| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Lala Ru
   |
Posted - 2006.06.30 13:24:00 -
[61]
Funny, usually when someone starts complaining about a tactic on the forums, as stack of people pop in shouting "STFU n00b! Adapt!" However, this seems to be missing when talking about logon traps. What makes logon traps diffrent from other supposedly "unfair" ways to get ahead (scams, GTC, multiple accounts, etc. etc.)
|
Jenny Spitfire
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 13:27:00 -
[62]
 Originally by: Lala Ru
Funny, usually when someone starts complaining about a tactic on the forums, as stack of people pop in shouting "STFU n00b! Adapt!" However, this seems to be missing when talking about logon traps. What makes logon traps diffrent from other supposedly "unfair" ways to get ahead (scams, GTC, multiple accounts, etc. etc.)
We are all humans, each to their own interest. Being human is somehow a disease. 
----------------
RecruitMe@NOINT!
|
Roma Augustus
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 13:27:00 -
[63]
Hey, who would of guessed...RAT at the forefront of lameass exploit development. What a suprise! Congrats fellas. Here, let me get a quote from your new information minister.
Quote:
I cant say for all RA members but:
1. We never make lags.
2. We does not use exploits.
Daroh - Solar Dragons - Red Alliance
|
Scorpyn
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 13:35:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Lala Ru
Funny, usually when someone starts complaining about a tactic on the forums, as stack of people pop in shouting "STFU n00b! Adapt!" However, this seems to be missing when talking about logon traps. What makes logon traps diffrent from other supposedly "unfair" ways to get ahead (scams, GTC, multiple accounts, etc. etc.)
You would probably find less people complaining if it was made part of the game mechanics rather than metagaming.
|
Lala Ru
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 13:36:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Scorpyn
You would probably find less people complaining if it was made part of the game mechanics rather than metagaming.
And having two accounts in two windows isn't metagaming?
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 13:41:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Gripen
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Originally by: Gripen
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Best counter to login tactics - Remove local.
Signed. It is impossible to catch people who don't want to fight without login trap. No local - no way to avoid the fight.
Impossible ?
Hardly...
Hard ?
Maybe...
Have you tried movign around and hiding yourself in system one jump off-route from for example an enemy freighter escort ? Then it comes down to having good timing, but it removes your apparent 'need' for a logontrap.
Oh, and no one notes 70 people blob on the map?
You actually logontrap with a blob of 70 ?
I was assuming that finding more then about ten to twenty people lame enough to engage in such disgracefull play would be difficult tbh. Guess I'd better adapt by expectations of RAT and RA then right ?
If you've got ten to twenty not showing up on the map is actually quite doable. It's why I suggested keeping your group on the move.
Old blog |
Gripen
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 13:53:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Originally by: Gripen
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Originally by: Gripen
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Best counter to login tactics - Remove local.
Signed. It is impossible to catch people who don't want to fight without login trap. No local - no way to avoid the fight.
Impossible ?
Hardly...
Hard ?
Maybe...
Have you tried movign around and hiding yourself in system one jump off-route from for example an enemy freighter escort ? Then it comes down to having good timing, but it removes your apparent 'need' for a logontrap.
Oh, and no one notes 70 people blob on the map?
You actually logontrap with a blob of 70 ?
I was assuming that finding more then about ten to twenty people lame enough to engage in such disgracefull play would be difficult tbh. Guess I'd better adapt by expectations of RAT and RA then right ?
If you've got ten to twenty not showing up on the map is actually quite doable. It's why I suggested keeping your group on the move.
Attacking ~100 man gang with "ten to twenty" group is the best idea ever. And your insults show that you run out of arguments.
|
DukDodgerz
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 14:19:00 -
[68]
There is a simple answer for CCP.
Leave all the other aspects related to logging on/off the same, but remove the attribute that warps them back to where they were.
This forces the player to manualy warp in.
This removes the trap aspect, and the lack of a trap that is allowed by ccp (who never want to call anything an exploit until after it is fixed) will remove the incentive to use it, since all it gains them is lag on their own side as well as their intended victims.
FRODO HAS FAILED;
BUSH HAS THE RING!!!
The Hippo mating ritual |
Sirkill
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 14:36:00 -
[69]
Or how about you cant initiate agression on another player for 5 minutes after you log in.
|
Kozak
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 14:43:00 -
[70]
What is really lame is that our convoys have crashed nodes before. You can't have 100+ people moving 50+ jumps in a smooth manner. Someone always lags and is emergency warped out. You can't have taht with freighters. So when you have 70+ people log in JUST AS THE FREIGHTER JUMP IN, some of them emergency warp, others are cought in the intredictor bubble that that is placed just as the interdictors warp in from load. Having more with you will not save your freithers. There is no way to combat this. It's lame and CCP are going to loose more members (as they are currently loosing) if they refuse to do anything about this.
About 2 years ago I was involved in a logon trap against another player (before they stated it's an exploit). We ganked his ship and CCP warned us and reimbursed the pilot. It's a shame they changed their mind all of a sudden.
BTW, In E3, we didn't put out drones because when we did we lagged and were ordered to pull them back. You guys are getting kills but are not getting any respect. I think at the end of EVE there will be empire carebears and players like RAT. Everyone else would have had enough. I'm getting close to it.
|
DukDodgerz
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 14:45:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Gripen
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Originally by: Gripen
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Originally by: Gripen
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Best counter to login tactics - Remove local.
Signed. It is impossible to catch people who don't want to fight without login trap. No local - no way to avoid the fight.
Impossible ?
Hardly...
Hard ?
Maybe...
Have you tried movign around and hiding yourself in system one jump off-route from for example an enemy freighter escort ? Then it comes down to having good timing, but it removes your apparent 'need' for a logontrap.
Oh, and no one notes 70 people blob on the map?
You actually logontrap with a blob of 70 ?
I was assuming that finding more then about ten to twenty people lame enough to engage in such disgracefull play would be difficult tbh. Guess I'd better adapt by expectations of RAT and RA then right ?
If you've got ten to twenty not showing up on the map is actually quite doable. It's why I suggested keeping your group on the move.
Attacking ~100 man gang with "ten to twenty" group is the best idea ever. And your insults show that you run out of arguments.
You answer to respond to a larger enemy force is to use a known lag inducing "exploit" (CCP wont call anything an exploit until AFTER it is fixed, or it causes their own characters a hassle in the game).
Most people call that a cowardly display (the big P word comes to mind).
Grow a pair, try fighting your enemy, instead of using exploits and lame "P" tactics.
ASCN should use the same 'tactic' on their enemy, but with 2-5x the numbers, and CCP can keep their lips shut on this since they gave the "OK" on the "tactic".
FRODO HAS FAILED;
BUSH HAS THE RING!!!
The Hippo mating ritual |
Convictus
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 14:59:00 -
[72]
Forgive me for being naive but the problem seems to be mostly related to the fact that when logged out for long periods of time in space you log in exactly where you logged out or near enough to that point (15km or so I think). Why not then make it so that if you are logged out more than 5 minutes(or some other amount of time) you are warped to a random point within a predetermined range (an imaginary box in system).
Login traps definately sound lame, and I have not yet had the displeasure of encountering one.
There is definately lots of mechanics which could be fixed in eve to allow for a better pvp experience but this one seems so easy to fix :p
|
Kozak
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:07:00 -
[73]
Problem is that CCP don't realize how much damage this does to everyone's ejoyment of the game. If you are beaten fairly, fine. But when something is one sided, you don't even want to logon.
You can't adapt, your way of game play is completely disrupted. I guess we can all become gankers and sneak into complexes to make ISK, but who do we gank when we are all gankers?
I guess if CCP makes some NPC carebears that have some automated responses in local like "I hate you, I'm gonna petition" and send them out through 0.0 in industrials and NPC setup battleships, then we'd all be happy.
|
Catbutt
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:12:00 -
[74]
You will just start a bunch of new flame posts if you have players relog to a random spot.
All anyone will need to do to escape an enemy is to log as soon as they see someone that they do not want to fight. Then they could just relog and they would be at a random point in the system. They could now just warp to a gate and keep playing, instead of wondering when it would be safe to log back in.
----------------------
Professional Ore Thief and Escrow Scammer |
Fubear
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:13:00 -
[75]
This tactic, and all other tactics that involve mass logging in/out, are legal yet lame.
It is IMPOSSIBLE to detect a login trap by any means until it has been sprung, this can lead to disasterous results for slower ships, especially Freighters.
Logging off is a problem as well. Freighter pilots regularly log to escape gate camps, pod pilots log to save their implants, Dread pilots can log to save their ships (although logging back in is a whole other story), pods/shuttles/faster frigates can log to escape bubble camps (bubbles dont prevent you from warping once you log), logging in and out rapidly to randomly change safespots while waiting out aggressions, etc.
The GM's say that they cannot control when people can or cannot login, which I can agree with. I also believe that exceptions should be made for those who deliberately and intentionally exploit the log in/out game mechanics for their own personal advantage, particularly because in most cases there is absolutely nothing the victim can do about it.
|
Xelios
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:16:00 -
[76]
I've seen my share of this lame tactic, a couple weeks ago I engaged an SE Arma in a Cyclone only to have 4 more log in the second I opened fire. Just yesterday I engaged a Raven and Blackbird in a Typhoon and had 6 others log in the second I opened fire. Lame doesn't even begin to describe this "tactic" when it results in a 8 vs 1 gank (or in this case, attempted gank).
Honestly there should be a 2 minute delay in offensive module activation on login, which is only toggled if your ship disappears (which means if you crashed and log back in right away it will not apply to you). Problem solved.
_________________________________
|
Snakester
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:40:00 -
[77]
or also, u can make it so u cannot log out in claimed space which isn't under your corp/alliance's soverenty. if your ship disepears u go back to a predifined system under your sov, like a clone station u can pick what system u log back into after log out, maybe even allowing u to put your "log of clone" tied to a freindly pos, or even if the system is not your soverenty but has a freindly pos in same system, u can log out ok inside the safety of the sheilds.
just my 2 cent's worth.
<-------------------------------------------------------------->Currently Ownz a English Pub IRL¬ |
Gripen
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:43:00 -
[78]
Originally by: DukDodgerz
You answer to respond to a larger enemy force is to use a known lag inducing "exploit" (CCP wont call anything an exploit until AFTER it is fixed, or it causes their own characters a hassle in the game).
Actually, it is the lag what saved half of ASCN fleet there. I don't say that they lagged less, but it's easier to warp out in the lag than kill somebody or deploy a probe correctly.
May be we will stop this whine and try to find the way for CCP to prevent people logging off their freighters every time enemy ship shows within the range of five jumps?
|
Shinnen
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:45:00 -
[79]
Edited by: Shinnen on 30/06/2006 15:45:08
Originally by: Traxio Nacho
Originally by: TZeer
Edited by: TZeer on 30/06/2006 10:52:51
Not according to CCP/GM`s.
It`s not RA.
And it`s not important who it is.
What`s important is that this tactic is legal and not seen as an exploit.
*cough* SE/RAT *cough*?
*cough* Always is  *cough*
Shinnen
------------------
I support macros, and make drugs legal in gallente space
|
Akkarin Pagan
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:46:00 -
[80]
So using a third party program to gain an upper hand over the other players in eve is not an exploit??? So is macroing now legal too???
Anyway, the best idea I have seen so far is the one about deactivating high slots on log off. The only problem I can see is that if you log in space due to RL (it happens sometimes :() and log back in you find yourself warped into a gate camp that wasn't there when you logged off and your high slots aren't functioning :(
I understand where CCP are coming form, an it is a hard one to work out a counter to, except the show pilots logged off in space on the map, which is only a tool to help you, not an actual way of stopping this lame tactic.
Perhaps as an addition to the high slot deactivation, you sit at the emergency warp safe spot, and once the high slots are fully reactivated, you immediateley warp to within 15k of your last position before log off (like now, but with the delay of activating the high slots). Only problem here is that the hunted can use this to check local if they logged to avoid a camp or hostile pilot:(
Luckily I haven't been the victim of this type of trap yet (my own natural stupidity is all that's required to get me ganked :)). I bet the lamers who practice this tactic are the same ones who complain about ppl taking wcs into combat! It would appear that the only way to avoid the log in trap is to stab up, and when 10 ppl suddenly warp in, you warp out, which isn't a route I'd like to take (I have been known to fit stabs for guerilla fighting but not fleet ops), as in most engagements I want my low slots for tank or damage mods.
Akkarin
|
Baldour Ngarr
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:58:00 -
[81]
The simplest solution would still be:
- Logged out more than 10 minutes ago? Immobile, invulnerable, cloaked, but visible on local, for three minutes.
You can't be found and camped ready for your invulnerable timer to run out; you can't login-trap; anyone who CTD'ed and wants to get straight back in, doesn't have a problem.
I think this was Rod Blaine's idea, or at least that it was him posting about it where I first came across it. Much though I hate having to give him any credit for anything, I can't find a flaw in this one
________________________________________________
"I tried strip mining, but I lost, and it's cold flying around in space naked." |
Blighter
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 16:10:00 -
[82]
Ah. It's nice to know useing a third party program (ts/vent) to obtain an ingame advantage is not a bannable offence.
|
DukDodgerz
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 16:10:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Gripen
Originally by: DukDodgerz
You answer to respond to a larger enemy force is to use a known lag inducing "exploit" (CCP wont call anything an exploit until AFTER it is fixed, or it causes their own characters a hassle in the game).
Actually, it is the lag what saved half of ASCN fleet there. I don't say that they lagged less, but it's easier to warp out in the lag than kill somebody or deploy a probe correctly.
May be we will stop this whine and try to find the way for CCP to prevent people logging off their freighters every time enemy ship shows within the range of five jumps?
They will stop others from loggin off to avoid login traps when they stop little "P" exploiters from using said login trap
Loggin off is the only defense to the exploit RAT uses.
FRODO HAS FAILED;
BUSH HAS THE RING!!!
The Hippo mating ritual |
Gripen
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 16:34:00 -
[84]
Originally by: DukDodgerz
Originally by: Gripen
Originally by: DukDodgerz
You answer to respond to a larger enemy force is to use a known lag inducing "exploit" (CCP wont call anything an exploit until AFTER it is fixed, or it causes their own characters a hassle in the game).
Actually, it is the lag what saved half of ASCN fleet there. I don't say that they lagged less, but it's easier to warp out in the lag than kill somebody or deploy a probe correctly.
May be we will stop this whine and try to find the way for CCP to prevent people logging off their freighters every time enemy ship shows within the range of five jumps?
They will stop others from loggin off to avoid login traps when they stop little "P" exploiters from using said login trap
Loggin off is the only defense to the exploit RAT uses.
You get it wrong. Logging in is the only offense to log off exploit ASCN uses. 
|
Sensor Error
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 16:42:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Malachon Draco
Bring friends.....or do it yourself, with 10 times more people and crash the server.
Its legal after all.
CCP better think this over again or warfare could get really ugly really fast.
this has been legal for about two years... and it's kinda ugly, but not that bad.
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!
------------------------------------------
Dev Responses to common questions |
Hellspawn666
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 16:50:00 -
[86]
oh for pitys sake, logon exploits havent been actually possible for a VERY long time now. It used to be when you could have ships logon and appear right next to you straight away.
Nowadays it just isnt really doable tbh, okay you could log off a fleet to mask its presence then log on and leg it or take ona few ships but that process alone is gonna take a few minutes at least, defantly not as extream as being able to tackle someone who has jumped into an empty local.
I remember this coming up alot in the CA, and the truth behind the matter is that 99.9% of these log on tactics are people jumping in and the side that loses blaimes it on a sploit to save face. At peat time to log on a whoel fleet your lucky if you get on in 3 minutes. Hardly a rush! If anything it means ure enemy with be spread out to hell with half their players still trying to get in.
|
ElCoCo
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 16:52:00 -
[87]
So you're telling me that a GM would need more evidence than seeing 10-20 accounts logging in at the same time, around the same gate to be persuaded that they're doing a logon "trap"?
|
eLLioTT wave
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 16:57:00 -
[88]
it IS an exploit and you should PETITION every occurance you witness.
As is spamming shuttles, dropping 200 cans on a gate ect ect.
|
Xelios
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 17:01:00 -
[89]
It's not an exploit until CCP says it is, and considering it's been allowed for over a year now I don't think that'll be any time soon.
But it IS still a lame tactic, and CCP should still look into a simple way to nerf it without affecting legit logins. And TBH, the 2 minute delay in offensive modules is the best solution I've seen.
_________________________________
|
Sochin
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 17:14:00 -
[90]
Logon traps havent been effective since they implemented warpoffs years ago. 99% of the instances people think someone has done a logon trap they were just the victim of a well-sprung aggro-trap, with hostiles waiting in the next system to jump in.
I've been accussed of logon traps probably a hundred times, and I've only actually done it once (ordered to way back in Curse Alliance). It didnt even work that time, either.
Nemo me impune lacessit
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |