Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Demon Azrakel
Gallente Defiant.. Narwhals Ate My Duck
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 03:23:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Demon Azrakel on 04/08/2011 03:24:21 Ok, kinda necroing this a bit, but is using a ****ton of bubbles for the sole purpose of providing a ****ton of EHP to chew through an exploit?
A fleet of 100 would take a while to chew through 500 bubbles (for price, lets say t1 large), but CCP has not provided players the tools necessary to anchor a super-bubble with the same coverage as a t1 bubble, 500x the hp, and 500x the cost, that can still somehow be carried by a fleet of BS and be anchored by a fleet of BS in under 10 minutes.
Suggestion: consolidate bubbles button, you would want a slight range boost doing so, because said 500 bubbles would cover more area (even bunched closely together) than, say, 1 t1 large with just 500x the EHP (you would also want it to "destroy" the bubbles as they were shot, keeping someone from repping up the thing after 100 of the 500 bubbles would have been destroyed, when you split them back for storage, you would get less in the way of bubbles back)
Point is: Bubble EHP is important, and, lag or no lag, bubbling for a non-lag intended delay should be considered a valid tactic.
EDIT: Actually, why hit the consolidate button? There would need to be a reason, or a bonus, targeting 500 bubbles takes time, so you would want the EHP of 1000 bubbles for the cost of 500 bubbles.
|
Lakuma
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 03:34:00 -
[62]
Originally by: GM Homonoia
Originally by: Ghoest
Originally by: GM Homonoia
Originally by: Ghoest It looks to me like we have GM drastically reinterpreting(effectively changing)the rules based her preferred play style when she was a player.
I can assure that this is not the case. Although I guess I should not be feeding the troll.
If you are going to start calling names based on people pointing out you effectively changing the rules - then you shouldnt be posting under a dev account.
Oh dear
Professional or not...gonna have to say +1 for the GM on this. Seriously though - the rules have never been changed and something as complex as lag (far too many variants that affect it) you can't put a definitive rule on it. There is no 'geiger counter' for lag in EVE, especially since lag can be very legitimate from a large fleet fight such that debris may be contributing, but isn't making a drastic impact. You wouldn't want such a system because then GM's would be busting gangs on something they can't control, when other larger gangs might not get busted simply because the node is handling better.
|
Blind Man
Caldari Point Blank Carebears
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 04:07:00 -
[63]
Originally by: GM Homonoia
Originally by: Ghoest
Originally by: GM Homonoia
Originally by: Ghoest It looks to me like we have GM drastically reinterpreting(effectively changing)the rules based her preferred play style when she was a player.
I can assure that this is not the case. Although I guess I should not be feeding the troll.
If you are going to start calling names based on people pointing out you effectively changing the rules - then you shouldnt be posting under a dev account.
Oh dear
Beautiful.
|
ChromeStriker
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 08:02:00 -
[64]
Edited by: ChromeStriker on 04/08/2011 08:01:53
Originally by: Ghoest Edited by: Ghoest on 24/07/2011 13:34:26
Originally by: Kuronaga Gettin counter-trolled pretty hard there ghoest.
It seems to me that any CCP employee could start calling names when called out and would get the same type of applause from the fan boi set.
More or les the same as thread a few months ago where the Devs resorted using "wictionary" as the source for word definitions in response to being called out.
Ha i like this!
Troll gets burned (by a GM lol ) -> troll cries -> troll tries comeback -> everyone shakes head at fail troll fail
-1 for troll by failing against a GM, +1 for GM - Nulla Curas |
Mendolus
Aurelius Federation Eternal Evocations
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 13:38:00 -
[65]
Edited by: Mendolus on 04/08/2011 13:38:32
Originally by: Voith People are calling BS because several times during the Goon v BoB wars bubble cages around BoB areas where taken offline by GMS even though they were not causing lag.
While the official policy may be not to take out bubble cages in reality it has happened multiple times.
You may be confusing confluence with circumstance here, i.e. based on subjective analysis alone, it is inevitable that some incidents of removal will fit a paradigm of perceived abuse or favoritism, but based on circumstances alone, the fact that a few of these incidents occur on any roughly set frequency, says nothing of whether they were intentional or not.
To prove intent and motive, you have to analyze who the events favored alone across a broad range of factors, even then all you can show is that either one side had really bad luck, or someone was pulling some strings. Both of which are almost indistinguishable without first hand accounts or knowledge of the people involved themselves.
It is like trying to prove that someone is part of the mafia by arguing that they regularly show up at the same restaurant once a month while the don just happens to be entertaining guests. A judge will toss the case before it even gets to trial.
|
Valei Khurelem
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 13:49:00 -
[66]
I give credit to the OP for coming up with a solution to the covert ops ships rather than *****ing for a nerf because it is the only realistic way people have of hiding from fleets and gatecampers.
|
Othran
Brutor Tribe
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 13:51:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Demon Azrakel Edited by: Demon Azrakel on 04/08/2011 03:24:21 Ok, kinda necroing this a bit, but is using a ****ton of bubbles for the sole purpose of providing a ****ton of EHP to chew through an exploit?
No.
You can put as many bubbles up as you like provided you have a TACTICAL reason for doing so. Making your enemy chew through 100+ large T2 bubbles is definitely tactical.
|
Reeper 2435
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 14:08:00 -
[68]
Edited by: Reeper 2435 on 04/08/2011 14:09:22 Edited by: Reeper 2435 on 04/08/2011 14:08:55 Thank you for the information GM Homonia. I play on an older laptop and these issues cause great grid load times for me. I have used the client optimizer to help counteract this and generally i run with very minimal graphics simply for the enhanced performance (although i do turn on the bells and whistles once in awhile to admire the awesome artwork). I've read about gamebooster, it's supposed to help your computer. Would this product benefit those of us who run older computers looking for performance enhancers? Or do you know of options? (Besides the divorce the new computer would cause me LOL).
Originally by: GM Homonoia The number of static items on a grid rarely causes actual server side lag (unless ridiculous amounts are used or the node itself is already under a heavy load from other causes). The lag we are talking about in these particular cases are usually client side lag. This usually manifests itself as all objects or models loading slowly or controls not responding for a few seconds as the grid loads.
|
daddys helper
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 14:29:00 -
[69]
Edited by: daddys helper on 04/08/2011 14:29:55 when you camp a gate and want to catch cloakies coming in you spam debris.
if you want to catch cloakies warping to zero you position a drag bubble close in so the gate decloaks the covops.
some players are just lazy or lack finesse, so they just go for quantity over quality of placement.
and when you find can spammers (as in a **** ton of cans) these are the guys you wanna pop a cyno on, because they will melt in very short order.
Personally I love it when people leave obvious visible cues to the level of their game, it makes picking targets easier
|
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 14:47:00 -
[70]
Originally by: daddys helper Edited by: daddys helper on 04/08/2011 14:29:55 when you camp a gate and want to catch cloakies coming in you spam debris.
if you want to catch cloakies warping to zero you position a drag bubble close in so the gate decloaks the covops.
some players are just lazy or lack finesse, so they just go for quantity over quality of placement.
and when you find can spammers (as in a **** ton of cans) these are the guys you wanna pop a cyno on, because they will melt in very short order.
Personally I love it when people leave obvious visible cues to the level of their game, it makes picking targets easier
Aside from can art, the only time I remember cans being removed was in a fight between IAC and MC a couple years back. Goon FC told us to jet 1 unit of ammo repeatedly as our reinforcements were further out than the MC fleet and we needed to hold up the MC fleet until our other fleet arrived. It worked, but GMs showed up and were pretty angry. We're talking well over a thousand cans on in the in gate grid in that case.
This signature is useless, but it is red.
|
|
Jack BingKaria
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 19:52:00 -
[71]
Originally by: GM Homonoia Normally I would direct anyone with specific question to our petition system. However, we get this question a lot and a large part of our players seem to think that this is an exploit; thus let me answer this question as clear as possible:
No, this is not an exploit and is fully allowed.
Using debris to decloak ships is a perfectly valid strategy. You can use cans, drones, and any other object that decloaks a ship. This is simply a clever use of normal game mechanics.
The Exception: The only thing you may not do is deploy so much debris that it causes lag.
How much debris will cause lag? Well, there is no hard answer for that as this is highly dependent on too many factors to formulate a definition that can always be applied. Common sense will need to be applied (and GMs have certain protocols to use to determine if it causes lag or not, to make sure that all GMs use the same benchmark).
hmm, can we have our mines back then :)
|
Ozmodan
Minmatar Massively Mob
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 20:13:00 -
[72]
Legal tactic response from a GM? Excuse me while I chortle. Nothing like a stupid response from a CCP representative. Using cans around a bubble will get a petition for sure, tying up the petition system for no explicit reason.
When you announce an official decision you should think first before swallowing your entire foot. So now the petition systems gets clogged because of the supposedly hands off approach? I rarely find things to criticize CCP for, but unless you can come up with a better reason for this position than I have seen here or I will have to rack this up as the dumbest response from a GM I have ever seen.
As to your lag comment, does not take that many cans to generate lag. So now the GM has to go look to see if it is generating lag? How much lag is bad lag? Yeah right, it all depends on the GM looking at it. So now you get more people mad at you because the GM's will differ on what is bad lag. Talk about the endless pit and I thought CCP was attempting to do some redress on their reputation. Nothing like letting a GM make a dumb comment to make you look bad again.
Well my official response is to petition it every time I see it and I highly recommend everyone else do the same. Maybe CCP will come to it's senses and realize that tying up the petition system is not always a good thing when players do questionable practices like this! Learners permit still current |
Mendolus
Aurelius Federation Eternal Evocations
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 20:21:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Ozmodan Legal tactic response from a GM? Excuse me while I chortle. Nothing like a stupid response from a CCP representative. Using cans around a bubble will get a petition for sure, tying up the petition system for no explicit reason.
When you announce an official decision you should think first before swallowing your entire foot. So now the petition systems gets clogged because of the supposedly hands off approach? I rarely find things to criticize CCP for, but unless you can come up with a better reason for this position than I have seen here or I will have to rack this up as the dumbest response from a GM I have ever seen.
As to your lag comment, does not take that many cans to generate lag. So now the GM has to go look to see if it is generating lag? How much lag is bad lag? Yeah right, it all depends on the GM looking at it. So now you get more people mad at you because the GM's will differ on what is bad lag. Talk about the endless pit and I thought CCP was attempting to do some redress on their reputation. Nothing like letting a GM make a dumb comment to make you look bad again.
Well my official response is to petition it every time I see it and I highly recommend everyone else do the same. Maybe CCP will come to it's senses and realize that tying up the petition system is not always a good thing when players do questionable practices like this!
You must live in a very sad world of nothing but 1s and 0s.
|
Zagdul
Gallente Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 20:56:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Mendolus Edited by: Mendolus on 04/08/2011 13:38:32
Originally by: Voith People are calling BS because several times during the Goon v BoB wars bubble cages around BoB areas where taken offline by GMS even though they were not causing lag.
While the official policy may be not to take out bubble cages in reality it has happened multiple times.
You may be confusing confluence with circumstance here, i.e. based on subjective analysis alone, it is inevitable that some incidents of removal will fit a paradigm of perceived abuse or favoritism, but based on circumstances alone, the fact that a few of these incidents occur on any roughly set frequency, says nothing of whether they were intentional or not.
To prove intent and motive, you have to analyze who the events favored alone across a broad range of factors, even then all you can show is that either one side had really bad luck, or someone was pulling some strings. Both of which are almost indistinguishable without first hand accounts or knowledge of the people involved themselves.
It is like trying to prove that someone is part of the mafia by arguing that they regularly show up at the same restaurant once a month while the don just happens to be entertaining guests. A judge will toss the case before it even gets to trial.
Naw, I was the one anchoring them.
6-8 T2 bubbles around a large tower.
ALL gone the next day.
|
Lady Go Diveher
The Independent Troll Society
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 21:40:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Ozmodan RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
Lets say the GM states that, say, 50 cans is the limit. Because 50 causes lag.
Here's what happens: - Everyone goes and drops 50 cans at their camps, safe in the knowledge that it is unpetitionable. - Someone warps to the gate, lands in the bubble and experiences significant lag and DIAF.
Why, how? Because EVE IS REAL (trololol) in that a lot of variances come together to form the situation. Maybe having a celestial up close affects it. Maybe having a lot of items off grid, in DSCAN range affects it, maybe the server node the system is on that day affects it, maybe wrecks affect it more than cans, maybe ... maybe anything.
Point is, there is no magical number when lag becomes an issue. You call CCP a FAILURE at this?? Since how is heading to EACH individual site at which it is petitioned to find the truth of the situation BAD customer service? That's a dedication to the *actual fact of the matter* that should be highly commended.
You, sir, are an idiot. -------
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |