Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Milkyway Tzu
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 18:07:00 -
[1]
Is this considered as exploit? Tons of cans around the bubble.
[URL=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/18/pic2yh.jpg/][/URL] [URL=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/204/pic1wbg.jpg/][/URL]
|
Simplus Massive
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 18:23:00 -
[2]
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1443066 http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1522983 http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1353163
So basicly, how many cans are a ton of cans? ------------------------------------------ simplus.rjctd.com ★ zaisen.rjctd.com |
Breaker77
Gallente Reclamation Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 18:35:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Simplus Massive
So basicly, how many cans are a ton of cans?
If you go by weight, a small standard container is 11 tons.
If you go by number of cans, then 2000 cans would be petitionable if the node didn't crash by the time they were all deployed.
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:13:00 -
[4]
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).
|
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:25:00 -
[5]
Changing the rules again I see.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:26:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Ghoest Changing the rules again I see.
This has always been a valid tactic. As a player I have been using this since 2006 as a legal tactic.
|
|
Enquirer
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:26:00 -
[7]
Outstanding warp bubble to drag the cloakies off of gate , cans probes and drones in around bubble leading to gate.... die cloakies die... And thank you for answering this....
|
Sadayiel
Caldari Inner Conflict
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:30:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Sadayiel on 23/07/2011 23:31:29
Originally by: Ghoest Changing the rules again I see.
AS far as i know the answer has been and it's always been, as long it NOT LAGS it's allowed.
Hence there is no changing rules just a more definitive explanation (GM have benchmark to test if there is lag for such ammount or not so everyone measure all situations as equals) than before.
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).
Also thx for finally answer the never answered question (the there is an equal benchmark for everyone) about this issue.
P.S: adding this thread to my adressbook to link whenever ppl comes up with this complain again.
DEAR MONOCLE OVERLORDS JOIN TO FORCE CCP ADD LORGNETTE FOR THE OVERLADIES!! |
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:36:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Sadayiel
Also thx for finally answer the never answered question (the there is an equal benchmark for everyone) about this issue.
P.S: adding this thread to my adressbook to link whenever ppl comes up with this complain again.
Well, it is quite simple, really. All GMs use roughly the same hardware (there are a few exceptions, but these GMs ask others who do have the hardware that falls within these standards to check it instead) and the very best way to check this is to simply go there and experience it (there are other options, of course, but going through the actual experience is always the best indicator). On top of that, even though we have these protocols in place, a second opinion is almost always part of the process.
|
|
Smoking McPot
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:37:00 -
[10]
with the term LAG do you mean real lag, like increasing network latencies, or does it also include stuttering graphics which is often also related to overstrained hardware? |
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:42:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Smoking McPot with the term LAG do you mean real lag, like increasing network latencies, or does it also include stuttering graphics which is often also related to overstrained hardware?
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.
|
|
Nian Istaria
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:49:00 -
[12]
As a cloaky with some experience staying alive this tactic doesn't bother me too much. I have no problem with it because it only makes the job marginally harder. Thinking in 3 dimensions and having keep at range preset usually suffices. Also remember to throw occasional taunts in local, it can tie up as many 49 pilots looking for you. Patience and a cool head will keep you alive and make any overpowered gatecamp wish they never heard of you.
|
Siigari Kitawa
Gallente Perditus Peregrinus
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 23:58:00 -
[13]
Originally by: GM Homonoia
Originally by: Smoking McPot with the term LAG do you mean real lag, like increasing network latencies, or does it also include stuttering graphics which is often also related to overstrained hardware?
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.
I didn't know you guys were capable of detecting client-side lag.
I have a bunch of petitions to file now, thanks.
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 00:01:00 -
[14]
Edited by: GM Homonoia on 24/07/2011 00:01:13
Originally by: Siigari Kitawa
Originally by: GM Homonoia
Originally by: Smoking McPot with the term LAG do you mean real lag, like increasing network latencies, or does it also include stuttering graphics which is often also related to overstrained hardware?
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.
I didn't know you guys were capable of detecting client-side lag.
I have a bunch of petitions to file now, thanks.
We cannot detect if YOU have suffered from client side lag. That is on your PC and the internet gods have not bestowed me with the authority to snoop around in your PC. I can, however, detect if MY client suffers from lag.
|
|
The Pteradactyl
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 00:03:00 -
[15]
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).
I petitioned a situation in which an alliance had put over 200 bubbles on one gate to protect it (it was a dead end system). My thought was that the only reason to put that many bubbles up was to lag out anyone that came in (the lag was massive).
In the response to my petition I was told that the bubbles provided a tactical advantage and so it was not an exploit despite the lag. Has that changed so that lag is considered an exploit? Or is the lag fine if it comes from objects that also provide some other advantage?
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 00:06:00 -
[16]
Originally by: The Pteradactyl
I petitioned a situation in which an alliance had put over 200 bubbles on one gate to protect it (it was a dead end system). My thought was that the only reason to put that many bubbles up was to lag out anyone that came in (the lag was massive).
In the response to my petition I was told that the bubbles provided a tactical advantage and so it was not an exploit despite the lag. Has that changed so that lag is considered an exploit? Or is the lag fine if it comes from objects that also provide some other advantage?
Bubbles are somewhat of a special case. No amount of deployed bubbles is considered an exploit. Overlapping bubbles are often needed to keep a fleet in place by preventing them from simply quickly destroying a few bubbles and leave.
|
|
Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 00:24:00 -
[17]
Thank you... it was great for me to have the rule cleared up.... I really wasn't sure if it was ok to pop a few dozen cans in a bubble or not.
And I think its perfectly clear to reasonable people where the lag issue starts getting pushed. ... something that feels in scale with other occurences in the game and not one player having the effect of hundreds feels like polite competition.
|
Chissie
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 00:28:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Chissie on 24/07/2011 00:30:30
Originally by: GM Homonoia
Originally by: The Pteradactyl
I petitioned a situation in which an alliance had put over 200 bubbles on one gate to protect it (it was a dead end system). My thought was that the only reason to put that many bubbles up was to lag out anyone that came in (the lag was massive).
In the response to my petition I was told that the bubbles provided a tactical advantage and so it was not an exploit despite the lag. Has that changed so that lag is considered an exploit? Or is the lag fine if it comes from objects that also provide some other advantage?
Bubbles are somewhat of a special case. No amount of deployed bubbles is considered an exploit. Overlapping bubbles are often needed to keep a fleet in place by preventing them from simply quickly destroying a few bubbles and leave.
I don't think this has always been the case, I remember few years ago, IT alliance deployed about 100 or so large bubbles around a gate, with extremely heavy overlapping (all of the bubbles were in an area that could have been covered with about 10 or less bubbles), this was deemed exploit (for causing excessive lag) by GM and all of the bubbles were destroyed by the GM.
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 00:33:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Chissie
I don't think this has always been the case, I remember few years ago, IT alliance deployed about 100 or so large bubbles around a gate, with extremely heavy overlapping (all of the bubbles were in an area that could have been covered with about 10 or less bubbles), this was deemed exploit (for causing excessive lag) by GM and all of the bubbles were destroyed by the GM.
Correct. This is one rule that was changed. Pretty much the way fleets battles were fought changed and we needed to update our policy in that regard in order to keep them in line wit reality.
|
|
Lady Spank
Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 00:43:00 -
[20]
CLIENT SIDE LAG, BECAUSE THE LOGS SHOW SOMETHING ~~~
|
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 00:59:00 -
[21]
It looks to me like we have GM drastically reinterpreting(effectively changing)the rules based her preferred play style when she was a player.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Speaker4 theDead
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 00:59:00 -
[22]
Wow, that's not a change? Are they hiring PR execs as coders now?
Current Subscription6 Months- Canceled Account Expires09 August 2011 - 4:04 am (in 18 days) |
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 01:02:00 -
[23]
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.
|
|
Kuronaga
Black Snake Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 01:15:00 -
[24]
Remember that thread where everyone told me I was wrong?
Yea, Kuronaga remembers.
What now, carebears?
|
Seamus Donohue
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 01:19:00 -
[25]
Thank you for clearing this up, Homonoia. _____ SURVIVOR of Teskanen, fan of John Rourke. The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated |
Taedrin
Gallente Zero Percent Tax Haven
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 01:24:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Ghoest Changing the rules again I see.
This has *ALWAYS* been this way. Decloaking cans have been used in EVE since I started playing in late 2004. As the good GM pointed out, this has been petitioned COUNTLESS times, and the answer has ALWAYS been the same: You can use as many decloaking cans as you want, so long as it does not cause lag. Exactly how many cans can be used has always been an open question - one which the GMs have never been willing to answer - they simply tell us to use common sense. ----------
Originally by: Dr Fighter "how do you know when youve had a repro accident"
Theres modules missing and morphite in your mineral pile.
|
VicturusTeSaluto
Gallente Metafarmers MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 02:05:00 -
[27]
amazing. I have always been told this was an exploit.
one time I saw about 100 cans all around a gate. I decided to poooteeeeeshun just to find out if its actually considered an exploit. I basically said "hey, there's many many cans at this gate in this system. seems to be designed to prevent people from cloaking. Is such a tactic considered an exploit or not?"
All I ever got was "thanks for bringing the matter to our attention" *petition closed* Now why was it so hard for them to admit that its not an exploit?
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 02:08:00 -
[28]
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.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Sentient Blade
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 02:11:00 -
[29]
IMO the topic is deserving of a renewed discussion within CCP and a firm policy stating from the devs and community support team themselves.
I think that there is a danger here of an individual GM's comments being used as cover for people to begin carpet bombing gates and stations with ever increasing numbers of jettisoned shuttles and cans in an attempt to push the limits -- I wouldn't give it long before petitions conveniently including screenshots with the FPS monitor show to argue "my frame rate was fine" etc.
Seems to me if you want to decloak someone you should have to use ships, not inanimate objects.
|
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 02:13:00 -
[30]
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
|
|
|
I Love Boobies
Amarr All Hail Boobies
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 02:17:00 -
[31]
Why is spamming cans to uncloak people okay, but can art was considered a no no and was basically ruled an exploit? So since people can deploy as many cans as needed to uncloak as long as no lag is result of it, does that mean we can do can art again too as long as it doesn't cause lag?
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 02:24:00 -
[32]
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
I dont even get that??? You have a problem with my name?
You are just another noob player who got an entry level job in customer service and thinks its a big deal. And now you think its cool to call people troolls etc.
Youre talking about your game playing experience it means something - it doesnt. Ive been playing longer than you - and that doesnt mean anything either.
All that matters is how the rules are being interpreted an you just announced they are being interpreted in a new way.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Alpheias
Euphoria Released HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 02:44:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Ghoest
I dont even get that??? You have a problem with my name?
You are just another noob player who got an entry level job in customer service and thinks its a big deal. And now you think its cool to call people troolls etc.
Youre talking about your game playing experience it means something - it doesnt. Ive been playing longer than you - and that doesnt mean anything either.
All that matters is how the rules are being interpreted an you just announced they are being interpreted in a new way.
I like how you can start crying for no reason whatsoever. That is good to know.
You better call a psychiatrist too, Homonoia
♫ When your ship gets blown to bits ♫ And you lose your Faction fits \☻/ Don't worry ♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪ Be Happy \☻/ |
Taedrin
Gallente Zero Percent Tax Haven
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 02:51:00 -
[34]
Originally by: I Love Boobies Why is spamming cans to uncloak people okay, but can art was considered a no no and was basically ruled an exploit? So since people can deploy as many cans as needed to uncloak as long as no lag is result of it, does that mean we can do can art again too as long as it doesn't cause lag?
Because the number of cans required to create can art is much greater than a can or two to decloak someone on a bubble.
Can art requires at least a dozen or more cans, decloaking (if done right) only requires a handful. In fact, you only need one if you have a bubble on the gate (the scariest moment of my life which almost cost me my rapier)
In fact, there HAVE been cases where GM have declared that a dozen cans was too much for decloaking.
So you don't suddenly now have permission to start spamming cans everywhere in an attempt to decloak people. NOTHING HAS CHANGED WITH REGARDS TO THE RULES. ----------
Originally by: Dr Fighter "how do you know when youve had a repro accident"
Theres modules missing and morphite in your mineral pile.
|
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 02:58:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Sentient Blade
Seems to me if you want to decloak someone you should have to use ships, not inanimate objects.
I have to agree somewhat here. It just caters a bit too much to the risk-free pvp attitude that has infested the game these days.
Anchor bubble, spam jetcans, sit in complete safety and wait for easy ganks. Run from everything that could remotely pose a threat.
|
XIRUSPHERE
Gallente The 8th Order
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 03:01:00 -
[36]
CCP troll best troll, seems to be a lot more rolling with the punches lately and it's awesome
|
Harendotes
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 03:07:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Ghoest
Originally by: GM Homonoia
Originally by: Ghoest
Originally by: GM Homonoia
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
I dont even get that??? You have a problem with my name?
You are just another noob player who got an entry level job in customer service and thinks its a big deal. And now you think its cool to call people troolls etc.
Youre talking about your game playing experience it means something - it doesnt. Ive been playing longer than you - and that doesnt mean anything either.
All that matters is how the rules are being interpreted an you just announced they are being interpreted in a new way.
Hahahaha! U mad ?! You got owned mate, just admit it.
|
Tom Gerard
Caldari Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 03:09:00 -
[38]
Best way to do this is to have trial alts dropping cans, best part is when they die and get podded they create yet another new decloaking object
Ideally you want about 50 to 75 cans about 2km apart, this pretty much is a surefire way to kill the exploiting cloakers.
|
Tippia
Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 03:18:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Ghoest All that matters is how the rules are being interpreted an you just announced they are being interpreted in a new way.
Do you have any kind of statement to prove that claim?
The only thing I have ever heard is that it's not legal to dump stuff to the point where it creates lag; simply using cans or whathaveyou to decloak people has never been against the rulesà ùùù ôWe want to try this thing called micro-transactions, but we don't know what it is. Can anyone explainà aw screw it, let's just do it! What could go wrong?ö ù ÇÇP |
Nimrod Nemesis
Amarr Royal Amarr Institute
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 03:22:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Tippia
The only thing I have ever heard is that it's not legal to dump stuff to the point where it creates lag; simply using cans or whathaveyou to decloak people has never been against the rulesà
That has been the only rule i've ever heard of myself. Ghoest is simply making the common troll error of "trying to hard."
Although he's a frequent offender in that catergory. Perhaps Tom here can help him improve. vOv
|
|
KaarBaak
Minmatar No Option Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 03:30:00 -
[41]
My question to Homonia would be:How do you determine what causes the lag?". Is it a simple 'order of precedence thing?'
Example- Gate camp fleet deploys bubbles and cans to catch cloakies. No lag...all is good. Ship jumps in and holds cloak....still no lag... All still good and legal. Cloaky dials up mates and they jump in...addition of players on grid and lag starts...cloaky calls 'foul' on the cans. Campers claim incoming fleet caused lag, not the cans.
Does the decision go to player-controlled object(ships) over the cans? Or is it based on the cans were there first? The campers didn't intend to cause lag and there wasn't any when they were set. Circumstances rule men; men do not rule circumstances. --Herodotus, Histories
|
Pr1ncess Alia
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 03:36:00 -
[42]
are all these people really this stupid?
or are they trolling?
does it matter?
GM:"...common sense..." Players:"omfg waht does it mean double rainbows" /headasplosion
--- Players are losing faith and loyalty in CCP due previous expansions not living up to player expectations. The CSM and CCP agreed that expectation management can be improved |
|
GM Homonoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 03:43:00 -
[43]
Originally by: KaarBaak
My question to Homonia would be:How do you determine what causes the lag?". Is it a simple 'order of precedence thing?'
Example- Gate camp fleet deploys bubbles and cans to catch cloakies. No lag...all is good. Ship jumps in and holds cloak....still no lag... All still good and legal. Cloaky dials up mates and they jump in...addition of players on grid and lag starts...cloaky calls 'foul' on the cans. Campers claim incoming fleet caused lag, not the cans.
Does the decision go to player-controlled object(ships) over the cans? Or is it based on the cans were there first? The campers didn't intend to cause lag and there wasn't any when they were set.
We are talking about gate camps here (usually), which do not tend to involve large fleet engagements (usually). What usually happens is this:
1. We are informed that there are an insane amount of cans/drones/shuttles/whatever on a gate. 2. A GM goes to the gate in question (which is why, if petitioning this, you should always mention the actual gate, not just the system) and has a look. 3. Does warp in cause client lag for the GM? Does a second GM agree? If yes, offending items are destroyed. If no, no action is taken. 4. Exceptions, fringe cases, etc: - A big fight is already going on -> We almost never take action (there may be exceptions, but those fringe cases are too complicated to explain here). - The node the system is on is under a heavy load or is otherwise causing issues -> then it all depends on the situation and it needs a judgement call, usually taken by a senior or all GMs present. - Truly exceptional and unique circumstances -> then it all depends on the situation and it needs a judgement call, usually taken by a senior or all GMs present.
In the end the following question needs to be answered: Is the debris present in such amounts that it is a significant factor in causing lag?
|
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 04:35:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Ghoest on 24/07/2011 04:35:36
Originally by: Nimrod Nemesis
Originally by: Tippia
The only thing I have ever heard is that it's not legal to dump stuff to the point where it creates lag; simply using cans or whathaveyou to decloak people has never been against the rulesà
That has been the only rule i've ever heard of myself. Ghoest is simply making the common troll error of "trying to hard."
Although he's a frequent offender in that catergory. Perhaps Tom here can help him improve. vOv
Mostly Im just saying the same thing over and over. I didnt think that was "hard' but maybe it is for you.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Vice Admiral Spreadsheet
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 04:54:00 -
[45]
If there's a troll in your neighborhood Who ya gonna call? GHOESTBUSTERS
If there's something weird and it don't look good Who ya gonna call? GHOESTBUSTERS
I ain't afraid of no trolls I ain't afraid of no trolls
If ghoest's seeing things running through his head Who can ya call? GHOESTBUSTERS
An annoying troll spamming in your forums Who ya gonna call? GHOESTBUSTERS
I ain't afraid of no trolls I ain't afraid of no trolls
Who ya gonna call? GHOESTBUSTERS
If ya all alone pick up the phone and call GHOESTBUSTERS
I ain't afraid of no trolls I hear it likes being fed I ain't afraid of no troll Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah
Who ya gonna call? GHOESTBUSTERS
If you've had a dose of a freaky ghoest troll Ya better call GHOESTBUSTERS
Lemme tell ya something Bannin' makes me feel good!
I ain't afraid of no trolls I ain't afraid of no trolls
Don't get caught alone no no
GHOESTBUSTERS
When it comes through your thread Unless you just want some more I think you better call GHOESTBUSTERS
Who ya gonna call? GHOESTBUSTERS!
|
Jessica Pink
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 05:23:00 -
[46]
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
LMAO
|
Kuronaga
Black Snake Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 05:33:00 -
[47]
Gettin counter-trolled pretty hard there ghoest.
|
Trig Onami
Caldari Onami Corporation
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 10:30:00 -
[48]
I was hoping CCP would start counter trolling 3 weeks ago. But today is fair enough. +9000 EVE. The most ambitious project on earth. |
Devious Relation
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 10:40:00 -
[49]
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).
Thank you very much Homonoia for clearing this up! I for one haven't been sure on this grey area for years. Great to know where i stand with my bubble trouble :)
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 10:56:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Mag''s on 24/07/2011 10:59:25
Originally by: Kuronaga Remember that thread where everyone told me I was wrong?
Yea, Kuronaga remembers.
What now, carebears?
Actually you'll find I was correct and you moaned about it.
Edit: In fact many in that thread indicated de-cloaking ships was not an exploit, it always boils down to just how many objects you have.
Originally by: CCP Zulu Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
|
Sadayiel
Caldari Inner Conflict
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 12:06:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia are all these people really this stupid?
or are they trolling?
does it matter?
GM:"...common sense..." Players:"omfg waht does it mean double rainbows" /headasplosion
Nah Alia this is EVE, so there is a large, large part of the forum playerbase trying to bend over the rule so it fits to their ingame needs to claim they actuated rightfully and along the rules.
P.S: on the other hand i prefer frozen corpses, almost anyone shows them on overview and even harder to detect by plain sight, the perfect decloaking tool and Hey who knows maybe you can decloak someone with a friend or even their own frozen corpse Oh the irony !!
DEAR MONOCLE OVERLORDS JOIN TO FORCE CCP ADD LORGNETTE FOR THE OVERLADIES!! |
firepup82
Missions Mining and Mayhem Northern Coalition.
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 12:56:00 -
[52]
pretty sure this is the best customer service response i've seen in eve.
all around, bravo.
|
Probe Alt
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 13:22:00 -
[53]
Originally by: firepup82 pretty sure this is the best customer service response i've seen in eve.
all around, bravo.
Agreed. Need more ccp employees not afraid to call out the a-holes on their BS.
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 13:31:00 -
[54]
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.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Remus Andromedus
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 13:34:00 -
[55]
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.
Are you, or have you ever been a member of Goonswarm?
|
Voith
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 13:42:00 -
[56]
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.
|
Grath Telkin
Amarr Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 13:44:00 -
[57]
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.
If i were you, I'd make a bunch of butthurt posts after getting ass stomped by a dev on a public forum
|
Sadayiel
Caldari Inner Conflict
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 13:46:00 -
[58]
Edited by: Sadayiel on 24/07/2011 13:47:34
Originally by: Remus Andromedus
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.
Are you, or have you ever been a member of Goonswarm?
This kind of rumours to bash CCP people amuses me.
In the past all CCP employes were part of BOB, then later they moved to PL and now it is they are part of GOONSWARM. So in the next 1-2 years they will be part of another massive/mean/ruling alliance and this crap can going on forever.
Tbh between the wannabe CCP fanbois, and the wannabe butthurt trolls this forums are just a mere shadow of the old times. Getting nostalgic i just miss Shikari and Hippoking
DEAR MONOCLE OVERLORDS JOIN TO FORCE CCP ADD LORGNETTE FOR THE OVERLADIES!! |
Alpheias
Euphoria Released HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 13:46:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Grath Telkin
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.
If i were you, I'd make a bunch of butthurt posts after getting ass stomped by a dev on a public forum
Isn't that what he is trying?
♫ When your ship gets blown to bits ♫ And you lose your Faction fits \☻/ Don't worry ♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪ Be Happy \☻/ |
Misunderstood Genius
|
Posted - 2011.07.24 15:46:00 -
[60]
I just can say that I petitioned a few times can dropping with success because what's for sure: more objects in grid will cause lag at the end. The first time it was round about 80 cans creating a "decloak-bubble" around a gate done by jump forth and back of a bigger camp. One time I got caught in my cloaker and I realized that I was lagged out, I tried to cloak after jumping in but it didn't work and I died immediately after that. The local response was: "Bad cans, eh?"
In all cases a GM removed the cans. In one case the GM got smacked in local for it. In the first extreme case I never saw the camp dropping cans again. Probably they got a warning? If so it would make no sense. Because when CCP says that this is not an exploit how should someone work out the limit and when you cross the limit then it's an exploit because you use it for lag?
My conclusion: you can't say that dropping cans is valid while a not defined number of cans causing lag is an exploit.
Personally I don't see an exploit by just using cans for tactics to catch cloakers or decloak recons warping into your mission pocket.
|
|
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] |