I, too, want a game that is barely functional with more than 2 people on grid because the server is logging every facet of every interaction

in the vain hope that one day heuristic analysis will be good enough to accurately determine human intent.

You're arguing something that is so removed from possibility that there's no logical objection someone can have to it.

GǪaside from determining intent, which will be required if it is to be classified as harassment.

How on earth are you still acting like intention isn't key?

That could potentially cause all kinds of problems when it comes to killing stuff, yes. There's also no reason to limit the timer.

Please list all your reasons for introducing a time limit on ship on ship violence. I'd be interested to see if any of them don't boil down to "baw i dont want to explode"

The majority of L4 missions are completed in under an hour, should we therefore make it impossible to complete a L4 mission if you dilly dally and take longer than an hour?

It's not relevant because the rules apply the same everywhere for the same reasons.

Reducing the reward is not the same as making it mechanically impossible to complete.

It's rude to ignore people you know.

So being rude is the appropriate response when someone merely questions an argument you made? That's rather childish.

And since HS currently has no special combat timers, why do you feel HS should suddenly operate under different combat rules than everywhere else?

Yes it says "hey we are using the systems provided to kill people trying to solo in an MMO." You can whine and cry all you want but playing eve solo will always put you at a disadvantage. Crying that you don't like a mechanic doesn't make it an exploit.

Well aside from CCP stating that it is not an exploit and a valid tactic to use and the fact that jita would be very interesting, I can tell you that this tactic has counters.

No, I can't quote CCP saying this because it's the logical result of someone saying they will judge someone's actions on a case-by-case basis.

Well then lets go back to the two situations I posted ten pages back - how do you determine which of those is harassment without judging intent.

Go.

44 Pages of bad players insisting that freighters should be able to log off to avoid dying when people shoot at them.

lol

An hour of being stopped from warping and then ganked is not harassment. We hold down capitals in null and low sec for much longer spans of time. This is simply a case of a gank gone bad. You can ask CCP Punkturis when she gets back and she will provide the same answer as me because that's what we were told back when crimewatch was announced.

Most people would love for their freighter to take this long to gank as that would give them a lot of time to form a defence fleet to save it.

The crimewatch mechanics were designed literally with a mind to put stop to logging off to save yourself. Concord and how they were being dragged around weren't planned as such, but it's been like that for a decade and CCP don't consider it an exploit.

So it doesn't even warrant a petition.

The freighter is playing a multiplayer game and was in an alliance with hundreds of others. It was killed by a fleet of around 30.


Seems very relevant.

S Byerley you still haven't answered my questions :(

None of that has anything to do with the freighter. The freighter has none of any of those abilities, nor does it have any drones or anything else those ships have. It's special in this case, as it were.

Yes they are, hence why they come under the same aggression mechanics as everything else. You just agreed with me again on this matter.

My side of the wager is that I am right and you don't understand the mechanics. You're misunderstanding what the time means - it does not mean "I pulled the trigger on someone else" it means "I was involved in an act of aggression in some way" - that includes being on the receiving end

hope this helps

Why on Earth shouldn't it warrant a timer? Not incurring one pretty much means anyone in high hp ships can pull the plug to save themselves from attacks. This is a bloody horrific idea, and will be abused to hell and back (like it used to be, and is literally why CCP changed it in the first place)

Murk, why do think it's an exploit or harassment because it lasted as long (and by long I mean a pretty short time, really - an hour is nothing) as it did?

Do you think there should be a special cut off time after which you can merely excuse yourself from the fight and leave without taking a loss?

I personally think that if someone manages to start and engagement with you while you're online and playing, then they should be able to finish what they started regardless of how long it takes, and merely logging off during the engagement should NEVER be what results in you escaping or winning.

I don't think ongoing fights should have any kind to time limit after which they are mechanically ended (such as via a log off) because that's crap. Currently, the time limit is technically until you reach downtime, I guess, but I don't see why we should go back to the old days of ships vanishing mid combat because the other guy decided he was losing and killed the client. That's just crap

Murk, why do think it's an exploit or harassment because it lasted as long (and by long I mean a pretty short time, really - an hour is nothing) as it did?

Do you think there should be a special cut off time after which you can merely excuse yourself from the fight and leave without taking a loss?

I personally think that if someone manages to start and engagement with you while you're online and playing, then they should be able to finish what they started regardless of how long it takes, and merely logging off during the engagement should NEVER be what results in you escaping or winning.

I don't think ongoing fights should have any kind to time limit after which they are mechanically ended (such as via a log off) because that's crap. Currently, the time limit is technically until you reach downtime, I guess, but I don't see why we should go back to the old days of ships vanishing mid combat because the other guy decided he was losing and killed the client. That's just crap

Why? I don't think there should be. If you end up in an engagement, I think it's perfectly reasonable that you remain involved in that engagement until it ends 'naturally' - that is to say, you win the fight, you escape, or you lose the fight. Not "it's exceeded some arbitrary time limit, so now I am allowed to kill the client and get away scott free tee hee"