Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 14:42:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Le Skunk on 05/05/2010 14:42:53 Probably the most pressing concern to low sec pvpers today is logofski.
PREEAMBLE:
Im sure you've all seen it before, but basically this technique involves jumping through a gate, seeing enemies, and then closing your client. If done whilst cloaked, your ship will disappear into thin air like a puff of smoke.
Further variations to this involve logging in and out quickly to move the position your ship warps back to to give you a safe route out. You don't even have to be inconvenienced by not being able to play after cheating, you can cheat again a few times and carry on your merry way.
Still further variations on Logofski are present in game but not widley known so i wont go into them.
THE CSM:
Any way, in an effort to deal with this, an issue was brought to the csm to be put before CCP asking for something to be done. After many threads, and many posts, and many ideas were discussed by many people - some sensible options were put forward to enable legitimate crashes to be protected and cheats to be punished.
Quote:
* A player who logs out but recieves agression before his ship disappears will recieve a full 15 minute agression timer and will not disappear in that time. Unless a player logs off at an obvious spot or in an area where probes are already present it is unlikely for him to be probed within 60 seconds.
* When a player logs out he will become 'anchored' to that point in space and will ALWAYS warp back to that point and his emergency warp point will remain constant.
Sensible options which would minimize CTRL+Q being used to avoid PVP in all its forms.
THE SMOKING GUN
Ive highlighted the pertinent bit in yellow
*******
CSM MEETING 3.005
Dierdra asked if he was correct in reading 4 different solutions in the proposal, and said he didn't like the 15 minutes lockout, but the other solutions sounded reasonable. Larkonis answered that there were inded 4, although not all mutually exclusive. Mazz asked what happens when someone logs of at a POS that is destroyed before the person logs back in. Larkonis suggested not logging off at a POS in danger of dying soon. Avalloc asked if the suggestion is to stop the ability to change the arrival point after a disconnect. Larkonis answered that it was. Avalloc said it would be a problem in Mazz' scenario and asked if this was an empire or 0.0 problem Larkonis answered it was both. Adding that if one were to jump into a bubble and log out, he wouldn't decloak immediately, but after the 60 seconds, which is incidentally the time the ship stays in space. Avalloc said if a POS was mistimed, it could be gone before the people logged off at it get a chance to get to safety. Larkonis agreed, but that this was still using game mechanics to avoid getting one's ship killed, that losing a ship due to a POS changing hands was more the responsibility of the person timing it badly. Voting followed. Motion passed 5 for, 4 against (Mazzilliu, Issler and Avalloc, Zastrow)
THE CONCLUSION
Mazzilliu - Who is currently courting the pirate vote in Crime and Punishment voted against one of (if not the) most pressing Pirate Prioritys! Yet she seeks our vote.
Why did she do this? Because she is a member of Pandemic Legion, a 0.0 alliance and puts the needs of some 0.0 idiot with his titan logged off on a pos above pirates. Indeed, the need of the 0.0 cap idiot above a basic sense of fair play where you shouldnt be able to gain advantage from logging off and on repetedly.
This, combined with other votes against pirate needs she has made in the past which other people have pointed out in other threads, leads me to decide against voting for her. And instead to present this damming evidence to right minded pirates, pvpers, and fair players the game over.
SKUNK (o)
|
mazzilliu
Caldari Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 14:56:00 -
[2]
Edited by: mazzilliu on 05/05/2010 14:57:44 hahaha i am honored that you will put so much effort into this
like i said in the other thread, about two times, i would not vote against a logoffski proposal that isn't terrible.
Also a titan, that cannot be scrambled, has nothing to fear from logging off at an enemy pos. I don't know where your knowledge of game mechanics comes from but it isn't EVE. this change will screw over pilots of things like smaller ships that can be scrambled instead.
Even if this had only the first point, it's still a terrible idea. what about players who are being camped in and probed constantly, but eventually need to log off because they cant play EVE forever? People who are in the situation of being probed for hours are probably pvpers being camped in by a bigger carebear alliance. there's no legitimate method of logging off and disappearing quickly under such a situation provided. if the proposal were passed we would see solo pvpers getting camped in by carebears, and then forced to play eve for 8 hours or lose their ship. i know how tenacious those guys can be, i've been camped in by them lots of times.
If there were something about logoff conditions because local population went from 1 to 2, I would think it's a fair proposal. But when there's already people in local and their chance to catch you unawares has been lost, you need to be able to log off.
MAZZILLIU FOR CSM 2010 CHECK OUT MY CAMPAIGN VIDEO http://www.eveonline |
FunzzeR
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 15:15:00 -
[3]
Honestly the only true lowsec or pirate oriented candidate worth voting for is Mynxee.
All the rest are 0.0 stalwarts whose first priority is 0.0 and whatever their constituents (read alliance mates) request (read demand). Despite what they promise, low sec will be barely be an afterthought and will remain the equivalent of the ginger orphan compared to high sec and 0.0.
Mynxee on the other hand up until recently has been a pretty much exclusively a low sec pirate and has first hand experience of the situation and problems that we face.
Vote Mynxee PRAISE THE SCOTTISH FOLD!!
THEIR WILL SHALL BE DONE!! |
RedSplat
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 15:21:00 -
[4]
This thread is pointless.
C&P is just going to vote for whoever has the cutest bottom anyway.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 15:24:00 -
[5]
Originally by: mazzilliu Edited by: mazzilliu on 05/05/2010 14:57:44 hahaha i am honored that you will put so much effort into this
like i said in the other thread, about two times, i would not vote against a logoffski proposal that isn't terrible.
Also a titan, that cannot be scrambled, has nothing to fear from logging off at an enemy pos. I don't know where your knowledge of game mechanics comes from but it isn't EVE. this change will screw over pilots of things like smaller ships that can be scrambled instead.
Even if this had only the first point, it's still a terrible idea. what about players who are being camped in and probed constantly, but eventually need to log off because they cant play EVE forever? People who are in the situation of being probed for hours are probably pvpers being camped in by a bigger carebear alliance. there's no legitimate method of logging off and disappearing quickly under such a situation provided. if the proposal were passed we would see solo pvpers getting camped in by carebears, and then forced to play eve for 8 hours or lose their ship. i know how tenacious those guys can be, i've been camped in by them lots of times.
If there were something about logoff conditions because local population went from 1 to 2, I would think it's a fair proposal. But when there's already people in local and their chance to catch you unawares has been lost, you need to be able to log off.
I smelt something a bit fishy about your thread from stage one, and other people pointing out your shortcoming in regards to pirate priorities made me take a look through the assembly hall for evidence of this (which we can all agree is pretty damming)
Firstly, if you choose to log off at a pos, inherent in that is the risk that if you dont log in for a few days, that pos might not be there when you get back. NO where outside of dock is safe - and thats how CCP designed the game to be. Multiple logofskis circumvents this using an out of game mechanic.
Secondly, whilst the titan or mothership, cannot be scrambled by the pos, as you try to deflect the argument with - it can be tackled by players at the pos waiting for it (as you well know) in a variety of ways.
Smaller ships who have taken the advantages of logging of at a pos (protection from shields, acsessing of the modules, protection from guns) must also be prepared for the disadvantages (its a static spot for an enemy to attack)
You championed the player who, upon deciding to log in, finds his ship is in danger of being destroyed, and to prevent this does not call for backup from his alliies, does not outwait the enemy, does not fight his way out.
he logs on and off and on and off and on and off and on and off a few times
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT PIRATES AND FAIR MINDED PVPERS THE GAME OVER HATE!
Yet you seek the pirate vote.
2) Your point about the player "being forced to play for eight hours" is also more misdirection. What you voted against (and thankfully Larkonis managed to get through) would not effect this. Present game mechanics mean only logging whilst cloaked will make you disapear into thin air. If tackled after logging in a safe spot NOW your ship will remain in place.
So if your being probed out you need to move fast, create safespots on the fly, and log at the correct moment. What you voted no against would not affect this. Perhaps you should vote to make probing harder... yes that would get you a lot of pirate votes wouldnt it.
So anyway - Even ignoring all the above points, your reason for voting NO and NEARLY HALTING the thing pirates pretty much most want, was with your 0.0 allince buddies in mind. NOT the lowsec pirate on the gate watching freighter number 108 log off in a row
Your priorities are clear.
SKUNK (o)
|
mazzilliu
Caldari Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 15:34:00 -
[6]
so you think piracy is nothing but gate camps? have you ever tried pirating in any situation where you are -gasp- outnumbered? you don't represent piracy yourself, no matter how much yellow text you use.
