| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jeremey
Glittering Dust
   |
Posted - 2010.03.09 17:07:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Jeremey on 09/03/2010 17:15:28
We cannot be silent any more. We wrote petitions - they were accepted. We filled bugreports - they were successfuly assigned. But CCP still (for at least more than a year already!) haven't fixed three fundamental flaws in game mechanics, which known to many, many pilots.
Here they are:
1) You logoff and after that someone places aggro on you - but you will still disappear after 1 minute.
2) You logoff, login, logoff, login - and appear on a spot not where you was or where you're travelling previously.
3) You click warp to and instantly logoff - no one can scramble you or even lock you.
What does these flaws in game mechanics allow?
1. The (1) allows player, if he have enough effective HP, to escape small-to-medium camps in lowsec and during highsec war, and most of the camps in nullsec if they're without bubbles.
Literally, that exploit makes freighter pilot using it almost invincible even without a scout - he will die only if fled to camp of 5+ battleships that can kill him in 1 minute.
Also, during highsec war, if you have camping enemy pilot and he jumps to your small camp, he can just logoff on his CNR or Marauder - and to disappear after 1 minute.
2. The (2) exploit allows pilot to escape ANY camp when quitting the system - in high/low/nullsec: pilot warps to other stargate and see on your scanner that there is camp here - so you just double-logoff in warp and appear not in the camp with bubble, but on a safespot.
Also it allows pilot to escape in his ship (including capital) any POS blockade - even if entire POS is covered with bubbles, pilot just makes double-logoff (with 15 minute interval after first logoff) and appears on the spot, where he can turn on cloaking device, warp out, etc.
Also it allows safely stealing capital ships from enemy POS without a worry about pos disruptors: all you need to bump them with alt out of POS shield and get into them with your main - and logoff. POS even with 15 Large Autocannons will to kill "nude" dread or carrier in 1 minute - so after double logoff you will just appear on the safespot, not near POS.
3. The (3) one makes pilot using it literally uninterceptable in high- and lowsec - regardless of the ship he is piloting (be it noobship, freighter or capital). Nuff said.
Carebears and pvp'ers - unite! Let's make CCP to fix this damned things at last, so we can happily live together in peaceful and good Eve! OH, WAIT...
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
The Obsidian Legion
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 17:16:00 -
[2]
As soon as you tell me how to tell from the server's perspective the difference between me unplugging my network cable and my internet going down, sure.
I mean sure, we can trap for CTRL-Q or closing the application - of course if I open task manager and just terminate the process none of that code will fire either, so...
--Vel
Forum Mom: Spanking the snot out of little brats. |
Jeremey
Glittering Dust
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 17:19:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: De'Veldrin
As soon as you tell me how to tell from the server's perspective the difference between me unplugging my network cable and my internet going down, sure.
I mean sure, we can trap for CTRL-Q or closing the application - of course if I open task manager and just terminate the process none of that code will fire either, so...
When you terminate your process or press Ctrl-Q, all tcp/udp sockets are closed and server notified about that immediately.
Also, no single one of these exploits' fixes requires server to make such distinction.
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 17:32:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Kadesh Priestess on 09/03/2010 17:37:34
1st seems to be considered as game mechanics' feature, not a bug by CCP for numerous years, so i'm inclined to neither support it nor completely disagree with you here.
2nd and 3rd are obvious exploits and hopefully sooner than later will be removed from game.
Originally by: Jeremey
Also, no single one of these exploits' fixes requires server to make such distinction.
I'd call such distinction a bad move - it will encourage players to simulate hard disconnect.
|
Jeremey
Glittering Dust
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 17:45:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Kadesh Priestess
I'd call such distinction a bad move - it will encourage players to simulate hard disconnect.
Yes, but again: no fixes for these exploits require server to ever make such distinction.
|
Fire77rusland
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 18:04:00 -
[6]
)))
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp.
Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 18:23:00 -
[7]
The 3 points in OP are valid and important enough to warrant fixing. I don't see any technical difficulty of fixing them, so it's not that much to ask either. The only issue people may have is ideological one: either you believe in carebearism or hardcore pvp.
I'm afraid the devs have gone soft
|
HCMan
The Deliberate Forces
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 18:50:00 -
[8]
Yes, i want it
|
Fabl0r
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 18:53:00 -
[9]
+1 From Russian Community.
|
Grarr Dexx
GK inc.
Panda Team
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 19:10:00 -
[10]
For every one person rescued by the mechanic as it should be, there's a hundred people who use it for safety and personal gain. Nullsec is more safe than empire with this nonsensical 'safety measure'.
___
|
|
|
Orioniys
The Deliberate Forces
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 19:11:00 -
[11]
not supported st1, but 2,3 sounds good
|
DolBoxloP
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 19:34:00 -
[12]
"Players can logon and logof as they want". We can cry for years.
|
Enzu777
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 19:48:00 -
[13]
|
Jeremey
Glittering Dust
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 19:53:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Jeremey on 09/03/2010 19:57:48
Originally by: DolBoxloP
"Players can logon and logof as they want". We can cry for years.
Fixing these bugs will not prevent players to logon or logoff anytime they want - just if they logoff in camp their ship will die, as it should be.
|
Z800XV
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 19:54:00 -
[15]
1 - norm
2 and 3 - signed
2 is so cheating =\
|
erewrrtr
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 19:56:00 -
[16]
That words of CCP, not myne. I agree, this exploit, rude exploit.
|
HeckfyEx
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 19:57:00 -
[17]
Plus my voice
|
Vizirion
The Deliberate Forces
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 20:10:00 -
[18]
Well, that's a hard decision. Signed for 2-3, first 1 is hard to fix.
|
Jerreie
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 20:13:00 -
[19]
Logging off being a viable way to protect virtual assets is moronic. Thumbs.
|
Larkonis Trassler
Genos Occidere
Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 20:17:00 -
[20]
This was raised by yours truely during CSM 3. I suggested that your login/out spots be 'anchored' in order to prevent 'double loggoffski'. I believe it's being looked into.
Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
No. Larkonis |
|
|
Jeremey
Glittering Dust
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 20:21:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Larkonis Trassler
This was raised by yours truely during CSM 3. I suggested that your login/out spots be 'anchored' in order to prevent 'double loggoffski'. I believe it's being looked into.
Thank you for information.
|
Drake Draconis
Shadow Cadre
Looney Toons.
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 20:45:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 09/03/2010 20:47:40
Originally by: Jeremey
Edited by: Jeremey on 09/03/2010 17:29:58
Originally by: De'Veldrin
As soon as you tell me how to tell from the server's perspective the difference between me unplugging my network cable and my internet going down, sure.
I mean sure, we can trap for CTRL-Q or closing the application - of course if I open task manager and just terminate the process none of that code will fire either, so...
When you terminate your process or press Ctrl-Q, all tcp/udp sockets are closed and server notified about that immediately (in case of udp, by special command game sends).
Also, no single one of these exploits' fixes requires server to make such distinction.
*coughbull****cuogh*
yes its a problem but stop making TCP/IP concepts out of thin air mkay?
*case and point... pull the plug on your ethernet cable and we'll see if your server is smart enough to know... nice try nooblet*
=========================
CEO of Shadow Cadre
http://www.shadowcadre.com
========================= |
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 20:49:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Larkonis Trassler
This was raised by yours truely during CSM 3. I suggested that your login/out spots be 'anchored' in order to prevent 'double loggoffski'. I believe it's being looked into.
It was actually in the preliminary release notes for dominion iirc. but then got pulled for the final release. pretty strange.
|
Jeremey
Glittering Dust
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 20:55:00 -
[24]
Originally by: darius mclever
It was actually in the preliminary release notes for dominion iirc. but then got pulled for the final release. pretty strange.
One year ago I've filled bugreport about it - currently it is closed with words "Fixed in: Planetary Interaction". So (2) will be fixed in next expansion - Tyrannis.
|
Davader
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 20:56:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Davader on 09/03/2010 20:56:12
+1, agree with Jeremey
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 21:24:00 -
[26]
logging out should never be an exploit, however abusing logoff to get to an "nth" position that isn't where logoff 1 happened should be an exploit.
also the log out when just about to come out of warp and going ~10000m/s and are invulnerable should also be fixed.
|
Lineage2CT1
Ptaag Capital Shipyards
RED.OverLord
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 21:38:00 -
[27]
Agreed at all.
_________________________________________
There is only one correct way - own way. |
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente
Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 21:48:00 -
[28]
Quote:
As soon as you tell me how to tell from the server's perspective the difference between me unplugging my network cable and my internet going down, sure.
QFT
|
Red Raider
Caldari
Airbourne Demons
DeMoN's N AnGeL's
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 21:49:00 -
[29]
Agreed for 2 and 3 but 1 is intentional.
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp.
Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 22:03:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Red Raider
Agreed for 2 and 3 but 1 is intentional.
It may be intentional but it's still carebear. If the log off timer was 2 minutes, that non-aggro exploit wouldn't be so useful. In most cases when people log right before they are targeted, the attacker needs just 30-60 seconds more to finish the job.
And lets face it, if you log off on purpose to save the ship, you deserve no pity. You must be destroyed.
|
|
|
Dark Drifter
Amarr
Sardaukar Merc Guild
General Tso's Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 22:42:00 -
[31]
ok has noone herd of combat probes? have an lat sit with 4 probes at 1 at aound a gate.
survs 2 functions:
1: insta scan for BC's and bigger on log in
(if agressed for shooting/being shot by u)the players ship will sit in space for 15minits
so scan them down and kill them while they log off
2: pilot in capship (fitted with cloak) will be scanned when they land on there SS grid
the cloak is not going to sace them when u warp to 0m with a fleet containing ceptors and drones
i dont personaly see any of the OPs complaints as exploits (dont use them either)
if u want the KM then go the extra mile to get it, that simple
stow whining anD tool up for the job in hand
..
to our departed friend EDD "april 09" fly true man |
Red Raider
Caldari
Airbourne Demons
DeMoN's N AnGeL's
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 22:49:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Ephemeron
Originally by: Red Raider
Agreed for 2 and 3 but 1 is intentional.
It may be intentional but it's still carebear. If the log off timer was 2 minutes, that non-aggro exploit wouldn't be so useful. In most cases when people log right before they are targeted, the attacker needs just 30-60 seconds more to finish the job.
And lets face it, if you log off on purpose to save the ship, you deserve no pity. You must be destroyed.
Thats all fine and good until you go LD warping into (insert combat scenario here) and die because you had no chance to defend yourself against (insert anything that shoots here). A lot of legitimate disconnects happen at handoff's and spawn points like undocking, jumping, and entering a deadspace area.
If you didn't get to kill that shiny Freighter because he pulled the plug on you then you should have brought more firepower. It sucks and it is carebear but you COULD have done it where as a legitimate disconnect shouldn't suffer a ton of grief over a technical issue. As it is now I believe someone discoing is an exploit so when they do it report them and let CCP handle them. CCP developed the 1 minute timer for a reason and with a lot of thought to prevent accidental ship losses and the influx of petitions that would follow asking for reimbursement.
So since you know that you have 1 minute to kill your target if he/she is a douche then plan accordingly and make the douche pay dearly. Especially since if he disco's his pod will still warp off to a safespot and you can still report him for discoing and he lost his ship.
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 23:08:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Dark Drifter
...
How would probes help with catching lock-immune ship in lowsec or preventing ships breaking thru gazillions of bubbles from POS in WH?
Originally by: Red Raider
Thats all fine and good until you go LD warping into (insert combat scenario here) and die because you had no chance to defend yourself against (insert anything that shoots here). A lot of legitimate disconnects happen at handoff's and spawn points like undocking, jumping, and entering a deadspace area.
Don't make LD jumps, especially in systems with only 2 gates. Burn your cap to warp within 1-14 au from gate, check, then warp to gate.
Originally by: Red Raider
If you didn't get to kill that shiny Freighter because he pulled the plug on you then you should have brought more firepower. It sucks and it is carebear but you COULD have done it where as a legitimate disconnect shouldn't suffer a ton of grief over a technical issue. As it is now I believe someone discoing is an exploit so when they do it report them and let CCP handle them. CCP developed the 1 minute timer for a reason and with a lot of thought to prevent accidental ship losses and the influx of petitions that would follow asking for reimbursement.
There should be absolutely NO difference between disconnect and log off in PvP (in PvE it may be okay imo) - as i stated this encourages players to simulate disconnect in trouble. If you get disconnected often then your ISP/switch/power upply is pile of ****, blame it and not CCP. Yes, any disconnected person in PvP battle shouldn't have ANY additional options/abilities when compared to logged off player.
|
Ogogov
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 00:03:00 -
[34]
not supported to see pirate tears :)
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp.
Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 00:26:00 -
[35]
I had my share of disconnects, both during a fight and just traveling.
And I can't think of a single PvP situation where I was glad that the server disconnected me. You know why?
Because when you pvp, you have the 15 min aggro timer. People who disconnect during pvp do not benefit from current exploit mechanics at all. Only the people who disconnect seconds before aggro benefit. And what are the chances that you are going to randomly disconnect within a few seconds on combat?
23*3600 = 82800
so for 10 seconds, it's 1:8280 chance of legitimate disconnect.
And what are the chances of somebody disconnecting on purpose 10 seconds before combat? I'm pretty damn sure it's 1000 times more.
|
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 02:52:00 -
[36]
Every other MMORPG I have played has a harsher log off system than in EVE and that is just flat out unacceptable for a "hardcore" MMORPG. In these other games you have to sit still for 20-30 seconds and if something interrupts you (like say by attacking you) you must sit there until you reconnect. If you die, then so be it.
Let's get real here, the vast majority (well over 99%) of log offs after jumping through a gate are not real disconnects. And ffs if you log off, you should reappear exactly where you left off, no repeated log on/log off tricks to magically teleport to a safe location. These exploits should have been fixed years ago and it is an embarrassment for CCP to be so blind.
I thought this CSM was supposed to bring issues to CCP, how many years have players repeatedly brought up this subject to CCP with no response. Supporting this, although I have little hope as I've been watching targets get out of jail free for well over 3 years.
Originally by: Jim Raynor
EVE needs danger, EVE needs risks, EVE needs combat, even piracy, without these things, the game stagnates to a trivial game centering around bloating your wallet with no purpose. |
Sherlock Masterson
Amarr
Fugitive Biomass
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 02:57:00 -
[37]
/signed
|
Red Raider
Caldari
Airbourne Demons
DeMoN's N AnGeL's
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 04:45:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Kadesh Priestess
Originally by: Dark Drifter
...
How would probes help with catching lock-immune ship in lowsec or preventing ships breaking thru gazillions of bubbles from POS in WH?
Originally by: Red Raider
Thats all fine and good until you go LD warping into (insert combat scenario here) and die because you had no chance to defend yourself against (insert anything that shoots here). A lot of legitimate disconnects happen at handoff's and spawn points like undocking, jumping, and entering a deadspace area.
Don't make LD jumps, especially in systems with only 2 gates. Burn your cap to warp within 1-14 au from gate, check, then warp to gate.
Originally by: Red Raider
If you didn't get to kill that shiny Freighter because he pulled the plug on you then you should have brought more firepower. It sucks and it is carebear but you COULD have done it where as a legitimate disconnect shouldn't suffer a ton of grief over a technical issue. As it is now I believe someone discoing is an exploit so when they do it report them and let CCP handle them. CCP developed the 1 minute timer for a reason and with a lot of thought to prevent accidental ship losses and the influx of petitions that would follow asking for reimbursement.
There should be absolutely NO difference between disconnect and log off in PvP (in PvE it may be okay imo) - as i stated this encourages players to simulate disconnect in trouble. If you get disconnected often then your ISP/switch/power upply is pile of ****, blame it and not CCP. Yes, any disconnected person in PvP battle shouldn't have ANY additional options/abilities when compared to logged off player.
I knew when I posted this that someone wouldn't know that LD means link dead. This is caused by the server and there is nothing you can do about it. So NOT flying into situations where you go LD is not an option.
|
Daymio
Research and Development Shop
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 05:33:00 -
[39]
signed for fix warp-logoff.
|
Mihalich
Gray Hunters
White Noise.
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 06:55:00 -
[40]
OH, WAIT...
|
|
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 07:05:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Kadesh Priestess on 10/03/2010 07:05:00
Originally by: Red Raider
I knew when I posted this that someone wouldn't know that LD means link dead. This is caused by the server and there is nothing you can do about it. So NOT flying into situations where you go LD is not an option.
So essentially you say that eve cluster disconnects you while keeping other players in the same/nearby system on-line? Nah, never've been in such situation.
|
HaartSp
The Deliberate Forces
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 08:26:00 -
[42]
Supported
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 08:48:00 -
[43]
Quote:
Also, during highsec war, if you have camping enemy pilot and he jumps to your small camp, he can just logoff on his CNR or Marauder - and to disappear after 1 minute.
A CNR surviving 1 minute of non NPC attacks?
Are you bravely attacking him with T1 fit Kestrels?
Why all those who fail killing a ship in 1 minute were THEM the carebears not daring to bring in the real guns. Fear to lose some precious battleship that you CBA bringing enough firepower to kill a enemy you *know* is arriving?
Why never is mentioned about 101 of bringing probes? What's it, 1k ISK is too much to afford them?
Quote:
Every other MMORPG I have played has a harsher log off system than in EVE and that is just flat out unacceptable for a "hardcore" MMORPG
In the other MMOs you pay 20 silver repairs and are good to go again.
In EvE I land in say Mordus headhunters and lose a Gist-X shield (plus the rest of the ship (btw the shield is an example, I wish I had that)) because the client crashed or similar.
Quote:
Let's get real here, the vast majority (well over 99%) of log offs after jumping through a gate are not real disconnects. And ffs if you log off, you should
False, non TCP/IP hard disconnect related disconnects happen because of client or connection issues after something new loaded, thus crashing after a warp or after arriving in a mission / PLEX is one of the top causes.
Quote:
So essentially you say that eve cluster disconnects you while keeping other players in the same/nearby system on-line? Nah, never've been in such situation.
Right yesterday I got an error about "the station facilities are only available while inside a station". Too bad I was in a station since 10 minutes and I asked to use no facility at all.
The game CAN bork up.
I am sorry that people CBA to bring enough firepower to kill defensless, stationary ships, with no CONCORD, when in high sec others can alpha and suicide gank the same ships with no problem.
Next time, instead of calling coward the guy (the right adjective for him is: idiot), try thinking why you can't achieve what others do in hi sec every day.
Too stingy? Not caring to scout he's arriving so you field too little firepower? Not caring to bring probes? Not read that NOIR article on how they counter logoffskies?
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Jowen Datloran
Caldari
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 09:02:00 -
[44]
This is not really my issue to discuss on, but it seems to me like these suggestions will make it even more rewarding to blob up to hell and back?
----------------
Mr. Science & Trade Institute
|
Moad Dip
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 09:11:00 -
[45]
signed
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 09:19:00 -
[46]
Quote:
This is not really my issue to discuss on, but it seems to me like these suggestions will make it even more rewarding to blob up to hell and back?
No, all it'll change is that if today they have to work "hard" to kill a logoffski (unless it's a russian macro but then they are macros and are obnoxious to tricks).
Tomorrow those who today go in recklessy with a chance to die, will stop going in recklessy and thus the chances of killing them will decrease, not increase.
Anyway, all of this talk is pointless without proper statictics (which CCP probably got) telling what % of logoffski missed kills vs how many non logoffski kills happen.
It's probably a zero dot zero zero something % and it's why it's in the backburner, compared to how often real disconnects happen.
Some will miss the simple fact that not everyone live in London, many connect with all what they contry has to offer, that is garbage. I used to have some Greek friends who envied me when I had a 200k awful DSL with 500ms latency. They had to pay like 65 euros a month to have it even worse.
I don't know how much their situation changed since 2 years ago, I recall when we raided and they disconnected ALL at least once every 4 hours. Imagine how nice would be to lose weeks of grinding with such probability and have no chance to have a better connection.
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Tairon Usaro
The X-Trading Company
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 09:50:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Tairon Usaro on 10/03/2010 09:58:09
Edited by: Tairon Usaro on 10/03/2010 09:50:31
Originally by: Dark Drifter
ok has noone herd of combat probes? have an lat sit with 4 probes at 1 at aound a gate.
survs 2 functions:
1: insta scan for BC's and bigger on log in
(if agressed for shooting/being shot by u)the players ship will sit in space for 15minits
so scan them down and kill them while they log off
Start playing in 0.0
You obviously have no glue what you are talking about. I can tackle a ship and it logs out after a minute. not E-Warping to a 1 mio spott, it logs out ! How do scan a ship thats not there ?!?
Quote:
Anyway, all of this talk is pointless without proper statictics (which CCP probably got) telling what % of logoffski missed kills vs how many non logoffski kills happen.
It's probably a zero dot zero zero something % and it's why it's in the backburner, compared to how often real disconnects happen.
we are not talking so much complaining about ships that log off before they got tackled (though i say logging off in front of an enemy should never be an option for saving the ship), we are talking about ships that are successfully tackled and taking damage, that have not not aggressed and therefore do not get the 15 minute timer, but log out after one minute......
In essence freighters and other capitals are completly indestructible to small to medium gangs, who cannot burn through the HP in one minute, ( but would certainly be abble to take down the ship in 15 Minutes).
I dont request to change the current log off times, i only request, that a ship, thats being aggressed by players get the 15 minute timer ...
________________________________________________
Some days i loose, some days the others win ... |
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 10:17:00 -
[48]
1) no - besides there's another story to it after that
2) definitely
3) definitely
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 10:48:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 10/03/2010 10:50:26
Quote:
we are talking about ships that are successfully tackled and taking damage, that have not not aggressed and therefore do not get the 15 minute timer, but log out after one minute......
Well, like I pointed in another unrelated thread (about RR mechanics) old & ugly foundation code (read: touch it and the game easily breaks) is managing both PvE and PvP and this is a major scare factor for CCP to make changes, expecially when the cases are so specific.
In particular, in some places the code seems not discerning between NPC vs PC being the originator of the actions.
Example of very often DC / crash scenario: player warps in PLEX or mission, NPCs could almost insta-scram (usually it's NPC frigs vs player battleship size signature).
With no intervening mechanic, the ship is basically as good as dead.
To counter this CCP made frigs randomly turn off scram or switch to web and often there's some KMs of space before the frigs can lock, all to prevent lots of ragequits and petitions.
There are still some missions which are an harsher exception to this, though and it's why I believe they still let exist that behavior you noticed.
Now, if the combat code could detect that it's a PC point being made and not an NPC, it could probably act differently. Something tells me it's not so though and to change it, it requires to open their can'o'worms code.
Quote:
In essence freighters and other capitals are completly indestructible to small to medium gangs, who cannot burn through the HP in one minute, ( but would certainly be abble to take down the ship in 15 Minutes).
Maybe it's intended. They are bringing their biggest available "horsepower", not an iteron.
You are bringing in an agile setup (to be able to GTFO I suppose, are you sure you are not being 'bear at all in this?) that is not your biggest available horsepower, yet you want to kill their biggest horsepower?
I mean, would using battleships be enough? Yes, they are. But you use BCs and / or HACs and / or inties etc because YOU don't want to be hotdropped so YOU are also not perfectly virgin in this talk.
Said that, I'd be totally fine to have PC scrammed ships die, I just don't think CCP are ready to fiddle with what "works since years".
I'll even add more meat about the exploits: ok it's fine that T3 needed some "push" because after so much work they revealed to be meh and players ignored them.
But isn't it vastly too much (to "sell" T3 to the players) to give them te ability to be unscannable? What counter for that? Logoffski can be countered with effort, exactly like MWD + cloak can be < 100% safe.
But what's counterable about total immunity from probes? *goes to create a thread for it*
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Root'er
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 10:50:00 -
[50]
support all , it's just stupid that you can save your ship just by logging off
|
|
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 10:59:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Kadesh Priestess on 10/03/2010 11:01:48
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Right yesterday I got an error about "the station facilities are only available while inside a station". Too bad I was in a station since 10 minutes and I asked to use no facility at all.
The game CAN bork up.
Seems like it's related to your connection anyway, as i didn't have any single occassion of such dcs. All of dcs i've experienced are problem of my ISP.
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
(usually it's NPC frigs vs player battleship size signature).
With no intervening mechanic, the ship is basically as good as dead.
FYI - npcs do not have scan resolution, they have reaction delay (min and max, random amount of milliseconds between two these is picked) after which they lock you.
Personally, i don't mind intervening in PvE-only as long as it can be steadily and reliably separated from all other cases.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 11:22:00 -
[52]
Quote:
Seems like it's related to your connection anyway, as i didn't have any single occassion of such dcs. All of dcs i've experienced are problem of my ISP.
It is not a disconnection, in fact I did not disconnect, had just to press "OK" to the message. Game just acted up, an eventuality you cannot remove even with years of debugging.
Quote:
Personally, i don't mind intervening in PvE-only as long as it can be steadily and reliably separated from all other cases.
And that's exactly what ATM is not implemented, along with proper RR attribution of aggression / timers etc.
Some things are very old, IE the counters to RRing NPCs till they would kill an NPC scrammed player piloted neutral ship.
This is why they are probably vary to change things, the ripple consequences are always ready to bite.
Quote:
Lol. They do not switch scram to web if you stay in their scram/web range.
I mission for lots of hours a week, do you think I have not seen what frigs do? They CAN drop scram. Whether it's another ship putting up the web (same name, can't demonstrate it's the same) or it's the one who previously had scram up, does not change the result.
Quote:
So you say that you can catch warp-logoff freighter in lowsec?
Eve-search for NOIR's "tutorial"?
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 11:27:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
It is not a disconnection, in fact I did not disconnect, had just to press "OK" to the message. Game just acted up, an eventuality you cannot remove even with years of debugging.
Then it's a bug which needs to be tracked down and fixed, eliminating its impact by mechanics which will influence tons of other situations is bad idea.
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
And that's exactly what ATM is not implemented, along with proper RR attribution of aggression / timers etc.
Some things are very old, IE the counters to RRing NPCs till they would kill an NPC scrammed player piloted neutral ship.
Well, from what i've seen in PvE logout != disconnect.
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
I mission for lots of hours a week, do you think I have not seen what frigs do? They CAN drop scram. Whether it's another ship putting up the web (same name, can't demonstrate it's the same) or it's the one who previously had scram up, does not change the result.
Then their orbit is close to scram range (7500 for some npc frigs) and from time to time they move out of it.
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Eve-search for NOIR's "tutorial"?
Will do. Didn't see it.
|
Gunnanmon
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 11:38:00 -
[54]
Signature locked for discussing moderation. Navigator
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 11:40:00 -
[55]
Quote:
Then it's a bug which needs to be tracked down and fixed, eliminating its impact by mechanics which will influence tons of other situations is bad idea.
They can remove *this* bug, but CCP (wisely, I am a programmer in RL too and see this to often) cannot be sure they removed *all* of the sources of crash and thus they play on the prudent side.
Quote:
Well, from what i've seen in PvE logout != disconnect
But here comes the catch, you can *always* disconnect by plugging the cable be it because it's genuine DC or not.
So, how would the game discern a malicious DC vs a "legit" one?
CCP conservatively chose to consider all DCs as legit by default, because this saves them tons of customer care and petitions.
What do you offer in trade? That you put a thank you CCP on a killboard?
Quote:
Then their orbit is close to scram range (7500 for some npc frigs) and from time to time they move out of it.
How it's achieved is not my concern, it happens even when I stand still (got the tank for it for several missions: less wrecks spread, quicker salvaging).
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Knight Phaeton
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 12:26:00 -
[56]
Signed
|
fnvent
The Deliberate Forces
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 14:16:00 -
[57]
1 no
2 and 3 signed
|
Holy Cheater
Monks of War
DarkSide.
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 14:22:00 -
[58]
signed for warp-logoff.
The first two are bad only for campers. The first is bad only within lowsec and when you do not have enough damage. And I'm not agreed with the idea to stimulate some idiotic camping.
|
Red Raider
Caldari
Airbourne Demons
DeMoN's N AnGeL's
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 16:23:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Kadesh Priestess
Edited by: Kadesh Priestess on 10/03/2010 07:05:00
Originally by: Red Raider
I knew when I posted this that someone wouldn't know that LD means link dead. This is caused by the server and there is nothing you can do about it. So NOT flying into situations where you go LD is not an option.
So essentially you say that eve cluster disconnects you while keeping other players in the same/nearby system on-line? Nah, never've been in such situation.
You have never had a disconnect while zoning? Docked in jita 23/7?
|
Kilostream
Roving Guns Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 17:19:00 -
[60]
Logoffski's are a pain in the arse, to be sure, and it'd be nice to eliminate them.
However, legit disconnects happen all the time - and whilst this is the case I wouldn't support changing the game mechanic - better that a hundred guilty men go free than one innocent man gets punished.
Besides if the problem were that severe there'd hardly be any kills in New Eden - a brief perusal of the various killboards available tells me that's not the case.
|
|
|
Empire Vendor
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 18:11:00 -
[61]
+1
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 23:33:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Red Raider
You have never had a disconnect while zoning? Docked in jita 23/7?
I even had multiple losses due to disconnect, but i have balls to not whine and admit that it's my prob/prob of ISP and loss is legit.
|
Jeremey
Glittering Dust
|
Posted - 2010.03.10 23:47:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Kilostream
However, legit disconnects happen all the time
And so what? If CCP will fix these exploits, legit disconnects will happen all the time too.
Originally by: Kilostream
Besides if the problem were that severe there'd hardly be any kills in New Eden - a brief perusal of the various killboards available tells me that's not the case.
A brief perusal of current freighters' pilots actions tells us that these exploits are used by almost every freighter pilot in lowsec.
|
Red Raider
Caldari
Airbourne Demons
DeMoN's N AnGeL's
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 00:34:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Kadesh Priestess
Originally by: Red Raider
You have never had a disconnect while zoning? Docked in jita 23/7?
I even had multiple losses due to disconnect, but i have balls to not whine and admit that it's my prob/prob of ISP and loss is legit.
First, I never whined about anything you may want to look in a mirror to find that. I stated what CCP has already made perfectly clear, a 1 minute logoff timer is in place to reduce the chances of a legitimate disconnect resulting in the destruction of a players assets. The OP and the people supporting his first item are whining that 1 minute isn't long enough to kill a target. Anything can be killed in less than a minute if enough firepower is available but a player can't avoid legitimate disco which is why the rule exists. That doesn't mean I support people using this tactic to avoid losing assets but since doing so is considered an exploit then it is up to you to petition the offending party not me and everyone else to lose our ships because of a legitimate disco and you and yours not getting a kill because you were unprepared to dish out the firepower needed to pull it off.
So in summary. You have multiples avenues to deal with item 1 while legitimate disco's have no way to stop a legitimate disco so they shouldn't pay the consequences and CCP agrees.
|
HunterVolCh SPb
VolCh'ya syt
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 02:41:00 -
[65]
My English not very well for full discuss, but i signed.
|
Lilith Velkor
Final Agony
B A N E
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 05:30:00 -
[66]
Long overdue.
|
Morry Gun
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 09:53:00 -
[67]
Supported by all means.
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 09:57:00 -
[68]
Edited by: Kadesh Priestess on 11/03/2010 09:58:20
Edited by: Kadesh Priestess on 11/03/2010 09:57:44
Originally by: Red Raider
First, I never whined about anything you may want to look in a mirror to find that. I stated what CCP has already made perfectly clear, a 1 minute logoff timer is in place to reduce the chances of a legitimate disconnect resulting in the destruction of a players assets. The OP and the people supporting his first item are whining that 1 minute isn't long enough to kill a target. Anything can be killed in less than a minute if enough firepower is available but a player can't avoid legitimate disco which is why the rule exists. That doesn't mean I support people using this tactic to avoid losing assets but since doing so is considered an exploit then it is up to you to petition the offending party not me and everyone else to lose our ships because of a legitimate disco and you and yours not getting a kill because you were unprepared to dish out the firepower needed to pull it off.
So in summary. You have multiples avenues to deal with item 1 while legitimate disco's have no way to stop a legitimate disco so they shouldn't pay the consequences and CCP agrees.
If i'm flying ship with relatively small hp, this rule won't help me. If i fly a ship with some nice hp buffer - then i will use it in any camp where hp buffer is enough to survive 1 minute but not 15, and where i will be defeated anyway if i'll stay online and fight.
Considering this now i agree with point 1). Because this point doesn't prevent everyone from being destroyed in smaller ships (even if they had some *real* disconnect) and easily abused to avoid definite ship loss in bigger ships - something should be changed.
|
PRZ pm69
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 10:24:00 -
[69]
1) no
2)yes
3)yes
|
Khan Zung
SoT
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 11:02:00 -
[70]
I've tried these tricks several times but it doesnt't works. So lets remove them for everyone!
[url=http://terr.in/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=39011]
[/url] |
|
|
Zula Rage
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 11:04:00 -
[71]
supporting it
|
Mind disruptor
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 11:09:00 -
[72]
signed
|
D'Ork
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 11:10:00 -
[73]
if my support means anything - you got it lol
|
ambasadorit
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 11:12:00 -
[74]
signed
|
Great Creator
Jacks of all trades
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 11:12:00 -
[75]
+1
Support
____________________________________________
omg... where i`m?? booo... drinking is very baad( |
WrathSama
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 11:53:00 -
[76]
agreed
|
DonBasss
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 12:06:00 -
[77]
signed
|
Steel Head
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 12:29:00 -
[78]
Agreed
|
Sarkat Kador
ZER0.
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 13:07:00 -
[79]
First of all - propose some solution, not just identify exploits.
1) NO.
Increasing time to 90 or 120 seconds MIGHT be acceptable, but anyway losing a capital that logged off in an empty system just because some nice scanner found it after it logged off and cynoed in capfleet is idiocy.
2) Yes.
3) Yes.
|
Takeshi Taro
Drunk GanG
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 14:59:00 -
[80]
/signed for 2 and 3
|
|
|
Laechyd Eldgorn
Toy Factory
Exalted.
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 16:39:00 -
[81]
Supported. Most of mentioned things are pretty stupid and honestly don't have much to do with real connection problems.
I think you should be able to stop warp with some delay though. It has always annoyed me that there's no such feature to stop warp when you know you're obviously going to wrong place. There should be some delay so you cannot just click scanner and quit warp though.
|
veelzevul
Sacred Inquisition
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 17:23:00 -
[82]
/signed for 2 & 3
good idea
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp.
Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 18:43:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Sarkat Kador
1) NO.
Increasing time to 90 or 120 seconds MIGHT be acceptable, but anyway losing a capital that logged off in an empty system just because some nice scanner found it after it logged off and cynoed in capfleet is idiocy.
2) Yes.
3) Yes.
Why wouldn't you log off your cap at the POS?
And if you are in hostile system with no support fleet and no friendly POS, maybe a cloak would be good idea. Or just cyno out to safety before you call it a day.
Otherwise, what prevents you from hitting that X button just as you see enemy dictors exit warp on top of you?
Nothing but your honor.
And even if you happen to have any, you can bet that a whole bunch of other people won't.
|
Red Raider
Caldari
Airbourne Demons
DeMoN's N AnGeL's
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 19:46:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Kadesh Priestess
Edited by: Kadesh Priestess on 11/03/2010 10:00:55
Originally by: Red Raider
First, I never whined about anything you may want to look in a mirror to find that. I stated what CCP has already made perfectly clear, a 1 minute logoff timer is in place to reduce the chances of a legitimate disconnect resulting in the destruction of a players assets. The OP and the people supporting his first item are whining that 1 minute isn't long enough to kill a target. Anything can be killed in less than a minute if enough firepower is available but a player can't avoid legitimate disco which is why the rule exists. That doesn't mean I support people using this tactic to avoid losing assets but since doing so is considered an exploit then it is up to you to petition the offending party not me and everyone else to lose our ships because of a legitimate disco and you and yours not getting a kill because you were unprepared to dish out the firepower needed to pull it off.
So in summary. You have multiples avenues to deal with item 1 while legitimate disco's have no way to stop a legitimate disco so they shouldn't pay the consequences and CCP agrees.
If i'm flying ship with relatively small hp, this rule won't help me. If i fly a ship with some nice hp buffer - then i will use it in any camp where hp buffer is enough to survive 1 minute but not 15, and where i will be defeated anyway if i'll stay online and fight.
Considering this now i agree with point 1). Because this point doesn't prevent everyone from being destroyed in smaller ships (even if they had some *real* disconnect) and easily abused to avoid definite ship loss in bigger ships - and that's something that should be changed.
You are basing everything that occurs in EVE off of lowsec and .0 pvp. Unfortunately for you the vast majority of EVE doesn't live and operate in either of those spaces. So when a noob in a frigate jumps into his level 1 mission and doesn't get killed because of a legitimate disco it's because this rule is in place due to the fact that a huge majority of paying eve customers face this issue every day. This rule is backed up by rules specifically designed to stop people from using this mechanic as a way losing your ship. There is nothing broken here except for the fact that people are not reporting it as they should be. Instead they come whine about it in the assembly hall.
Yes it's frustrating but CCP isn't going to make 3/4 of it's paying customers ****ed off because 1/100th of them disco on purpose.
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp.
Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 21:58:00 -
[85]
Quote:
So when a noob in a frigate jumps into his level 1 mission and doesn't get killed because of a legitimate disco it's because this rule is in place due to the fact that a huge majority of paying eve customers face this issue every day.
What saves the noob in this case is "emergency warp" that happens immediately after disconnect.
Nobody here is proposing any changes to emergency warp. Your point is moot.
|
Red Raider
Caldari
Airbourne Demons
DeMoN's N AnGeL's
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 22:34:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Ephemeron
What saves the noob in this case is "emergency warp" that happens immediately after disconnect.
Nobody here is proposing any changes to emergency warp. Your point is moot.
Wrong there is warp jamming in some missions.
|
Jeremey
Glittering Dust
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 22:51:00 -
[87]
Edited by: Jeremey on 11/03/2010 22:51:47
Originally by: Red Raider
So when a noob in a frigate jumps into his level 1 mission and doesn't get killed because of a legitimate disco it's because this rule is in place due to the fact that a huge majority of paying eve customers face this issue every day.
What saves the noob is 2 minute aggro from NPC. No one here proposed any changes to that. Also no one here proposed to remove emergency warp or making ships stay for more than 1 or 2 minute if they don't have aggro.
If you don't know that "player" aggro and "npc" aggro are different things with different timers that are triggered differently, then go learn basic game mechanics before posting such posts.
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp.
Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 23:02:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Red Raider
Originally by: Ephemeron
What saves the noob in this case is "emergency warp" that happens immediately after disconnect.
Nobody here is proposing any changes to emergency warp. Your point is moot.
Wrong there is warp jamming in some missions.
Please provide evidence of level 1-2 missions that have warp scrambling rats
|
Jeremey
Glittering Dust
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 23:09:00 -
[89]
Edited by: Jeremey on 11/03/2010 23:11:02
Originally by: Ephemeron
Please provide evidence of level 1-2 missions that have warp scrambling rats
It doesn't matter, because he doesn't understand that in this topic no one proposes to make NPC aggro timer to reset itself even if player logoffs. The whole talk is about player vs. player aggro timer.
For every one who doesn't know: if NPC shoots at you, you've got 2 minute "npc aggro" - if you logoff, your ship will be present in game for 2 minutes (it will either warp out or will stay in place for that time if NPCs have scrambled you).
On the other hand, player vs. player interaction (shots, warp disruptors, ecm, etc.) places on you 15 minute aggro.
The whole bug is that if you logoff and player places aggro on you AFTER that, you still disappear after 1 minute. But no one here proposes to make that if NPC shoots you after logoff (or disconnect) to make you ship stay for 15 minutes! People who think that this is proposed in this topic are just don't know even current game mechanics.
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp.
Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 23:34:00 -
[90]
you are right Jeremey, the proposed changes have no effect on carebear that doesn't get attacked by another player.
The main problem is people logging off literally seconds before they see incoming aggro. And as I said earlier, the probability of real disconnect in that case is less than 1:10000
|
|
|
Azumo
Zombie Clowns from Outer Space
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 17:10:00 -
[91]
/signed
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 21:55:00 -
[92]
Edited by: Kadesh Priestess on 12/03/2010 21:59:46
Okay boys and girls, i've re-read whole thread and noticed that almost everyone who opposes these changes uses 'what happens if i get real disconnect' argument, so let's look a bit deeper into it.
When you get disconnected, server stops getting data from client; to make sure that connection is really lost it waits for 30 or 60 seconds before making emergency warp-off, and only after that moment you're considered as logged off (opposed to insta-logoff using ctrl-q).
---
1. You logoff and after that someone places aggro on you - but you will still disappear after 1 minute.
There're really 2 cases in this single point: 1.1. after jumping into some system through gate and 1.2. all others. Major difference is 45-60 seconds of cloaked state which provides you total invulnerability after jumping into some gate.
1.1. If you've got legit disconnect in gate cloak - most likely you'll be able to avoid aggro and if you have enough tank your ship will vanish in 1 minute. In this case suggested mechanics change will affect you in some edge cases. But personally i think number of 1.1.1. legit disconnects in fat ships which can survive camp is absolute minority when compared to 1.1.2 number of legit disconnects in cases where your ship won't be able to tank campers (you'll die with 1 minute aggro the same way you'd die with 15 minutes aggro) plus number of forced logouts which are done just to keep your ship 'alive'
1.2. There're numerous situations, but let's take some fat ship in the belt, say, Orca and group of Hulks. They noticed few interceptors en-route to their belt and have no time to align and warp to POS (at least that's true for Orca). They log off right when interceptors land into their belt, and if gang doesn't have enough DPS arriving instantly after interceptor to the belt - most of miner guys will survive. If they had real disconnect - they'd be aggroed before server issues log off after time out is reached. In this case, it won't help players which got really disconnected.
---
2. You logoff, login, logoff, login - and appear on a spot not where you was or where you're travelling previously.
That's pretty obvious that it's impossible to make this trick (especially multiple times) without insta-logoff, which is not the case with real disconnect where time out should expire before actual logoff.
---
3. You click warp to and instantly logoff - no one can scramble you or even lock you.
Same. If you click warp and hit log off - this trick works. If you click warp and get disconnected - you will be aggroed and killed.
Sooo, is 'what happens if i get real disconnect' argument that strong? I don't think so, really :P
|
Jeremey
Glittering Dust
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:33:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Kadesh Priestess
When you get disconnected, server stops getting data from client; to make sure that connection is really lost it waits for 30 or 60 seconds before making emergency warp-off, and only after that moment you're considered as logged off (opposed to insta-logoff using ctrl-q).
Everything you wrote in your post is quite right, but just small remark: it seems that Eve uses TCP/IP (and not asynchronous UDP), so server doesn't literally waits for client data - it's just notified when TCP/IP connection is timed out (as I can say from my programming experience without touching the game itself, of course).
From practical standpoint we can say that during "legit" disconnect (not closing game client by ctrl-q) the server just waits 30-60 seconds for client data.
|
Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Shadow Cadre
Looney Toons.
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 23:29:00 -
[94]
Step 1: Log in and get into a fight
Step 2: Pull the Ethernet Cable out of your computer
Step 3: Rinse and repeat.
Weak argument my ass... Server will never be able to discern the difference between a logoffski and a disconnect.
Stop theorizing and talking about things you know nothing about people.
Yes its a problem... but the suggested solutions will cause more harm than you ever thought possible.
Just wait until it happens to you... I guarantee you will be first one to scream at CCP.
It only takes one incident... just one.
PS: and before you flame me note I supported this proposal.. so shove that up your missile tube.
=========================
CEO of Shadow Cadre
http://www.shadowcadre.com
========================= |
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp.
Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 23:50:00 -
[95]
Anyone who had legitimate disconnect during battle (as I have) knows that the current mechanism doesn't benefit you at all. You fight, you disconnect, you log back in 30 seconds later - your ship is dead.
Or you fight, you disconnect, by some miracle you weren't scrambled, you warp to safe, you log back in 30 seconds later, warp back into enemy gang, weakened, and probably die.
Or you fight, you disconnect, you can't log back in cause of serious internet problems, but by some miracle your ship wasn't scrambled. So the enemy probes you down in 2-5 minutes and you die anyway.
The only way to get any benefit from this is to exploit the system purposely.
|
Jeremey
Glittering Dust
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 23:51:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Jeremey on 12/03/2010 23:53:21
Edited by: Jeremey on 12/03/2010 23:51:44
Originally by: Drake Draconis
Step 1: Log in and get into a fight
Step 2: Pull the Ethernet Cable out of your computer
Step 3: Rinse and repeat.
Weak argument my ass... Server will never be able to discern the difference between a logoffski and a disconnect.
Have you read what others wrote here? We talking about that if server (or devs) cannot descern between legitimate logoff and cutting your ethernet cable, then logoff should not give advantages in/during pvp.
Also, if logoff happened not during pvp (so player doesn't have 15 minute aggro timer), proposed changes will have no effect on him.
Originally by: Drake Draconis
Yes its a problem... but the suggested solutions will cause more harm than you ever thought possible.
What harm exactly fixing these bugs will cause? Please be more specific when making such statements.
Originally by: Drake Draconis
Just wait until it happens to you... I guarantee you will be first one to scream at CCP.
It only takes one incident... just one.
No, I think it is fair that if you've disconnected in the middle in the fight - you die (if enemy have scrambled and shooting you with enough dps).
Originally by: Ephemeron
Anyone who had legitimate disconnect during battle (as I have) knows that the current mechanism doesn't benefit you at all. You fight, you disconnect, you log back in 30 seconds later - your ship is dead.
Or you fight, you disconnect, by some miracle you weren't scrambled, you warp to safe, you log back in 30 seconds later, warp back into enemy gang, weakened, and probably die.
Or you fight, you disconnect, you can't log back in cause of serious internet problems, but by some miracle your ship wasn't scrambled. So the enemy probes you down in 2-5 minutes and you die anyway.
The only way to get any benefit from this is to exploit the system purposely.
Thank you for clarification, that is exactly about what I'm talking about too.
|
Abyss Wyrm
Caldari
Starbridge
Brotherhood of Starbridge
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 00:33:00 -
[97]
I could partly aggre only on 3rd matter. Though as long this... feature will exist, i will use it myself.
But 3rd thing is rly kind a bug, as for 1st and 2nd, its a normal game feature.
Gather more DDs to kill your target in 1 minute, and dont let them go (unless they will use 3rd feature/bug) so double logoff/login wouldnt matter at all.
You cant just ask to remove every possible feature in the game thet let ppl escape from the grasp of agressors. Basicly you ask to make game simplier for you (and your folks may be), and thats wrong.
So as i only partly agree about 3rd matter, no my support here.
My standing service is available now again, check this link. |
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp.
Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 01:38:00 -
[98]
Quote:
You cant just ask to remove every possible feature in the game thet let ppl escape from the grasp of agressors. Basicly you ask to make game simplier for you (and your folks may be), and thats wrong.
I'm not pro-blob. I don't argue to change log off mechanics just so the big blobs can kill more people.
If you are seriously interested in giving people more chances of escape from gate campers and blobbers, we should undo the Great Nano Nerf - when people had more speed and agility they could escape bad situations without resorting to LAN cable pulling.
The nano nerf was just as retarded as current log off mechanics. The fact that CCP are just fine with this proves they cannot be trusted to make good judgment on game design. We have to force them into doing the right thing, for the good of EVE community as a whole rather than select individuals.
|
Abyss Wyrm
Caldari
Starbridge
Brotherhood of Starbridge
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 02:56:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Ephemeron
Quote:
You cant just ask to remove every possible feature in the game thet let ppl escape from the grasp of agressors. Basicly you ask to make game simplier for you (and your folks may be), and thats wrong.
I'm not pro-blob. I don't argue to change log off mechanics just so the big blobs can kill more people.
If you are seriously interested in giving people more chances of escape from gate campers and blobbers, we should undo the Great Nano Nerf - when people had more speed and agility they could escape bad situations without resorting to LAN cable pulling.
The nano nerf was just as retarded as current log off mechanics. The fact that CCP are just fine with this proves they cannot be trusted to make good judgment on game design. We have to force them into doing the right thing, for the good of EVE community as a whole rather than select individuals.
Smaller ships are still fast and agile enough to escape most of gate camps in low.
As for heavier. There is still mwd+cloak feature, there is still warpstabs, there is still ECM-bursts. A lot of ways still out there to escape gatecamps in low even without using buggy warp+logoff feature.
Not even mentioning comlitely safe carrier's logistics.
My standing service is available now again, check this link. |
Omega Flames
Caldari
Last Resort Inn
SYSTEM SHOCK INITIATIVE
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 03:18:00 -
[100]
Originally by: De'Veldrin
As soon as you tell me how to tell from the server's perspective the difference between me unplugging my network cable and my internet going down, sure.
I mean sure, we can trap for CTRL-Q or closing the application - of course if I open task manager and just terminate the process none of that code will fire either, so...
Not supported from me either because she's right there is no way to tell if I terminated the process/ unplugged the network cable from an actual unintentional dc. The entire point of terminating a process is for it to immediately cease functioning which means its not going to send any commands back to CCP, it's simply going to drop all contact just like a dc would. Now with a ctrl-q yes you could have that send signals because the program would still be running until the ctrl-q command was finished and implementing a message sent to CCP saying ctrl-q command was used to log off would work but the other methods are still useable.
Originally by: Jeremey
When you terminate your process or press Ctrl-Q, all tcp/udp sockets are closed and server notified about that immediately (in case of udp, by special command game sends). Also, no single one of these exploits' fixes requires server to make such distinction.
Care to explain exactly how a fix could be implemented that the server would not need to be informed of how you logged off? cause I've never heard of one before.
-------------------------
"Forsys > WAR
Forsys > HUH
Forsys > WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR
Harry Sunday > loot
Forsys > touchT" |
|
|
Jeremey
Glittering Dust
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 06:10:00 -
[101]
Edited by: Jeremey on 13/03/2010 06:11:42
Originally by: Abyss Wyrm
You cant just ask to remove every possible feature in the game thet let ppl escape from the grasp of agressors.
Escaping the gatecamp with closing game client is not a game feature - it's undocumented outgame mechanics, totally unintended by devs.
Escaping the bubbled POS by double-logoffing is not intended game feature too - at least because devs are already fixed it.
Originally by: Abyss Wyrm
Basicly you ask to make game simplier for you (and your folks may be), and thats wrong.
The motivation of my statements have no influence on their rightesnousness or usefulness. So please refrain from such demagogy.
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 06:12:00 -
[102]
Edited by: Kadesh Priestess on 13/03/2010 06:15:22
Originally by: Drake Draconis
Weak argument my ass... Server will never be able to discern the difference between a logoffski and a disconnect.
I had disconnects during warping into camp and i know what i'm talking about.
Originally by: Drake Draconis
Just wait until it happens to you... I guarantee you will be first one to scream at CCP.
I am solo pvper and had numerous losses due to disconnects. I never screamed at CCP - please tell me what i'm doing wrong.
Originally by: Abyss Wyrm
Gather more DDs to kill your target in 1 minute, and dont let them go (unless they will use 3rd feature/bug) so double logoff/login wouldnt matter at all.
Exactly. You can counter each of the 'features' by bringing more ships just to counter exploits. Ships to aggro you on the other side during warp-in and separate team which will pursue you after warp-logoff trick, dedicated probers to catch logoff-login-logoff-login jerks, bringing more dps to kill you in 1 minute without aggro. It's not really possible to camp gate with small team without letting guys (who know these tricks) escape.
Do you really want eve to become more blobbish?
Originally by: Omega Flames
Not supported from me either because she's right there is no way to tell if I terminated the process/ unplugged the network cable from an actual unintentional dc. The entire point of terminating a process is for it to immediately cease functioning which means its not going to send any commands back to CCP, it's simply going to drop all contact just like a dc would. Now with a ctrl-q yes you could have that send signals because the program would still be running until the ctrl-q command was finished and implementing a message sent to CCP saying ctrl-q command was used to log off would work but the other methods are still useable.
Oh come on dude. Did you read my post on top of this page? Care to test any of its points and say 'yes, fixing this point will affect those who had legit disconnect'?
|
Jeremey
Glittering Dust
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 06:18:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Omega Flames
Not supported from me either because she's right there is no way to tell if I terminated the process/ unplugged the network cable from an actual unintentional dc.
And so what? How inability to distinguish between legitimate disconnect and unplugging the cable prevents from fixing described bugs?
|
Slade Hoo
Corpse Collection Point
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 08:13:00 -
[104]
------
Make Lowsec useful! Vote in the CSM-Forum! |
Ramzes Razares
Caldari
Fremen Sietch
DarkSide.
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 12:12:00 -
[105]
+1, fix this
|
Dungheap
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 19:15:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Jeremey
Here they are:
1) You logoff and after that someone places aggro on you - but you will still disappear after 1 minute.
2) You logoff, login, logoff, login - and appear on a spot not where you was or where you're travelling previously.
3) You click warp to and instantly logoff - no one can scramble you or even lock you.
1. no. no aggro after you log off without aggro. way too exploitable and unfair to those that wait out aggro timers and log. wouldn't be that big of an issue except for #2.
2. WAS ACTUALLY FIXED A WHILE BACK YOU WOULD WARP BACK TO ORIGINAL LOG-OFF SPOT NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES YOU RELOGGED. BROKEN GAME MECHANIC.
3. you can't point or lock someone in warp. not sure how this works when combined with logging off, heard it was ruled an exploit. can't comment on this one...
supported to fix #2 as it was already implemented once and broken in a subsequent patch.
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 19:18:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Dungheap
3. you can't point or lock someone in warp. not sure how this works when combined with logging off, heard it was ruled an exploit. can't comment on this one...
You instantly become 'invulnerable' after hitting ctrl-q - others can't lock you.
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp.
Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 23:03:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Dungheap
1. no. no aggro after you log off without aggro. way too exploitable and unfair to those that wait out aggro timers and log. wouldn't be that big of an issue except for #2.
And what do you call people who log off literally 1-3 seconds before they get aggro?
The current mechanic is much, much more exploitable than the potential exploit you worry about. So even if changing it wouldn't solve all problem, it would make situation at least 10 times better
|
Bilaz
Fremen Sietch
DarkSide.
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 10:05:00 -
[109]
Edited by: Bilaz on 15/03/2010 10:05:52
Thats no exploits afaik, but bad mechanic and only thouse who logoff on purpuse get benefits from it - since if you really have problems with connection - good chances are that eve-server would go on like you still in game, or close client after you engaged in combat.
The way i see it fixed - after character gets logged off (no matter for real or ctrl-q) for 10 seconds ship stoppes any warp/moving related activites (or waits for warp to end (if speed > 0.1 au per second) and then kickes 10 second timer on) and can be agressed - after that - the usual: emerg. warp and 1 or 15 minute timer depending on agr. state.
|
irion felpamy
HellJumpers Corp
Indecisive Certainty
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 13:18:00 -
[110]
To often and easily abused to be left in TBFH.
|
|
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 13:42:00 -
[111]
Quote:
The way i see it fixed - after character gets logged off (no matter for real or ctrl-q) for 10 seconds ship stoppes any warp/moving related activites (or waits for warp to end (if speed > 0.1 au per second) and then kickes 10 second timer on) and can be agressed - after that - the usual: emerg. warp and 1 or 15 minute timer depending on agr. state.
This would not work against those CTRL-Qing right after warp in and would also require a change to PvE scrambling mechanics and would make warp-in-aggro missions easily exploited / defeated.
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Dark Rai
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 20:20:00 -
[112]
I do not sign it, Jeremey why the hell did you tell everyone about these exploits? Why? You think it`ll help?
And I say no it wont. Before that only rare golem or whatever would use these things to get out of the camp, but now you`ve opened so many people`s eyes on it, ene everyone, EVERYONE uses this crap now. Have you lost your mind man? Or its just cuz you SOMETIMES fail to kill some sweetass carebear`s ship? Well not you wont able to kill more than that .
/NOT signed
Imho this thread should not exist, devs plz delete it as it tells everyone about the exploits. Before that about 200 people were useing them not every single one uses em omgwtfbbq... Yeah, big thx Jeremey, big thx man.
I was fine about these exploits although i never used them myself, and i was fine when sometimes my victims use them, because it were only rare occasions.
|
Dark Rai
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 22:31:00 -
[113]
And fixing this will deny making deep spots :(( that would be very sad
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 12:03:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Dark Rai
He posted this crap on Russian community forums (eve-ru.com) as well, and you now what? Few people support him. Only few.
Lie. There're almost twice more votes for fixing these exploits than total number of supports in this thread.
|
Hentuku
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 12:48:00 -
[115]
/signed.
Fix this! Its insane that you can escape death in this way. Eve is supposed to be harsh (apparently). Seems most people are unaware of this get out of jail free card feature.
Makes a mockery of the game tbh. If your internet connection sucks so bad then don't undock in anything you can't afford to lose.
I hate losing something as much as the next guy, but this is just a farce.
|
Foxlike
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 13:15:00 -
[116]
Not support.
It wasn't an exploit for more than 2 years, why it should be now? It's the same type mechanics as cloaked (macro)hunters - so it's should be fixed both or neither.
|
sanjar
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 13:43:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Dark Rai
Edited by: Dark Rai on 16/03/2010 05:33:08
He posted this crap on Russian community forums (eve-ru.com) as well, and you now what? Few people support him. Only few.
Period.
That's the truth.
And gentlemen, please don't pay much attention to this bunch of low-sec pirates. All the rest of russian community, i'm glad to represent, is perfectly satisfied with width and flexibility of the features, eve-online offers to it's subscribers.
the following is the result of poll that took place in a central russian-community resource:
81 ppl would like those features to be eliminated
160 ppl would like those features to be kept intact.
PS. I beg a pardon, gents, but most probably i wouldn't be able to reply you. I can't read english. I can only write messages in english.
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 14:44:00 -
[118]
Originally by: sanjar
Originally by: Dark Rai
Edited by: Dark Rai on 16/03/2010 05:33:08
He posted this crap on Russian community forums (eve-ru.com) as well, and you now what? Few people support him. Only few.
Period.
That's the truth.
Well, if 80+ is few - then yes, it's the truth :P
Originally by: sanjar
And gentlemen, please don't pay much attention to this bunch of low-sec pirates. All the rest of russian community, i'm glad to represent, is perfectly satisfied with width and flexibility of the features, eve-online offers to it's subscribers.
Yea, availability of exploits is flexibility of the features. Great.
Originally by: sanjar
the following is the result of poll that took place in a central russian-community resource:
81 ppl would like those features to be eliminated
160 ppl would like those features to be kept intact.
It's a shame that you don't get that 3rd option "no, i'm DarkSide member and feel butthurt" isn't the same as "no". Uniting them into one single option and summing number of votes is bad idea, mkay?
|
Apulaz
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 22:31:00 -
[119]
I Agree. Hate exploits and want them to be fixed.
|
Red Raider
Caldari
Airbourne Demons
DeMoN's N AnGeL's
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 22:36:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Jeremey
Edited by: Jeremey on 11/03/2010 22:51:47
Originally by: Red Raider
So when a noob in a frigate jumps into his level 1 mission and doesn't get killed because of a legitimate disco it's because this rule is in place due to the fact that a huge majority of paying eve customers face this issue every day.
What saves the noob is 2 minute aggro from NPC. No one here proposed any changes to that. Also no one here proposed to remove emergency warp or making ships stay for more than 1 or 2 minute if they don't have aggro.
If you don't know that "player" aggro and "npc" aggro are different things with different timers that are triggered differently, then go learn basic game mechanics before posting such posts.
If that is the case than I am all for it. I was unaware that PVP timers and NPC timers were different and honestly shocked that PVP timers are shorter since I assume this tactic is used almost entirely by the PVP crowd and not the NPC crowd.
As for that being basic game mechanics you are kidding yourself. Unless you are actively trying to figure it out instead of just dealing with the occasional disco you are never going to know the difference between the two without combing some mind numbing PVP guide to ganking on some fanboy epeen website that 3/4 of the population could care less about.
|
|
|
Jeremey
Glittering Dust
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 13:34:00 -
[121]
Edited by: Jeremey on 18/03/2010 13:34:56
Originally by: sanjar
the following is the result of poll that took place in a central russian-community resource:
81 ppl would like those features to be eliminated
160 ppl would like those features to be kept intact.
Oh, it's simply a lie. As everyone can see by looking at this thread with poll 33.46% (88 ppl) answered that they want these exploits to be fixed, 42.21% (111 ppl) answered that these are exploits but they don't want them to be fixed, and 24.33% (64 ppl) answered to "lulz answer" that they're members of DarkSide and have a butthurt because they're using these exploits themselves. So the last group cannot be realistically taken as voters against fixing these exploits.
Originally by: sanjar
PS. I beg a pardon, gents, but most probably i wouldn't be able to reply you. I can't read english. I can only write messages in english.
Then go away: don't disturb our dark and evil doings. |
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 14:00:00 -
[122]
does this thread help your discussion? |
seany1212
Stylo Corporation
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 19:40:00 -
[123]
Originally by: Dark Rai
Edited by: Dark Rai on 16/03/2010 05:29:39
Edited by: Dark Rai on 15/03/2010 20:27:29
I do not sign it, Jeremey why the hell did you tell everyone about these exploits? Why? You think it`ll help?
And I say: NO it wont help. Before this thread only a rare golem or whatever would use these things to get out of the camp, but now you`ve opened so many people`s eyes on it, that everyone, EVERY SINGLE ONE uses this crap now. Have you lost your mind man? Or its juat a rage cuz you SOMETIMES fail to kill some sweetass carebear ship/freighter? Well Im glad to tell you that now you will have difficulties to kill a lot more people, as these things have become extremely popular, you may be proud of yourself, GJ.
/NOT signed
Imho this thread should not exist, devs plz delete it as it tells everyone about the exploits. Before only about 200 people were useing them in the whole EVE, now every single bud uses em, omgwtfbbq... Yeah, big thx Jeremey, big thx man. GOOD JOB FFS
Grammar mistakes
I was fine about these exploits although i never used them myself, and i was fine when sometimes my victims use them, because it were only rare occasions.
OH and BTW some people have REALLY bad internet, so wtf if they have a disconnect in camp/warp they lose their ship? Yeah sounds good for you? But perhaps not for them. I personally do not want to write reimbursemnt petitions every time i lose my hsip because of a power cut, etc and then wait few days just to enjoy a GMs refuse to reimburse my ship because the server was not lagging, it is me who is lagging.
This thing is nto exploit, it was created to help laggers, to defend them from some ass pirate-kiddies who want to kill him when he lags.
And now these pirate blob-kiddies are whining on forums "WE CANT BE SILENT ANYMOOOOOOOOAR!!! WE WANT EASY FRAAAAGS!!! IT IS SUCH A PLEASURE TO KILL A FACTION FITTED GOLEM OR WHATEVAH WHEN HE LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGS!!!! WHYYYYYY WE CANT KILLL HEEEEEEEEEEEEEM?!?!?!?!?!??!"
How bou you guys grow up a bit eh?
Sounds like somebodys ****ed that they're about to lose there most used exploit.
Originally by: Dark Rai
Edited by: Dark Rai on 16/03/2010 05:33:08
And fixing this will deny forever making deep spots :(( that would be really, REALLY sad... Devs do not listen to him.
He posted this crap on Russian community forums (eve-ru.com) as well, and you now what? Few people support him. Only few.
Because if he do not have enough DPS to kill a logoffsky, its his problem, not mine, not ours, and not CCPs.
Period.
Thats because most russians are the ones who use it, the amount of russian cynabal pilots who jumped into a gate camp in my last corp and logoffski'd i stopped counting because it became a joke. |
Pelorn
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 20:06:00 -
[124]
Just had (1) happen to me:
Warp in on two hulks and a mammoth in my harpy; tackle one of the hulks. Get him down to 25% shield, he dissapears. I wait for him to come back online, but being in a main system, alliance brings in an archon and I'm forced to warp out.
I have the combat log, but I don't know of any way to do anything about this situation.
...Atlas cowards ftl. |
Alter Id
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 14:28:00 -
[125]
Quick question before I reply in full. You say you have petitioned this and you insinuated that the petitions were upheld in some fashion. Does CCP consider use of these tactics to be illegal exploits for which they punish players for using? |
Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Shadow Cadre
Looney Toons.
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 14:53:00 -
[126]
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 19/03/2010 14:59:40
Originally by: Alter Id
Quick question before I reply in full. You say you have petitioned this and you insinuated that the petitions were upheld in some fashion. Does CCP consider use of these tactics to be illegal exploits for which they punish players for using?
The only one that is being considered an exploit (quietly) is the deep deep deep space log off trick.
You log in... and log off... log in... log off.. .log in... eventually you end up in the ass end of the system.
And thanks to Grid Fu you end up on the overview a kajillion AU away from destination.
We caught some prick doing this in one of our systems... the GM actually shoved his shiny carrier butt in the station because someone got screen-shots to prove it. Of which we camped 23/7 until he managed to sneak out using the same damn trick right after downtime.
They said they haven't publicly announced it as such so what I'm saying is likely going to be disproved or "meh'd" and still require proof. Not easy considering.
The only reason that's being even considered as such mind you is due to the fact its abuse of said mechanic.
Disconnections and logoffskies?
AS I've said before.... pull the Ethernet cable from your tower and the server doesn't have a damn clue what your doing.
The moment you get that figured out... is the moment you understand that while this mechanic "Sucks".... it isn't as simple to fix.
All thanks to TCP/IP.
If anything there needs to be a change for when you log back in.... should be the exact same spot regardless.
And perhaps the best solution for THAT is that the said location remains "Stuck" until your session timer (double it if you need to) expires.. then you can write a new location.
Should be warped in long before it times out.
But they likely have already fixed that with Tyranis on the horizon. And I do mean specifically That.
You will likely never get a ultimate solution to this.
So while disconnections and logoffskies will be around... the logging on process will be nailed down as its logically the only rational solution to track.
It's impossible to track disconnections because if you attempt to do so on the server side... you will likely get accused of misjudging and CCP will never take that liability on.
The last thing they want to do is deal with ship reimbursement complaints on that level.
However... if you log back in... your going to log back in in such a way that it is entirely predictable within reason.... and if people camp that spot... they will get a all be it brief window of opportunity to pod said person. |
Alter Id
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 15:34:00 -
[127]
Edited by: Alter Id on 19/03/2010 15:37:22
So basically 1 is a glitch, 3 is an abused safety feature and 2 is a CCP error somewhere. 2 - Almost impossible to prove and the time it was proven in your above scenario the GM placed them in a station which he later escaped from using the exact same tactic. I'm going to assume a little something here. That the people supporting this thread are low-sec null-sec primarily. So I will reserve any vitriol for those I consider deserving of it.
As you said, there really is not way to stop the "logoffski" trick w/o punishing people who are not using it. (A friend was a victim of a dropout a couple of nights ago and CCP gave him the usual - we had no lag no our system so it was yours, tuff luck.)
I am going to surpise myself and support this proposal, my first, even though I'm a newb carebear/mission runner right now. I've been nailed in low sec 2 days into the game, can-flipped, had some attempt to gank me and had ninja-salvagers in my corp mates missions. These are people generally associated with pirates and low sec/ null sec dwellers. I'm going to support this anyway. I'm doing so really for one reason only, its a flaw that should be fixed. Even if I consider other areas of the game to be broken, some of which I cannot think of a fix for anyway (not really despite the threads about them), and I'm currently on the dead opposite side of you, they should at least fix fix this. So often it seems the don't want to fix, or rebalance or even improve the damned font! Maybe if I can get them to setting people to fixing problems, they will eventually get around to mine. (Well, that and I want to be able to use your own tactics against you in the near future.:D
One above poster was correct though. This really should have found another way to raise this issue w/o detailing what action is taken. If I had the opportunity to use this against someone who had tried to gank me or ninja salved me, I would in an instant. Just the thought of them spitting on their monitor in frustration brings a smile to my face.
Good Luck with this.
(Bloody Pirates!) |
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 15:51:00 -
[128]
just in case you didnt read the link .... CCP will change that mechanic in tyrranis. so the thread is already obsolete. |
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 16:07:00 -
[129]
Edited by: Bagehi on 19/03/2010 16:13:42
1. The exploit is impossible to track because it usually occurs during a session change (jumping into a gate camp) and session changes are often when normal disconnects occur (ever click "undock" and found yourself staring at your desktop instead?).
2. I'm under the impression this trick has been solved to some extent. Current mechanic is that even if you do end up 700 AU away, it will warp you back (eventually) to where you started and there is nothing you can do about it. However, there is no reason the server shouldn't flag this and dump the character back at their original location for 2 hours (just out of spite) if it is done more than twice in a row.
3. Not familiar with this, but I live in the world where bubbles exist. If this is the case, it should be fixed.
So, 2 & 3 should be fixed, but 1 is just something we have to deal with until CCP finds a way to win at the internets and prevent disconnections from ever happening again.
|
Lubomir Penev
Dark Nexxus
|
Posted - 2010.03.22 16:47:00 -
[130]
Originally by: De'Veldrin
As soon as you tell me how to tell from the server's perspective the difference between me unplugging my network cable and my internet going down, sure.
I mean sure, we can trap for CTRL-Q or closing the application - of course if I open task manager and just terminate the process none of that code will fire either, so...
The server does an awful job of detecting real network issue. Try it with a corpmate watching you : unplug your cable and ask him if he saw you ewarp. The time the server will take to detect you are gone is more than enough to get you killed, network events triggered ewarp don't really protect anyone in PvP (but do a decent job in missions where the dps is usually much less)
OTOH CTRL-Q is acted swiftly upon, making me support those issues a thousand times.
--
081014 : emoragequit, char transfered to a friend, 090317 : back to original owner
blog |
|
|
Kostya Semer
Gallente
Facepalm Corp.
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 20:53:00 -
[131]
go away, lowsec blober.
everything ok now
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp.
Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 21:28:00 -
[132]
Why are people discussing the difference between real and fake disconnect?
The nature of the disconnect is irrelevant for the things we are trying to fix.
From the OP:
Quote:
1) You logoff and after that someone places aggro on you - but you will still disappear after 1 minute.
2) You logoff, login, logoff, login - and appear on a spot not where you was or where you're travelling previously.
3) You click warp to and instantly logoff - no one can scramble you or even lock you.
Those game mechanics are bad whether they are done deliberately or accidentally, and thus should be changed.
|
Jerid Verges
The Society of Innovation
The Last Stand
|
Posted - 2010.04.02 00:40:00 -
[133]
Logoffski should be fixed. If you are in a PVP fight with aggression and stuff like that, you should definately NOT be able to take advantage of the safing mechanics. Very few people actually use it LEGIT, it is too heavily abused.
In all other circumstances, such as fights with NPCs or just in normal space. It should still apply.
There really is no easy way to approach the problem.
|
Angel Scott
|
Posted - 2010.04.06 19:45:00 -
[134]
I support this measure |
Tibalt Avalon
Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 04:51:00 -
[135]
Originally by: HCMan
Yes, i want it
Hardstyle Ambassador |
Cassidy Solo
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 00:40:00 -
[136]
Originally by: Kadesh Priestess
Edited by: Kadesh Priestess on 10/03/2010 07:05:00
Originally by: Red Raider
I knew when I posted this that someone wouldn't know that LD means link dead. This is caused by the server and there is nothing you can do about it. So NOT flying into situations where you go LD is not an option.
So essentially you say that eve cluster disconnects you while keeping other players in the same/nearby system on-line? Nah, never've been in such situation.
Lol? Play much? Or not at all? How about the fact that I have had two characters logged in, in the SAME FIGHT, and one gets an error message and disconnects, and the other one doesn't? I have been getting socket closure error messages at least once a day, sometimes as many as five or six times within an hour. It doesn't appear to be related to a specific account, as it randomly decides which one to disconnect, and which one to keep online.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |