| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
The Vince
   |
Posted - 2006.06.21 14:33:00 -
[31]
Reply: i talked to the person and it refers to the post i made and that got deleted in a chinese/islandic way.
Imho you could also call the people retards, who abuse this bug to kill newbies.
It was obvious that it's a bug, because CCP will never disable concorde without a warning. It was also obvious that the GMs would never tolerate such behaviour
As i stated in my deleted post:
Before dt lots of people got killed in empire cause Concord didnt came to their rescue for a change.
Was fun. CCP forgot to pay ( turn on ) Concord so a warning was issued like 50 minutes before dt.
Killing stopped period.
Ok all is well till after dt people login and they are banned.
Cause CCP fecks up like they always do and they get complaints of the local carebear alliances.
Good show CCP thx for the fun.
Always good to know that when CCP fecks up they blame someone else.
I hope you fire that idiot today responsible for it.
The Vince
calling ccp retards is insulting to retarded ppl.
So you can say it but i cant, thats called censorship in my country.
CCP made a huge mistake.
They warn ingame they dont want this, killing stopped.
Problem is people call fire and murder and petition.
Then CCP bans people for their fault.
I am just calling the facts and voice my opinion just like you do.
Diffrence is your post kisses ccp and mine dont.
My post gets deleted and yours dont.
Hope this one last 2 minutes
The Vince
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 14:44:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: Galk
Thats funny i remember seeing it with my own eyes.
Ohh and numbers 'did' go down in the first few months reguardless of what you claim. It was when i first joined running at just over 6k (hell i even remember a dev joining our newb corp chat saying grats on the record) sadly the number halfed by christmas.... mostly due to the crapheads doing nothing but attempting to ruin peoples days through lack of a decent player protection service relating to sec level (concord) and like you mention (jump in point camping) that shamefull method where you were mostly killed before your screen had a chance to load in because the 'talented' figured out that dumping a ton of crap in space worked wonders:/
Care to point out this huge drop for us?
You can use this to help you.
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Pegas
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 14:57:00 -
[33]
This just in!
CONCORD went on strike today because they lacked Gallente Exotic Dancers.
They demand more spiced wine and to work only 8h/day not 23/24.
Stay tooned more to come in!
|
Shiraz Merlot
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 15:25:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Sakura Nihil
I judge people I can't meet by their results - QA's responsibility is to make sure patches are suitable for TQ, and they simply continue to fail.
You are talking about firing people, a vile topic at the best of times.
You don't know what their individual results are. Unless you have some inside track on the CCP QA process and their individual performance review criteria. In which case posting on these boards about it would be grossly unprofessional.
Neither you nor I know how many times they succeed at detecting defects before release to production.
My view is that CCP's public success:screwup ratio is good. No caveats. Not even "given the enormous complexity and innovation of what they're doing." Although I do continue to be boggled that it works at all - I know the online services industry and most operators would be terrified of a situation where they have no acceptable rollback scenario for a production change. That's my worst-case scenario for any change.
If you're dissatisfied that software has unanticipated issues in production, join the queue. The entire software industry would like an answer to that problem. Firing your QA team is unlikely to make the shortlist.
/SM
|
Traellium
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 15:53:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Traellium on 21/06/2006 16:05:10
Maybe I have been playing MMO's for far too long (8 years or so), but I tend to assume that every patch gets a patch-of-the-patch.
The reasons I see for that are:
* Not enough people testing (both in terms of hired QA and of players on a test server)
* Poor code management, usually visible when old bugs migrate back into new code. Somewhere, somehow, someone didn't check code in or out properly.
* Test servers that are similar in nature to production, but not exactly alike. Typically, its a much smaller population that plays a lot less, and so the stress testing and combinations of events doesn't exist as it does on live servers
* Code on Test server may not always align perfectly with code on Production. This happens when some items have a much longer development or fixing time than others. Some items on a bug list are quick fixes, others need more time than is available before the patch to production. So, you get partial fixes that appear separate from a development point of view, but in fact are related in a non-obvious manner. the "fix" they thought they had in place was part of the long term development, and wasn't migrated as expected. They really need a test server just to test code migration, but thats a very expensive process (equipment & time).
* Some issues arise out of randomness, and that randomness is more likely to appear at the worst possible time. Hence Mr. Murphies wild success with his saying.
* Many, many problems are found on Test servers and are fixed, but because very few people play there they don't see the massive numbers of fixes. They see a tiny portion of them; namely the ones that go Live. From that, they assume nothing gets done. It's not a judgement that is made from a state of knowledge, but rather ignorance.
* Errors in the code/procedures that migrate changes from the development to production environments. It works on test right before it goes live, but then doesn't work on live after the patch. Funny thing is when they try it on Test, it works as expected.
* Massive differences between computers using the product. If everyone always tested on Test servers before a patch, then there is a much better chance that robustness testing is accomplished in a test environment.
* Confusion by players that "testing" code happens on a test server only while the main server is down for the patch. Sorry, but anything found then is far too late.
* Differences between what the development management rates for bug priority, and what players rate that same issue. Usually that has to do with "well, we have a work around!", but the workaround isn't obvious nor fun for the players, and so the bug goes live.
Its all a very, very complex system. I don't see the need to blame one specific item, but ultimately its the developers fault for any issues. Its not always a QA issue, nor developer, nor test environment, nor player support (ie didn't go to test server to help out) ... its that issues come up in the communications between all these pieces.
Life is a lot simpler if you assume the Microsoft approach of "Quality is job 1.1".
|
Over There
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 16:11:00 -
[36]
This is clearly the second best bug in eve. 
[those who've experienced the best bug will know what I'm talking about heh]
|
Galk
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 16:13:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: Galk
Thats funny i remember seeing it with my own eyes.
Ohh and numbers 'did' go down in the first few months reguardless of what you claim. It was when i first joined running at just over 6k (hell i even remember a dev joining our newb corp chat saying grats on the record) sadly the number halfed by christmas.... mostly due to the crapheads doing nothing but attempting to ruin peoples days through lack of a decent player protection service relating to sec level (concord) and like you mention (jump in point camping) that shamefull method where you were mostly killed before your screen had a chance to load in because the 'talented' figured out that dumping a ton of crap in space worked wonders:/
Care to point out this huge drop for us?
You can use this to help you.
Ohh common avon, you know i don't take any active part in your postings, your on record as saying you come here just to argue with people.
Obviously i was talking about active players on the server, im 99% sure your aware of that, as is everybody else... so just stop trying:/
______
Long ago one gorgeous night, we let the stars grow free.
We let Zhuge do that once, he came back carrying a traffic cone, a forsale sign and three empty bottles of dutch lager. He also lost his Zimmer Frame... - Imaran
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 16:16:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Galk
your on record as saying you come here just to argue with people.
Quote or stfu.
One of us is a troll, I agree.
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Plutoinum
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 16:18:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Plutoinum on 21/06/2006 16:35:30
@vince Sorry, didn't mean it in anyway personal.
I've played different MMOGs/MMORPGs so far and it has never been excepted there that people abuse an abvious bug to their advantage. That was more or less the definition of exploiting.
In a pvp game named Neocron, my friends and I even had serious talks on teamspeak with a representative of the games company that they were concerned about how our gameplay effected other players and they told us that they had an eye on us.
We didn't even abuse bugs to kill, just used the means that the devs gave us willingly to go on killing sprees for fun. Nevertheless we ****ed people off, who wanted to see us banned for some actions etc. (Like our subway ganking that resulted in heavy protests and making the area a safezone, where you couldn't attack other players for months.  )
So maybe the combinition of abusing a bug and ****ing off other players, who wanted your heads on a plate for it, is the reason, why it was somehow clear to me that the GMs take it seriously and don't think it's funny.
P.S.: Like I said to you, I don't expect perma-bans, but I'm not amazed that they use temporary bans to show that they don't accept that behaviour. 
|
Nyabinghi
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 16:32:00 -
[40]
What should be on the list of things to get an overhaul is Concord. Good citizen's get lulled into the idea that they are safe and the baddies will get punished with Concord policing things, only to find themsleves in a pod while the criminals cash in.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
I make cool banners for ISK.
|
Dave White
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 16:35:00 -
[41]
Concord was on strike because they were sick of killing newbships if you ask me
Recruitment |
Malthros Zenobia
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 16:40:00 -
[42]
Originally by: The Vince
*snip*
Anyone who thinks they were going to get away with abusing CONCORD's 'strike' to kill freely in high-sec has earned their punishment. The only exception I could imagine being 'ok' would be if you go pop someone who just abused the bug to kill you, or a friend, and even then that is VERY iffy.
It's CCP's 'fault' for CONCORD not working.
It's the player's fault for abusing what they damn well knew was a bug.
I have no sympathy what-so-ever for the people who used the problem to go pk in empire.
I also hope BC npcs get looked at, because they're way too easy (ofcourse this is coming from a torp-using pov, so they probably are pretty balanced if you fight them with something that isn't doing 2x dmg to BCs compared to cruisers).
|
Orree
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 17:04:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Malthros Zenobia
Originally by: The Vince
*snip*
<snip>
It's CCP's 'fault' for CONCORD not working.
It's the player's fault for abusing what they damn well knew was a bug.
I have no sympathy what-so-ever for the people who used the problem to go pk in empire.
<snip>
QFT
There's always a certain segment of society that thinks that when controls break down, they are free to do as they wish...then they are surprised when they find out that no, law was not suspended or abolished during their rampage.
In this game, exploiting bugs is punishable by banning. Those that were banned got what they deserved. I'm sure they had a good laugh while they committed their misdeeds, but they probably aren't laughing now. No...now they are whinging and calling CCP retarded...lol.
It's certainly clear to me who really qualify for that label in this situation.
|
Tasuric Orka
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 17:49:00 -
[44]
I too have no sympathy for those that went out of their way to kill people in high sec when they learned of this bug, getting banned in the process. It was exploiting, there is nothing else to it. People are using the ôbut its x-companyÆs fault!ö excuse all the time, and its BS because you have the choice not to take advantage, and anyone with a bit of sense knows ccp wouldnÆt let you get away with it.
Exploiters 0, ccp 1.
________________________________________________
I survived Veto and all i got was this lame sig. |
Ijaz
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 17:54:00 -
[45]
Every MMORPG has a rule similar to EvE's TSO #22 quoted below.
'You may not exploit any bug in EVE Online to gain an unfair advantage over other players. You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum. Bugs should be reported through the bug reporting tool on our website.'
CCP 4tW.
|
Audrea
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 18:50:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Ijaz
Every MMORPG has a rule similar to EvE's TSO #22 quoted below.
'You may not exploit any bug in EVE Online to gain an unfair advantage over other players. You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum. Bugs should be reported through the bug reporting tool on our website.'
CCP 4tW.
Once or twice in my eve career I was bored enough to go do suicide ganks in empire, with help of couple alts of course
This time I wasnt really prepared to have so much fun in the 50 mins we had left when warning was issued, anyway my point is, I dont care that CCP wants us to report bugs through the bug reporting tool.
If I WERE to find this bug before the warning, I can assure you, I wouldnt think wether its fair or not, whats wrong or not wrong with CONCORD, I would just go on ganking until told otherwise by the GMs/Devs.
It simply is not my duty to report bugs to them, as I am not paid to do that as a QA.
I might do that vonluntarily, if they cared to fix other bugs I have reported almost half year ago - like no station containers in conquerable stations (which still wasnt fixed), or the problems with the station management interface - which was fixed after months of petitions :(
With such treatement from the devs, do u really think me, or anyone else would WANT to help these stingy guys out? who not only save money to hire qualified QA personnel, but also ignore things which I know at least dozens of other ppl who are annoyed by their unfixed bugs??? -NO!
------------------
If you are tired of fleet combat lag, post HERE
All posts are my personal opinions. |
LUGAL MOP'N'GLO
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 18:57:00 -
[47]
Originally by: The Enslaver
I'd call it an improvement tbh... Would make the game much more entertaining.
Oh ya, all space becomes 0.0 and all you pirates base *****23/7
|
Tasuric Orka
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 19:02:00 -
[48]
If you cant or just wont think about the consequences before you take advantage of something that is clearly off, then you deserve to get banned. You dont need to file a bug report or a petition, but you sure as hell are expected to THINK. Exploiting is not allowed, period, and in this case it clearly was exploiting.
________________________________________________
I survived Veto and all i got was this lame sig. |
Ephemeron
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 19:19:00 -
[49]
I would really enjoy the game if all empire space turned in 0.0. It would not only be entertaining, but also very challanging for me. People would be getting killed into quiting by the thousands. Only the toughest and most resourceful would be left with uncanceled EVE accounts. A true reign of individual freedom.
|
LUGAL MOP'N'GLO
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 19:28:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Ephemeron
I would really enjoy the game if all empire space turned in 0.0. It would not only be entertaining, but also very challanging for me. People would be getting killed into quiting by the thousands. Only the toughest and most resourceful would be left with uncanceled EVE accounts. A true reign of individual freedom.
I hope thats sarcasm. Everyone needs to have fun, not just you.
|
Ijaz
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 21:11:00 -
[51]
Well Audrea, then you deserved to potentially get banned per the TOS you agreed to when signing up for EvE.
I do not understand why people are harping on QA. I write software for a living. It is the developer's job, or potentially the integration team, to ensure he/she does not regress a change into the system. It is QA's job to verify that the listed changes work per the Analyst's specification document.
|
Ab Initio
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 22:40:00 -
[52]
Edited by: Ab Initio on 21/06/2006 22:46:26
Originally by: Sakura Nihil
I judge people I can't meet by their results - QA's responsibility is to make sure patches are suitable for TQ, and they simply continue to fail.
We judge you by your results - your responsibility to make sure that your posts are constructive, and informed, and you continue to fail 
* Clearly it was a bug.
* It was resolved ASAP.
* People who abused it were lucky to get away with what they did.
* Talking about firing people, without being privy to any information regarding the issue is just plain stupid.
|
St Dragon
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 22:41:00 -
[53]
I cant belive i missed this a chance to try out piracy v some of those freighters and i missed it 
-----------------------------------------------
"Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god."
-- Jean Rostand |
Kamal Drax
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 23:51:00 -
[54]
You people bi+ch to much. Go outside and get some sunlight for a change.
|
Ab Initio
|
Posted - 2006.06.22 00:14:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Kamal Drax
You people bi+ch to much. Go outside and get some sunlight for a change.
Your coming on to a forum just to ***** about people *****ing...
The sun is that way ------>
|
Minotaurian
|
Posted - 2006.06.22 00:31:00 -
[56]
No where near as big as the old "base minerals + base waste = base recycle" formula problem... where if you researched your BPO and got your PE and refining skills up some, you basically printed minerals. Since you'd create for less minerals than you got out from recycling.
|
Furry Butt
|
Posted - 2006.06.22 01:08:00 -
[57]
The only problem I have is that people got banned even though they stopped before the GM's stepped in. That is wrong.
Sure...ban people for ingnoring the GM's but before that? I know for a fact one account got banned even though the perp also lost his ship after nuking a mining barge. Why the ban? He still lost his ship as you you should for committing a crime in high sec.
|
13th
|
Posted - 2006.06.22 02:22:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Furry Butt
The only problem I have is that people got banned even though they stopped before the GM's stepped in. That is wrong.
Sure...ban people for ingnoring the GM's but before that? I know for a fact one account got banned even though the perp also lost his ship after nuking a mining barge. Why the ban? He still lost his ship as you you should for committing a crime in high sec.
The people clearly knew they were breaking the intended rules of the game when concord didn't intervene and blow them up. They went out of their way to abuse this rule, someone doesn't accidently start shooting multiple people in empire. Claiming that you didn't know better because nobody specefically told them it was wrong is a 1st grader's excuse.
The people who were taking advantage of this situation knew what they were doing. They knew that they were taking advantage of the fact that concord wasn't responding to aggression in empire when they normally do. They intentionally broke the rules the moment the game stopped enforcing them due to a bug. They just weren't expecting to get punished for it. And for that, I applaud CCP.
|
Xendie
|
Posted - 2006.06.22 04:07:00 -
[59]
if they only had shot at some random guy once they might have gotten away with it.
but when they shoot multiple random ppl in highsec and dont get blown up by concord due to this bug then they were knowingly exploting as much as they could.
and ive checked up on a few killboards just out of curiosity and there had been instances where a certain person/persons in the corp/alliance gone out to suicide gank someone and then 5min later come back with a bigger and more expensive ship to repetedly gank others who normally cound survive the usual suicide kessies/caracals.
and not long after that there has been several others from the same corp/alliance that has done the exact same thing but skipped the smaller ship to start with and went out in HACS and BS straight off the bat knowing that it was safe for them to use those ships and they knew that they wouldnt get blown up by concord.
that is Exploiting and all of those ppl who killed more then a single person in a ship that isnt considered a throw-away should definetly be banned.
Originally by: F'nog
This would be great, because lag is not at all a problem currently.
|
Scoundrelus
|
Posted - 2006.06.22 04:22:00 -
[60]
FFS! CONCORD stopped responding and I wasn't there?! Oh my god... oh my god it would've been like a buffet, I missed it, I can't believe I missed it. To think, all those people mining in belts and flying in between gates... AND I MISSED IT! ARRRRGH!!!!!!!
===============================================
Don't say to me over a forum what you wouldn't say to my face. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |