or bring a ship with probes.
It's definitely a mirror copy of the mission forum cry threads about people not adapting to the game and screaming nerf at ninjas and can flippers and demanding the game to be changed to suit their "fairness" agenda.
Game's being unfair for both categories, that looks like EvE is balanced against both the "factions" in the end. - Auditing and consulting
Before asking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h and http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Gladys Pank
Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 12:09:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Gladys Pank on 19/02/2010 12:11:32
Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 19/02/2010 09:24:49
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Originally by: Gladys Pank Stop gate camping like a lameass and you won't have to QQ about this.
Are you suggesting he take risks and work for his killmails? You must be MAD!
Way to miss the point, or did the game change last week in a way that sitting at the same spot for hours without moving is suddenly safer than ganking something and immediately disappearing into a safespot?
Not even mentioning the fact that organized gatecamps have ways to work around the logoffski, which small roaming gangs and solo pvpers have not.
Eve is based on risk versus reward, where is the risk in jumping through a gate when you can just ctrl-q on the other side? In other words, how hypocritical does one have to be to ask for campers "working for their kills" and at the same time assume its perfectly valid for travellers to NOT work for their safety?
I don't recall actually advocating logoffskis.
Also your post implies gate camping is easy as you suggest they have workarounds, therefore negating any claim that logoffski is overpowered. By your claim it is counterable.
Your ship fittings are terrible by the way.
edit: spelling ~
Soar Like a Penguin |
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 17:41:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Omara Otawan on 19/02/2010 17:41:24
Originally by: Gladys Pank
Quote:
Not even mentioning the fact that organized gatecamps have ways to work around the logoffski, which small roaming gangs and solo pvpers have not.
Also your post implies gate camping is easy as you suggest they have workarounds, therefore negating any claim that logoffski is overpowered. By your claim it is counterable.
Reading comprehension is not your strong part I take it. I never said it was easy, but there are ways to still catch the ship with a bit of luck.
These however do not apply for roaming gangs or solo players, so in most situations it is not counterable, unless you want to advocate 50-ship gatecamps as primary form of pvp.
Originally by: Gladys Pank
Your ship fittings are terrible by the way.
So are your forum posts, guess neither can be helped.
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 22:46:00 -
[34]
Ideally, what should happen during disconnects (as opposed to graceful client exit where it sends exit message to server) is that server AI takes over your ship and either attempts to continue the fight (if there's active engagement) or get safe and disappear after log out timer.
I had my share of disconnects during battle - and believe me, when that happens, the current log out mechanics don't help at all. If you disconnect during battle, your ship has 15 aggro, it's probably scrambled anyway. I would wish that my ship could continue fighting at least with intelligence of Sleeper AI until I can reconnect and take over control
But when there's no battle, extending 1 minute log out timer to 2 minutes or doing some other changes to prevent abuse would help in much more situations than it would hurt.
The most common abuse of the current system is when people jump + log right away. The chance of that happening for real is low. And even when people have lag problems loading grid - it doesn't help them at all, because their enemies see their ships appear at the gate, there is no emergency warp, and they get killed anyways.
The current system only helps cheaters.
|
Removal Tool
Space Jerks
|
Posted - 2010.02.20 03:06:00 -
[35]
Hi it's vince from shamwow, you'll be saying wow everytime.
|
MarieFrance Tessier
|
Posted - 2010.02.22 04:02:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Future Mutant Edited by: Future Mutant on 17/02/2010 19:54:48 My solution is to have the second log off have him warp to a safe spot like normal- but when logged back in warp to the original location (known as x above) You should always warp to x when logged back in.
C/d?
CCP has on a few occasions said that this is their ideal solution to the problem, and that they are working on a way of implementing it.
An additional nice way to do it would be for "emergency warp" to be a command that is issuable at any time, and issued automatically by logoff/crash. It warps you you 1,000,000 KM the direction you are aligned to and activates 'distress beacon' which shows up on via onboard scanner as warpable. This removes logoffski as a valid tactic, since it is tantamount to pressing the E-warp button, makes it easier (read: trivial) to probe out for offensive PVP vessels (Which should be inescapable even in DC, there's no other fair way to decide it), plus it adds something the game lacks: If you hang out in your ewarp SS for a minute with your distress beacon up, you should be able to logoff instantly (As it is essentially picking logoff from game menu, but keeping a viewscreen up as you count down the minute in space timer).
Note the distress beacon interferes as cloak with module activation, it is precisely considered to match the behavior of logging off, except that you can still watch what happens.
|
Salen Kane
Amarr
|
Posted - 2010.02.22 12:31:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Kijo Rikki I wonder how they could fix this without screwing people who are legitimately disconnected in dire straits. Can the internets people tell if a connection has been properly closed or if it was an actual dc?
They could just put a timer on the logout-warp so it could only occur once every 5 minutes or so. That way, people who suffer an untimely disconnect is safe, but it becomes harder to exploit.
If you disconnect repeatedly you shouldn't be out PvPing anyway, and the people who would be screwed over by this change would be quite few compared to those that get screwed over by the exploiting of the mechanic as it is now. Do not try to pwn with the ship. You are only pwning yourself. Instead, realise that there is no ship, there is only you, pwning. |
Ackwell
Tiera Javelin Ltd.
|
Posted - 2010.02.22 12:54:00 -
[38]
Problem 1: Mentioning elite PVP and logoffski in the same thread. If anyone thinks he/she is "elite PVPer" he/she won't play with logoffski. In PVP you sometimes lose and sometimes win. Running from battle in dire situation is ok within game mechanics and player skill but you if have to do it by "cheating" I don't see it as something so called "elite PVPer" would do. Or would you call him "elite" then?
Just my personal opinion. But if there is somebody from the feared "elite PVP" community, please share yours too. Is this so far reaching problem in "elite PVP"?
And by the way, what defines PVP as "elite"?
Ackwell Javelin Commander
P.S. Yes, I'm at work and on a really bad mood :)
Ackwell CO, Tiera Javelin Ltd. Caldari Honor! Amarr Victor!
|
Haramir Haleths
Caldari Nutella Bande
|
Posted - 2010.02.22 13:53:00 -
[39]
Can someone explain the mechanic behind it for me. I would like to use it. Plz thx
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2010.02.22 15:22:00 -
[40]
I don't use it, but have seen it used many times. Can't say it really bothers me though.
|
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2010.02.23 18:00:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Ephemeron
The most common abuse of the current system is when people jump + log right away...
The current system only helps cheaters.
Strange you dislike this "system" yet are all over the cloak mwd "tactic".
Surely being able to ccp sanctioned logofski is saving "solo hauluage" in eve. According to your logic the gang should be using cunning measures to bait the pilot into a belt.
Both logofski and cloak-mwd use unintentional side effects in order to escape PVP. At least with logofski - the player is subsequently trapped out of game for a while until things cool down. With cloak-mwd he fly to the next gate to do the same thing again and again and again.
Just goes to show - people dont like cheating unless it benefits them.
SKUNK (o)
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.02.24 03:55:00 -
[42]
Le Skunk, that's a stawman argument.
With that kind of defense you can dismiss any meaningful discussion of game balance. Nothing would ever get done if people took that seriously. And while I could come up with counter argument, I know that it would be pointless since you can just keep them coming.
|
Zeba
Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2010.02.24 04:23:00 -
[43]
Oh boo ****ing hoo.
Gate campers bored out of their skull miss out on a kill because he logoffskied.
Make a thread about it ffs..
Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu The only thing separating us from frightened, feral monkeys is running water on tap, fuel in the tank, and current in our wall sockets.
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 02:59:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Le Skunk
Just goes to show - people dont like cheating unless it benefits them. SKUNK
(o)
|
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 04:03:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Omara Otawan on 25/02/2010 04:03:41
Originally by: Zeba
Gate campers bored out of their skull miss out on a kill because he logoffskied.
What are you on about? I hate gates being the primary kill zone of the game as much as the next guy.
But that doesnt change anything about my opinion that someone being dumb enough to jump his unscouted freighter into a camped system deserves to get his ship popped.
By your logic I should be able to log off and survive when I get blobbed in a belt taking some random bait, I should probably be able to log off and get my isk back when buying overpriced stuff, log off when I dont like a loot drop etc
|
Sader Rykane
Amarr Midnight Sentinels Midnight Space Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 05:09:00 -
[46]
uh... if the logoffski person was forced to warp back to spot X after the logoff then why would they log back in?
Either way you still lose.
(I'm assuming that the 15 minute agression timer is not applied when a person logs out before being engaged Confirm/Deny?)
Sig Gallery is currently down: Contact me ingame for prices.
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 06:49:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Le Skunk
Originally by: Le Skunk
Just goes to show - people dont like cheating unless it benefits them. SKUNK
I'm against all cheating. When I first discovered the MWD+cloak trick I made a public forum post about it asking for guidance from EVE community and CCP. CCP confirmed it was not cheating. There were numerous other threads and statements from GMs.
Quote: (I'm assuming that the 15 minute agression timer is not applied when a person logs out before being engaged Confirm/Deny?)
Confirmed. That is one of the major flaws in current system. I asked several time to change it.
|
Zeba
Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 07:11:00 -
[48]
To op. Boo Mother****ing Hoo.
You missed out on a nub killmail so cry us a river. So did the other 20 noobs you killed at the camp who were flying t1 untanked industrials filled with their entire amassed assets not satisfy you?
LRN2PVP
Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu The only thing separating us from frightened, feral monkeys is running water on tap, fuel in the tank, and current in our wall sockets.
|
Van PokerAlho
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 16:24:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Fumitsugu
Originally by: Gladys Pank Stop gate camping like a lameass and you won't have to QQ about this.
Agreed.
lol
is this a good answer?
do you know the game main concept is about travelling thru different systems? and do you know that gates are used for that?
There are some nice tutorials ingame and out of game(so I heard) maybe its time for you to read/make/use them? just a suggestion.
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 18:41:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Le Skunk on 26/02/2010 18:44:42
EMPHERMERONS ARGUMENT
1) Ephemeron states he is "against all cheating" - and continues to defend his usage of the cloak mwd tactic by saying CCP confirmed many times it was not cheating.
2) Ephemeron states that the present logging off system "helps only cheaters". This time Despite the fact the CCP have confirmed many times it is not cheating CCP declare that it is not up to them to decide when a player logs on or off.
So he quotes CCP when he uses one tactic that benefits him (he cloak mwds all around the map). Yet ignores CCP when he comes up against another tactic that he disapproves of (targets vanishing into thin air on a gate)
Which lead me once again to state (this time clearly evidenced)that it
Just goes to show - people dont like cheating unless it benefits them.
Quotes For Proof
Ephemeron referring to Logofski:
Originally by: Ephemeron
The most common abuse of the current system is when people jump + log right away. The chance of that happening for real is low. And even when people have lag problems loading grid - it doesn't help them at all, because their enemies see their ships appear at the gate, there is no emergency warp, and they get killed anyways.
The current system only helps cheaters.
Ephermeron referring to cloak mwd:
Originally by: Ephemeron I'm against all cheating. When I first discovered the MWD+cloak trick I made a public forum post about it asking for guidance from EVE community and CCP. CCP confirmed it was not cheating. There were numerous other threads and statements from GMs.
(o)
|
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 19:07:00 -
[51]
If you want to get neat picky with semantics, I haven't actually said that logging off after gate jump is cheating. Feel free to double check my posts.
I said this tactic helps cheaters. Logically, that does not imply that all people using this tactic are cheaters, nor does it imply that the use of this tactic makes one a cheater. What I do imply is that people who want to cheat are interested in using this tactic.
I consider it to be bad game design.
Anyway, again you aren't helping to further your cause by pushing the argument in current direction. The only people who can do anything are CCP, and they couldn't care less about what you think about some other player's opinion on cheating or how logically consistent some other player's forum posts are.
The target is CCP, shoot in their direction.
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 19:23:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Ephemeron If you want to get neat picky with semantics, I haven't actually said that logging off after gate jump is cheating. Feel free to double check my posts.
I said this tactic helps cheaters. Logically, that does not imply that all people using this tactic are cheaters, nor does it imply that the use of this tactic makes one a cheater. What I do imply is that people who want to cheat are interested in using this tactic.
I consider it to be bad game design.
Anyway, again you aren't helping to further your cause by pushing the argument in current direction. The only people who can do anything are CCP, and they couldn't care less about what you think about some other player's opinion on cheating or how logically consistent some other player's forum posts are.
The target is CCP, shoot in their direction.
Poppy****.
Ive got you bang to rights on this and you know it.
Im not interested in what CCP think - I was responding to clear hypocrisy and making the point that some of those who can be most vocal about one element of obvious bad game design (as I agree the present logofski mechanics are) are often happily "abusing" another (as you do with cloak-mwd).
Its not specifically you, I just tend to point it out when i remember a name in conjunction with a previous subject.
SKUNK (o)
|
Nobani
Merch Industrial SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 21:43:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Le Skunk Both logofski and cloak-mwd use unintentional side effects in order to escape PVP. At least with logofski - the player is subsequently trapped out of game for a while until things cool down. With cloak-mwd he fly to the next gate to do the same thing again and again and again.
In 0.0, a couple of anchorable bubbles/dictors are often enough to disrupt the cloak+mwd trick enough to allow a skilled group of gate campers to catch anything without a covops cloak. I haven't tested it, but they should also hold someone who logs in place for a minute, during > 30s of which they should be vulnerable, giving you a chance to kill them.
In low-sec, bubbles are of course not allowed. Shocking revelation: travelling solo through low-sec is safer than travelling solo through 0.0!
|
Commander Shag
No Trademark
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 23:07:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Nobani I haven't tested it, but they should also hold someone who logs in place for a minute, during > 30s of which they should be vulnerable, giving you a chance to kill them.
If someone logs off in a bubble, they agress as they try to emergency warp. They won't go anywhere, but even if they did they'd sit in space for 15 minutes.
Along the same lines, watching a cap stable heavy dictor get unintentionally disconnected with it's bubble up is... amusing.
|
lil j0n
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 01:51:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Kijo Rikki I wonder how they could fix this without screwing people who are legitimately disconnected in dire straits. Can the internets people tell if a connection has been properly closed or if it was an actual dc?
What's the matter with screwing people over who are legitimately disconnected? |
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 03:43:00 -
[56]
Originally by: lil j0n
Originally by: Kijo Rikki I wonder how they could fix this without screwing people who are legitimately disconnected in dire straits. Can the internets people tell if a connection has been properly closed or if it was an actual dc?
What's the matter with screwing people over who are legitimately disconnected?
There's 1 way that CCP could greatly help those who legitimately disconnect in battle situation while making it bad for people who abuse logging to save their ships:
When player loses connection, have Sleeper-type AI take over control of player's ship. It should be smart enough to know how to manage shield booster / armor rep, to target and attack ships within optimal range, use web/scramble if available, and to try to warp out to safe.
At same time, aggro timer should be applied to anyone who gets hit after logging. If people log without aggro, and they get hit within 60 seconds before their ship disappears, they should get 15 minute aggro timer.
This doesn't harm legitimate disconnects as much because those people actually log back in as soon as they can - within 1 minute usually. Those who can't - still take advantage of AI controlling their ship.
|
Sulg
Cobalt Dragon Exploration Company
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 04:28:00 -
[57]
Originally by: lil j0n What's the matter with screwing people over who are legitimately disconnected?
Nothing. It should be completely acceptable. Don't undock what you aren't willing to lose to a disconnect if your internet sucks. It's just that simple.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Warp speed is not fast enough. We must go straight to...ludicrous speed! |
Zeba
Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 05:07:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 25/02/2010 04:03:41
Originally by: Zeba
Gate campers bored out of their skull miss out on a kill because he logoffskied.
What are you on about? I hate gates being the primary kill zone of the game as much as the next guy.
But that doesnt change anything about my opinion that someone being dumb enough to jump his unscouted freighter into a camped system deserves to get his ship popped.
By your logic I should be able to log off and survive when I get blobbed in a belt taking some random bait, I should probably be able to log off and get my isk back when buying overpriced stuff, log off when I dont like a loot drop etc
A ship that logoffskis is vulnerable for 60 seconds after he hits control-q. Lock him up as soon as he appears on his align for the emergency warp and make sure to have enough dps to kill him in that 60 seconds. That you failed to do that is all on you. Period.
Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu The only thing separating us from frightened, feral monkeys is running water on tap, fuel in the tank, and current in our wall sockets.
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 05:43:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Le Skunk on 27/02/2010 05:43:43
Originally by: Zeba A ship that logoffskis is vulnerable for 60 seconds after he hits control-q. Lock him up as soon as he appears on his align for the emergency warp and make sure to have enough dps to kill him in that 60 seconds. That you failed to do that is all on you. Period.
So now we have to put 15 Damage battleships on every gate to kill the log-ofski freighter. When this is done the carebears call us blobbers and complain that sentry guns are not effective against large gangs and whine for sentry guns to be boosted.
So 15 people are needed to catch one lone logofskie non-cheat. Yes very balanced.
SKUNK (o)
|
Zeba
Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 05:55:00 -
[60]
Edited by: Zeba on 27/02/2010 05:59:41
Originally by: Le Skunk Edited by: Le Skunk on 27/02/2010 05:43:43
Originally by: Zeba A ship that logoffskis is vulnerable for 60 seconds after he hits control-q. Lock him up as soon as he appears on his align for the emergency warp and make sure to have enough dps to kill him in that 60 seconds. That you failed to do that is all on you. Period.
So now we have to put 15 Damage battleships on every gate to kill the log-ofski freighter. When this is done the carebears call us blobbers and complain that sentry guns are not effective against large gangs and whine for sentry guns to be boosted.
So 15 people are needed to catch one lone logofskie non-cheat. Yes very balanced.
SKUNK
Indeed. Now count on moar fingers of one hand the number of freighter logoffskis you have missed killing. Yeah, I thought so. Cri sum moar..
edit: yeah im drunk tonite. It takes less than 15 crap t1 fit dps bs to kill a freighter in the 15ish seconds you have before concord pwns your arse in a .5 highsec system. You can't do it in the entire zomg forever 60 seconds lulz paltry gate gun dps sentry range low sec gate? U R TEH FAIL.
Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu The only thing separating us from frightened, feral monkeys is running water on tap, fuel in the tank, and current in our wall sockets.
|
|
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 06:08:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Omara Otawan on 27/02/2010 06:13:17
Originally by: Zeba A ship that logoffskis is vulnerable for 60 seconds after he hits control-q. Lock him up as soon as he appears on his align for the emergency warp and make sure to have enough dps to kill him in that 60 seconds. That you failed to do that is all on you. Period.
You are missing the point, we are not talking about people doing the normal ctrl-q. "The Logoffski" actually refers to that nifty little exploit trick where you are unlockable, and it isnt just hitting ctrl-q.
All you get from the moment they decloak up until they are in warp is "Interference from the warp blabla is doing is preventing you from locking them".
So again, you will see them decloaked, but they are invulnerable, you cannot lock them. Being able to see them for 60 seconds before they are gone isnt doing anything, as you cannot point or shoot them.
Anyway, if you are not trolling and really think an unscouted freighter should be safe in lowsec if it doesnt land in a blob of 15 battleships, Eve is probably not the game you want to play.
|
Zeba
Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 06:28:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Omara Otawan All you get from the moment they decloak up until they are in warp is "Interference from the warp blabla is doing is preventing you from locking them".
So again, you will see them decloaked, but they are invulnerable, you cannot lock them. Being able to see them for 60 seconds before they are gone isnt doing anything, as you cannot point or shoot them.
Sorry then as we seem to have a misunderstanding. I was unaware of this particular circumstance happening in a statistically relevant amount.
Originally by: Omara Otawan Anyway, if you are not trolling and really think an unscouted freighter should be safe in lowsec if it doesnt land in a blob of 15 battleships, Eve is probably not the game you want to play.
You Do Not Need 15 Battleships To Kill A Freighter In Low Sec In Under 60 Seconds. I mean wtf man..
Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu The only thing separating us from frightened, feral monkeys is running water on tap, fuel in the tank, and current in our wall sockets.
|
Leiara Knight
Gallente The Oblivion Guard
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 07:00:00 -
[63]
I use a special macro which 'flutters' my log status, logging me off and on many times per second. I call it Perma-Logski.
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 14:01:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Omara Otawan
You are missing the point, we are not talking about people doing the normal ctrl-q. "The Logoffski" actually refers to that nifty little exploit trick where you are unlockable, and it isnt just hitting ctrl-q.
All you get from the moment they decloak up until they are in warp is "Interference from the warp blabla is doing is preventing you from locking them".
So again, you will see them decloaked, but they are invulnerable, you cannot lock them. Being able to see them for 60 seconds before they are gone isnt doing anything, as you cannot point or shoot them.
Thats not the accepted definition of logofski - which is nebulous in meaning. Logofski under cloak is generaly the issue people complain about - wherby you ship disapears into thing air like a magic fairy after 60 secs.
The issue you are talking about I have seen done about 7 times during a 2 week period by multiple pilots from the same russian alliance. When petitioned, CCP responded with the "people can log off at any time" line. When i further explained they were doing something new whereby you could not lock the target during the 60 seconds they were floating - before they disapeared into fairy la la land - CCP responded this was not intended and is an exploit.
So petition the cheat.
SKUNK (o)
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 22:09:00 -
[65]
Quote: You are missing the point, we are not talking about people doing the normal ctrl-q. "The Logoffski" actually refers to that nifty little exploit trick where you are unlockable, and it isnt just hitting ctrl-q.
All you get from the moment they decloak up until they are in warp is "Interference from the warp blabla is doing is preventing you from locking them".
So again, you will see them decloaked, but they are invulnerable, you cannot lock them. Being able to see them for 60 seconds before they are gone isnt doing anything, as you cannot point or shoot them.
I have personally encountered that many times. It seemed kind of random to me, about 50% chance that target will be invulnerable. I am not aware of any way to reproduce this bug, tho someone may know.
I think it's important that CCP people understand this and have a clear distinction in their mind between the regular log off mechanics and this invulnerability trick. The GMs you contacted probably not aware that this happens. And I don't believe CCP intentionally coded that, specifically because it doesn't happen all the time but has randomness to it.
In the past I have attributed it to desynch bug - where server may have already warped the ship but your client still sees it as pre-warp. While the 1 minute log off timer is bad enough, this particular bug should be completely unacceptable, even for the laziest and carebearish designer at CCP
|
Lucro Maximus
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 14:56:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Furb Killer
If i have been recently in any aggression i will stay 15 minutes in space when i disconnect.
Not exactly true. Your only allowed to have 1 character in space per account. You can log off and log back in on an alt on the same account and the character with the aggression timer poofs. I don't see how CCP would change that either. I can think of a of ways I could exploit the game if I could log two characters in on one account at the same time. Gee oops you caught my oober tanked decoy while I shoot you with my real character.
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 20:01:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Lucro Maximus
Not exactly true. Your only allowed to have 1 character in space per account. You can log off and log back in on an alt on the same account and the character with the aggression timer poofs. I don't see how CCP would change that either. I can think of a of ways I could exploit the game if I could log two characters in on one account at the same time. Gee oops you caught my oober tanked decoy while I shoot you with my real character.
I was pretty sure they fixed that, tho I can easily check later. You can have only 1 character logged in, but the ship in space is independent of your character and stays until proper aggro timer.
|
Rawbin Hood
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 20:21:00 -
[68]
Freighter tactic's
◄Brutor► The Movement Because the human race can do better as a whole (despite these forums, they don't count) |
Lord Aftermath
The Aftermath.
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 01:13:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Kijo Rikki I wonder how they could fix this without screwing people who are legitimately disconnected in dire straits. Can the internets people tell if a connection has been properly closed or if it was an actual dc?
Whenever you jump through a gate, or undock for that matter, you always take a certain risk. To fix the problem would deter people from logging out in the first place. When someone jumps through a gate, for example, they should not be invincible/impossible to lock. I've had many cases when someone jumps through to our gang and they log off while inside a bubble, but they're able to warp away in a battleship/freighter/something very large because they logged off before we had a chance to agro them. This mechanic needs to be fixed as soon as possible, in my opinion. Yes, **** happens. Yes, sometimes you do lose connection, but if you lose it jumping through a gate, you should lose your ship. It's an assumed risk you take. That applies to everyone.
Win a faction fit bhaalgorn. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1277681
Lord Aftermath Founder, Chairman and CEO, Car Ramrod |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |