I cannot imagine why people are popping up even to defend this, which, in my opinion is clearly an exploit.


Jetting a single can is not an exploit. A whole fleet jetting hundreds of cans to cause grid loading lag is. This we know.

Starting a single convo is not an exploit. A whole fleet starting hundreds of convos to cause lag is.


Simple.

I cannot imagine why people are popping up even to defend this, which, in my opinion is clearly an exploit.


Jetting a single can is not an exploit. A whole fleet jetting hundreds of cans to cause grid loading lag is. This we know.

Starting a single convo is not an exploit. A whole fleet starting hundreds of convos to cause lag is.


Simple.

Nothing is appropriate in war, you do what you have to do to win.

If you have to exploit to win, maybe you are on the wrong side of the war.

Let me address this:

The EULA clearly says "You may not take any action that imposes an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on the System."

Sending somebody a convo is an action "you" perform. The system is designed to support a conversation request from "you." One request does not break the game. Likewise, each of your fleetmates also may convo anyone they choose, so long as they don't do so in a way that causes their single request to be re-propagated automatically or in some other way cause lag to the system, they have performed a legitimate function of the game. To whit, even the FC calling for everyone to do this is not an exploit, per se, because they haven't directly taken action that presents a disproportionate load. In fact, when the FC attempts to convo the target, their request is just as valid as any other request which has been sent.

So in short, the answer is "you" aren't doing anything "wrong." Only taken as a whole does the attack cause a strain on the system, which isn't any different than jumping your giant fleet into jita and enacting lag and ti-di. It's just a natural part of a lot of people playing a video game in a persistent environment.

My 2 isk.

Denial of service attacks are against the law is some countries, and well that's what this is.

It's probably too much work to fix this issue for CCP to acknowledge it as an exploit.

I read your title and not your post. I did not consider it to be of the intellectual calibre required for a person of my intellectual superiority and genius to reply to.

Good day to you sir.

(I shall now read your OP)

I feel the need to reiterate that both sides have done this.

I think it's even funnier you can't read.

I feel the need to say that it doesn't matter who does or doesn't do it. It is still exploiting a mechanic for an unintended result.

I agree, but I was just responding to your quote.

So you're saying that Eve needs a Geneva Convention?

*Jovian Convention?

If you have to exploit to win, maybe you are on the wrong side of the war.

War isn't a pretty thing whether it's inside a game world or in real life. there are no real rules to it, you just do what you need to do to win. Ask any military force in the world about this.

I guess these restrictions are just one of those weird ideas we Europeans have about "civilization"...

This is kind of presumptuous, given that we're not exactly sure of the nature of the problem (client or network lag). I can't speak to any setups either, seeing as this has in fact never happened to me.

War isn't a pretty thing whether it's inside a game world or in real life. there are no real rules to it, you just do what you need to do to win. Ask any military force in the world about this.

If this mechanic is fully proven to DDOS an opposing players client (I remember log-scrolling in DAoC being used to slow people down) then dear God why are people defending it?

Is the asshattery so bad in this game that anybody could defend it?


One more reason to eschew (finally, used that word) large fleets, the basement dwelling win-at-all-costs-because-my-life-sucks neckbeards' corporations, and their 0.0 space.

How is that relevant?

I got that, but I don't think it weakens the arguments made against convobombing

Serious question for you James Amril-Kesh,

If you view convo spamming someone as being so bad, so against the law, so terrible. Why are you waiting till now to make this thread when your own main FC has been telling you guys to convo bomb Elo Knight for over a month now, maybe two. Why now bring it up? Why didn't you make this thread a long time ago?

Answer me that.

Also everyone else needs to please note that the battle where Razor lost 19 carriers iirc and a CSAA was in fact lost due to terrible placement of the carriers and the fact that they were only able to be cap stable for about two minutes before capping out, thus unable to rep. Anyone can go to the kill boards, plug in the fits they used on EFT and see in cold hard truth, they were terribly fit.

But yeah, answer the bolded questions James. We will all wait.

I don't really care about his motivation. He likely has bias but is offering some objective arguments. Marlona likely has equal bias but isn't providing or addressing any arguments.