MAZZILLIU FOR CSM 2010 CHECK OUT MY CAMPAIGN VIDEO http://www.eveonline |
Raetherana
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 15:43:00 -
[7]
just fix lowsec and stfu k THX.
|
Seeing EyeDog
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 16:01:00 -
[8]
Originally by: mazzilliu so you think piracy is nothing but gate camps? have you ever tried pirating in any situation where you are -gasp- outnumbered? you don't represent piracy yourself, no matter how much yellow text you use.
this *is* le skunk you're talking to. I dont think he's ever left a gate to get a single kill as a "pirate". |
Rawr Cristina
Caldari Omerta Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 16:21:00 -
[9]
Originally by: RedSplat This thread is pointless.
C&P is just going to vote for whoever has the cutest bottom anyway.
this (vote Elise)
- Malyutka (The Virus) - |
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 16:25:00 -
[10]
So the motion was passed, and nothing happened?
Hmmm... maybe that's the reason why we shouldn't really be voting for any of them.
I'd quite like a free holiday, but tbh I want to go to Norway. Hey, can I get a free holiday to Norway? I promise to post crap on youtube for you gawk over. |
|
Gilgamesh1980
The Black Rabbits The Gurlstas Associates
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 16:26:00 -
[11]
piracy is not fighting when outnumbered,
piracy is fighting when you know you will will over your opposer and to GTFO when you ARE outnumbered to live another day
funny enough, logoffskis in ANY situation should be reviewed as it is a huge PITA that people who do make mistakes can circumvent the consequences of their stupidity like this
Federic 'Gilgamesh1980' Chopin
Supreme Commander and Diplomat of the Black Rabbits and Gurlstas associates |
Mist3r Evil
Caldari the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 16:45:00 -
[12]
Originally by: mazzilliu so you think piracy is nothing but gate camps?
its part of piracy, whether you like it or not. besides, how else are you going to catch a freighter in low sec?, at a station?, at a POS?. also where did skunk mention gate camps?
Originally by: mazzilliu have you ever tried pirating in any situation where you are -gasp- outnumbered?
Have you, in low sec ?
Originally by: mazzilliu you don't represent piracy yourself
that's a matter of opinion, yours in this case. the question here is whether or not you represent piracy.
Originally by: mazzilliu no matter how much yellow text you use.
loltroll
I think the man makes a point. then again, what do you care what i think, i'm just a low sec gate camper that shoots a lot of shuttle and pods.
Oh frack, did i just feed the troll?
|
Cone Filler
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 16:49:00 -
[13]
Mynxee just won my 156 alt votes
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 16:53:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Le Skunk on 05/05/2010 16:52:55
Originally by: mazzilliu so you think piracy is nothing but gate camps? have you ever tried pirating in any situation where you are -gasp- outnumbered? you don't represent piracy yourself, no matter how much yellow text you use.
Indeed, Im not claiming to represent piracy myself. In fact if you spent any time on this forum you would know that every couple of months a "what is piracy" thread comes up and C+P poster cannot agree a definition our selves.
What I do claim to be able to do, is know how to spot someone who definatly does NOT represent piracy- and your track record in the csm is VOTING AGAINST THE MAIN ISSUES piracy, this forum, and the people who dwell in it have talked about for years.
* Your a 0.0 pilot, in one of the biggest alliances in the game. * Your not even an outlaw. * 99% of your (mediocre) kill record is in 0.0. * You talk of belt piracy but didnt even know BS spawn in lowsec belts and have done for a year * You criticise gate campers, which is the method used by 99% of the people who post on these forums * AND WORST You criticize people who "gang up" on people, when the Logofski tactic YOU VOTED TO PROTECT is one of the main reasons we need such big gangs - to get the DPS to nuke the logers.
CONCRETE PROOF IS AVAILABLE VIA YOUR PREVIOUS VOTING AGAINST PIRATE ISSUES IN YOUR LAST TENURE AS A CSM MEMBER (as discovered and linked by myself and others)
SKUNK
(o)
|
Gunnanmon
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 17:09:00 -
[15]
I only wish I took a game this seriously. But I can't be bothered. Signature locked for discussing moderation. Navigator
|
Owen Drakkar
Terra Nostra
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 18:13:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Gunnanmon I only wish I took a game this seriously. But I can't be bothered.
|
mazzilliu
Caldari Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 18:19:00 -
[17]
Edited by: mazzilliu on 05/05/2010 18:26:10 my ideal logoff solution:
-make it so you can be targetted while emergency warping in all cases -make it so you cant warp out of bubbles while ewarping, and you stop e-warping if a bubble is dropped on you in all cases. -also cut your agility by half(or double it, whatever makes you warp off half as fast) -if you're aggressed while logged off you become aggressed and you disappear 15 minutes after the last shot.
let's kill the people trying to log off at gates, and people logging out from belts. but not people who have already safespotted and aren't going to get caught if they were to stay logged in. Even if you crash on a gate or something like that, the act of jumping is a risk in itself.
MAZZILLIU FOR CSM 2010 CHECK OUT MY CAMPAIGN VIDEO http://www.eveonline |
Cone Filler
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 18:39:00 -
[18]
Originally by: mazzilliu Edited by: mazzilliu on 05/05/2010 18:26:10 my ideal logoff solution:
-make it so you can be targetted while emergency warping in all cases -make it so you cant warp out of bubbles while ewarping, and you stop e-warping if a bubble is dropped on you in all cases. -also cut your agility by half(or double it, whatever makes you warp off half as fast) -if you're aggressed while logged off you become aggressed and you disappear 15 minutes after the last shot.
let's kill the people trying to log off at gates, and people logging out from belts. but not people who have already safespotted and aren't going to get caught if they were to stay logged in. Even if you crash on a gate or something like that, the act of jumping is a risk in itself.
how about when you undock you are no longer Safe, this pop politics dont work for you when you have no clue what the topic is
ill give you a hint : if you log off in space its at your own risk, and the anchoring of your log off spot is a briliant idea
|
Commoner
Caldari The Tuskers The Tusker Bastards
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 18:55:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Commoner on 05/05/2010 18:55:58 I disagree with the the headline in your post. Logoffski stinks, but there are probably far more stuff i would fix before that.
And no, i didn't vote for mazz. \o HI MYNX!
|
Agent Unknown
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 19:28:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Agent Unknown on 05/05/2010 19:28:33 My major peeve is that when the person is actually found after they log off, not destroying the ship in 15 minutes causes it to vanish even when aggressed and being actively shot at. This has happened to me personally more than once. Changing this mechanic to (as someone else said) 15 minutes after the last act of aggression would be best.
Edit: Fail grammar. By the way, this is my signature.
TeamSpeak For EVE - API-controlled TeamSpeak 3 Access!
|
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 19:29:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Le Skunk on 05/05/2010 19:31:52
Originally by: mazzilliu Edited by: mazzilliu on 05/05/2010 18:26:10 my ideal logoff solution:
1-make it so you can be targetted while emergency warping in all cases 2-make it so you cant warp out of bubbles while ewarping, and you stop e-warping if a bubble is dropped on you in all cases. 3-also cut your agility by half(or double it, whatever makes you warp off half as fast) 4-if you're aggressed while logged off you become aggressed and you disappear 15 minutes after the last shot.
4) let's kill the people trying to log off at gates, and people logging out from belts. but not people who have already safespotted and aren't going to get caught if they were to stay logged in. Even if you crash on a gate or something like that, the act of jumping is a risk in itself.
1) Apart from the darkside logofski - which has been classified as a bug - this is already the case 2) Fine, but note bubbles cant be used in lowsec 3a) If logofski takes place after a gate, the target is tackled anyway so slowing its warp off time is irrelevant. 3b) If logofski happens in a belt, and the target is tackled it sits there for 15 mins anyway 3c) If your thinking about ratters who logoff when local goes up by one, the warp off time is also irrelevant as they can simply warp to a ss then log off from there
"Lets Kill The People Trying To Log Off At Gates" she says
Yes there are some great ways to do that either/or:
1)have aggression whilst logged off trigger the 15 min timer as would aggression whilst not logged.
YOU VOTED AGAINST THIS IN CSM 3
2)have the emergency warp back in spot upon relogging remain rooted. Where you logoff first is where you return every time. You can still logofski, but without being able to do a rapid relog to move your spot - your not playing eve anymore for the next hour/day/week depending on the tenacity of your opponent.
YOU VOTED AGAINST THIS IN CSM 3
As someone pointed out - your just trawling round looking for votes amongst the thickos of C+P despite your track record being proven to be one of the worst candidates Pirates could possibly vote for.
You don't pirate, you don't understand the issues of low sec piracy, you fly around in frigates and interdictors in 0.0 where 99% of your kills are(check battleclinic for stats). Your gonna get in anyway due to block voting, so why not drop the pirate charade.
You only qualification is (and I kid you not someone actually used this) is that you belong to a corp that used to pirate three years ago.
SKUNK
(o)
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive The Obsidian Legion
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 19:39:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Le Skunk
You only qualification is (and I kid you not someone actually used this) is that you belong to a corp that used to pirate three years ago.
SKUNK
You forgot the boobs. Those were the big selling point during her last campaign. Of course I don't think any of us have forgotten what a disaster CSM 3 was. --Vel
Originally by: Jiseinoku
Mining is the path to enlightement.
|
sakana
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 21:28:00 -
[23]
i was going to vote for mazz, but le skunk has opened my mind.
BRING ON GATECAMP ONLINE !
|
mamolian
Cruoris Seraphim
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 21:35:00 -
[24]
I am incredibly angry at this news. BRB time out. -----------
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 22:06:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Le Skunk on 05/05/2010 22:06:34
Originally by: sakana i was going to vote for mazz, but le skunk has opened my mind.
BRING ON GATECAMP ONLINE !
Above 0.0 Pilot Checklist:
* Lost Sleipnir to one of our gatecamps three years ago: CHECK * Still mad: CHECK * Felt need to post snotty comment on forums (its ironic innit): CHECK
Nice to see the 0.0 crowd coming out to support Maz in a thread where i accuse her of... supporting the 0.0 crowd over pirates.
SKUNK
(o)
|
Orar Ironfist
Resonance.
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 00:55:00 -
[26]
just fix the major issues of my low secs plox i dont want/need this stupid drama
|
The PitBoss
Caldari Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 01:35:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Le Skunk ... Great Argument ...
Probably the best argument I've ever seen out there NOT to vote for someone ...
Good work in citing voting history ... don't ever expect your past NEVER to catch up with you in-game
Bravo ...
Thank-You,
The Pitboss (Space between The & Pitboss)
Signatures by: Kalen Vox |
Professor Villinghopper
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 04:12:00 -
[28]
Originally by: De'Veldrin
You forgot the boobs. Those were the big selling point during her last campaign. Of course I don't think any of us have forgotten what a disaster CSM 3 was.
Pictures of these alleged boobs would greatly enhance my ability to make a voting decision. |
Auroral Borealis
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 04:49:00 -
[29]
Solo pvper's camped in by large numbers of people don't have much choice but to wait out their aggression and then log. You say 60 seconds like it's a long time, but in a small-ish system where the probing frigate/recon/whatever allready knows the signature ID of the ship that it's looking for, that's not nearly enough time. This is especially true if the solo player is flying anything above say, a cruiser or frigate. Real life takes priority over flying around avoiding probes for a a few hours.
If the timer was changed to a more reasonable one (perhaps 30 seconds) then I would completely support the resetting of an aggro timer on a logged off ship to 15 minutes, even if it never had aggression in the first place.
Anchoring a log off point is great for freighters on gates, but not so great for stuff like logging into pos's. However, with probes around the pos it wouldn't particularly matter if the log-off point was anchored or not, as any competent prober with .5au radius probes out can find the ship in about 10 seconds, and with a new mechanic that gave that logged off ship an aggro timer it could then be tackled and killed in the resultant 15 minute window : )
tl;dr: Maz is right to wait for a more coherent and more careful solution to your concerns. Perhaps the solution above fits your needs?
|
Cyan Cure
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 05:00:00 -
[30]
So a non-pirate is complaining about other non-pirate? You're pretty much pressing issues you have little idea about and even less idea on how it actually affects Piracy. All you want is a rule removed so you can have easy time gate camping. Just as other people here only want more carebear piniatas into lowsec for easy money and kills.
How about let's make a penalty for being in gangs to avoid blobbing, or if someone has a falcon in their gang it cuts EHP by 50%. Let's turn solo PvP into a game feature, cause right now you're trying to do the exactly same thing to Piracy and the whole idea is worth about as much.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |