EVE Search - The last GM straw...

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

The last GM straw...

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)
sonofollo	Posted - 2005.08.06 08:34:00 - [31] solo POS operators always take the risk - there are pirate corps that go round busting small POS just for fun and they dont use drones. If you want a POS at least start youre own corp recruit players that will aid u and do it as a corp thing. At least then defense is a little easier.
aeti	Posted - 2005.08.06 08:39:00 - [32] funny thing is the reason the GM gave (which of course can't be spoken of here) I have screenshots of exactly the opposite happening and they already should have a copy of them from a totally unrelated petition weeks ago random decisions
WildHope	Posted - 2005.08.06 08:44:00 - [33] 1) Lag was not in our interest. Given our tactics, lag was more of an irritant than a benefit. 2) I can't speak for everyone, but I and all I spoke to were unaware that the drones weren't inflicting damage. 3) I was aware that the drones would create extra targets for the guns, we were using light drones because they are the most cheap, expendable, and replenishable. Since when has this been considered an exploit? NO-ONE (categorically) knew that the locking time of the large gun on drones was larger than it's cycle time. However there were several small and medium batteries there in addition to the large ones. 4) Approximately 350 man hours were spent in the orgainsation and operation of this event. Overturned with the click of a button, maybe 3.5 secs. I've slept on it, and I still feel this is outrageous. Wildhope ShinRa Curse Alliance (may it last 1000 generations) Victim of the GM White JV1V massacre
Terradoct	Posted - 2005.08.06 08:45:00 - [34] alt rage 4tw woot!!! [5] is all your alts, come on show them all let howl eve know how good you are.
sonofollo	Posted - 2005.08.06 08:46:00 - [35] just another reasons to give POS anti drone drones that can only attack other drones (a much awaited and delayed feature from CCP as well as scavenger drones) and smaller anti drone weapons that can lock drones or wait - smartbombs on POS to take out the pesky drones Other option to neutralise both defenders and attackers using drones is a natural field or module on POS that neutralises all drones within a 100km radius (problem solved)
Terradoct	Posted - 2005.08.06 08:50:00 - [36] Originally by: sonofollo just another reasons to give POS anti drone drones that can only attack other drones (a much awaited and delayed feature from CCP as well as scavenger drones) and smaller anti drone weapons that can lock drones or wait - smartbombs on POS to take out the pesky drones Other option to neutralise both defenders and attackers using drones is a natural field or module on POS that neutralises all drones within a 100km radius (problem solved) There is NO problems with the drones. There is a problem with ppl that think if I send drone attack pos it will wtfpwn it. BUT field bubble is 30km radius, drones have 1km-4km optimal. HOW on earth are you attacking with them POS. Even blasterthrone can't do i scrach on POS shield.
W0lverine	Posted - 2005.08.06 08:54:00 - [37] so, you cant use drones on MOROS to take POS?..great
W0lverine	Posted - 2005.08.06 08:56:00 - [38] RABle rable rable!!
sonofollo	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:00:00 - [39] wel the rabble has spoken.
Kyle Caldrel	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:01:00 - [40] Originally by: Terradoct alt rage 4tw woot!!! [5] is all your alts, come on show them all let howl eve know how good you are. Obviously you dont see whos posting. There are a lot of non 5 members agreeing that it is not an exploit.
Galk	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:05:00 - [41] Cut between the lines here.... The original post was probaly made in haste, i 'seriously' doubt there's any exploit here, people have been using drones as aditional targets for ages... Though i can imagine here an honourable allaince such as the 5 not going for overkill and attracting gm attention because ccp are recieving a flood of petitions from the other party. Whats probaly happend here is the old professional ccp support staff issue...interpretation based on the furiousity of the complaints against... So GM makes a snap judgement just to clear it up. All wrong naturaly and having been the victim before.. well it's whatever. shrugs -------- 23
sonofollo	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:06:00 - [42] well if its an exploit lets see CCP take a proactive lead and add modules to POS that simulate a effect that renders all drones unworkable - unlaunchable within 100km of a POS - applies to both attackers or defenders using them OR add POS weapons that specifically target and shoot drones while he big guns target the player ships. Its easy enough to add a tag to the AI that says if its a player drone dont shoot it shoot with the big guns the player hsips - and with anti drone weapons shoot drones only. Would expand the weapons choices for POS - add POS drones that engage other drones. Or smartbombs on POS that can also attack drones within a 10km radius - a programmingsolution would be easy enough to implement
Joe	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:10:00 - [43] Originally by: W0lverine so, you cant use drones on MOROS to take POS?..great Moros is for empire mining by npc corp alts. please read patch notes Oberon Tech II Sales.
sonofollo	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:12:00 - [44] well dominix is still good for fitting mining lasers and high end mining drones :)
Ohmite	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:23:00 - [45] All I can say on the matter is one GM has made CCP look like a bunch of ******. A decision he made has done a lot of damage to CCP reputation, this needs to be looked into at the highest level as there is so many inconsistancies in what was done, the decision to class drones as an expoit is laughable as they have always been used to take fire from NPCs, POS FOF missiles etc and have been used by all alliances before without problems. If it affected tracking of guns then fit a sensor booster to the POS, I believe they have them, fit smaller guns, lots of things to try and do but to claim an expoit and say the drones were the cause of lag is total rubbish, even when the drones dissappeared the lag was still as bad So now you might as well remove the gallente dread from the game as it has no purpose. /emote shacks his head, A bad bad day for CCP, due to a GM over stepping the mark
Terradoct	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:28:00 - [46] Originally by: Ohmite All I can say on the matter is one GM has made CCP look like a bunch of ******. A decision he made has done a lot of damage to CCP reputation, this needs to be looked into at the highest level as there is so many inconsistancies in what was done, the decision to class drones as an expoit is laughable as they have always been used to take fire from NPCs, POS FOF missiles etc and have been used by all alliances before without problems. If it affected tracking of guns then fit a sensor booster to the POS, I believe they have them, fit smaller guns, lots of things to try and do but to claim an expoit and say the drones were the cause of lag is total rubbish, even when the drones dissappeared the lag was still as bad So now you might as well remove the gallente dread from the game as it has no purpose. /emote shacks his head, A bad bad day for CCP, due to a GM over stepping the mark All I can say on this matter is that 5 is bunch of whinning kids that can't read.
Doc Brown	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:29:00 - [47] I think I see an abuse for this right now and why it was stoped. I don't know if you did this or not, but if so I agree with the GM's decision. step 1: lots of drones (figure out the rest for your self since it'll be moderated if I continue) _________________________________________________ There are no bad ideas, only bad implementations.
Letouk Mernel	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:30:00 - [48] Oh come on, you all throw words like "reputation", "CCP", "bad day", "highest level" around as if this matters even one bit. How about this: IBTL, thread locked because "discussing GM actions is not allowed on the boards," matter will be reviewed internally, y'all have a nice day.
sonofollo	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:30:00 - [49] ohmite we have no way of knowing if a dev did or did not say something as there has been no offical response to this thread so its all heresay - the discussion has been based on if it is a exploit - though some ideas ie POS carrying anti drone drones - smaller guns - making drones unable to be launched within 50-100km of a POS So at least some good has come of this thread. But its all conjecture at this point lets not draw conclusions from incomplete information
Hunt Smacker	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:33:00 - [50] Well, it's time for a POS Mobile Smartbomb Battery! Lets call it Bob. Bob the smartbomb will erupt with a shield-piercing range of 100km, destroying anything too small to withstand the brutality! It requires additional fuel to activate, and uses up lots of grid on the control tower!
sonofollo	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:35:00 - [51] alternatively a smartbomb that fries all drones within a 20km radius and cycles every 3-5 minutes. or random cycles could be another avenue for new POS anti drone weapons
Brian Detaah	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:38:00 - [52] Originally by: Doc Brown Edited by: Doc Brown on 06/08/2005 09:29:55 I think I see an abuse for this right now and why it was stoped. I don't know if you did this or not, but if so I agree with the GM's decision. step 1: lots of drones (figure out the rest for your self since it'll be moderated if I continue) Hint: it's possible to have more drones in space than you can control. Well, yes it propery is possible, but thats not what happened. People had no more drones than they could control. Since you obviously are not informed on the issue, dont hand out tissues and have a dose of stfu ------------------------------------------------ `When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.' `The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.' `The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master - - that's all.'
Ithildin	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:43:00 - [53] The most simple solution of all is to disallow POS batteries to target drones, just as drones are disallowed to target pods. "Problem" solved. Still, there will be the tiny little problem that taking down a POS will absolutely require a large amount of Dreadnoughts so that only a few (one or two alliances) will be able to afford a POS take-down this year. Further degrading is that battleships won't be able to survive long enough to bolster the defences of the Dreadnoughts that are sieging and come under attack! This scenario still hasn't been considered, it seems: only the Moros will be able to reliably defend itself (assuming none of the defenders has a smartbomb), the rest will have to spend ten minutes going out of siege and then hope they've got enough stabs to get clear. Originally by: Christopher Scott Simple logic. If using drones as additional targets to the POS is an exploit: then using standings to "aim" the guns at specific, single targets is also an exploit. Fix both, or don't call either an exploit. kthx. Quoted for further emphasis. -- If TC causes you discomfort that you feel is unwarranted or may be outside TC's current contract - contact me, please. Josameto III - Moon 1
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:47:00 - [54] Sounds like NPC POS defence system AI needs some adjustment. Every ship/drone should be given a threat level (higher number = higher threat) and NPC POS defence AI should attack that which is most threatening. Link this with AI which recognises who/what is doing the most damage. You'd probably have to code something that made drones appear as a single threat once they start to actually attack (i.e in range and hitting for damage). That way the NPC P{OS defences would attack the most dangerous threats as individuals but if the drones start to rerally hurt, it would switch to them and start hitting. Obviously, since drones have really poor range, they'd be up close and personal rather than sitting 100km for lag purposes. LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Sherkaner	Posted - 2005.08.06 09:51:00 - [55] Exploits are not to be discussed on the forums. GM actions are not to be discussed on the forums. Private correspondence with GMs (including petitions) are not to be posted on the forums. And guys, please don't take rumors spread by a single player for face value. The above rules were created just because on the forums, those GM messages inescapably get garbled, misunderstood and misinterpreted. I have no idea what case the first poster is referring to, and I don't want to know either, but there's probably more behind it than just using drones against a POS. If you want an official response about if something is an exploit or not, your only way is to petition. Only the GMs have the authority to say that. And please only petition if you are directly affected by this, either defending a POS or planning to attack a POS with drones. forum rules \| [email protected]
WildHope	Posted - 2005.08.06 10:09:00 - [56] Edited by: WildHope on 06/08/2005 10:09:38 Originally by: Joshua Calvert Obviously, since drones have really poor range, they'd be up close and personal rather than sitting 100km for lag purposes. Not sure if you meant this to apply to the JV1V situation, but I'll point out there was no sniping. Everyone was up close. Wildhope ShinRa Curse Alliance (may it last 1000 generations) Victim of the GM White JV1V massacre
Ohmite	Posted - 2005.08.06 10:19:00 - [57] Dropping drones for defence is a valid tactic, we all use it. 1. If there is a enemy frig fleet about you deploy drones just in case they warp in. 2. You deploy drones to stop a covert ship getting on top of you. 3. If you are jamming a raven BS, you drop drones do the FOFs go for them and not you 4. When a NPC ship is attacking you, you drop drones and it allows you a bit of respite if they retarget your drones. All of the above are used by all in various situations, taking stations, fleet battles and also POS taking. Stating dropping drones as an exploit has far reaching consequences, does that mean in fleet battles dropping drones is an expoit as FOFs wont always hit ships.
ParMizaN	Posted - 2005.08.06 10:30:00 - [58] Drones in large amount are a massive lag for anybody trying to fight back. Granted it is extra damage but I'm sure if you could tell a pos not to target drones people would. I would doubt that such a piece of "advanced" technology would be "dumb" ------------------ Take from the rich and give to me
EL Soros	Posted - 2005.08.06 10:41:00 - [59] Quote: 1) Lag was not in our interest. Given our tactics, lag was more of an irritant than a benefit. 2) I can't speak for everyone, but I and all I spoke to were unaware that the drones weren't inflicting damage. 3) I was aware that the drones would create extra targets for the guns, we were using light drones because they are the most cheap, expendable, and replenishable. Since when has this been considered an exploit? NO-ONE (categorically) knew that the locking time of the large gun on drones was larger than it's cycle time. However there were several small and medium batteries there in addition to the large ones. Ok, I always hear we were unaware of, we honestly didnt know etc, strangely coming from those people who are regarded as among the most experienced and best PvPers in EVE... To be fair, we will never know whether you knew that you were almost completely disabling any functionality of large batteries, i.e. whether you were exploiting that problem on purpose. Still, the fact remains that these turrets were intended to provide POS owners with stationary defence that should be so tough to ***** that a special ship class was created. The thought that CCP intended that they should be so easily countered by using swarms of light drones is absurd. Whenever you find a loophole that obviously runs so completely against CCP intentions, your EVE fate lies in their hands. While it is true that others already exploited this design flaw of large batteries, it has never been policy of CCP to legalise such exploting behaviour based on not having acted quickly enough to prevent events in the past.
Blitz0r	Posted - 2005.08.06 10:43:00 - [60] Edited by: Blitz0r on 06/08/2005 10:45:15 Well this is just stupid! Drones have been in the game a LONG fracking time.. They have always been used as extra targets for gate camping (since gateguns target drones). GM's should not be allowed to play the darn game! Get staff to be GM's, ur making enough money as it is from the game that you can affort this. Get a grip and post the GM's name so that we all can stay away from this dudes answers! Don't care if its Xetic or Five or PA or anyone else who gains on it.. its fracked up! Fit a small gun on the POS ur fine.. it will take out drones fast. Edit: btw, drones and POS's have been in long enough for you to nerf this earlier.... M.Corp BPC Packages

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.

then using standings to "aim" the guns at specific, single targets is also an exploit.