|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:26:00 -
[1]
"Due to the ever-changing dynamics involved with maintaining a virtual, persistent world, it can sometimes be difficult or confusing to determine what might be considered an exploit."
And where is the intended mechanic of agression timers documented by ccp?
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:43:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Ctharth on 17/02/2007 08:40:27 Yes. but if something is documented in the form of a dev explaining how it should work or a general information about it. no one really knows how it is supossed to work. And if no one knows how it is supposed to work it cant be classified as an exploit.
All you are doing are guessing on game mechanichs. Show me the dev post or CCP site that clearly stes how it should work. and then you have documented it.
Until then it is your opinion. and in no way does the eula say if the general public opinion considder it an exploit it will be considdered one.
I aggree that if CCP decides to go out and state that this is an exploit then it will from now on be an exploit. But to my knowledge: there are no documentation on the acussations of an exploit in the form of official messages stating how the agression timer should work therefore there is no exploit.
If it isnt documented. it hasnt happened. if it hasnt happened grab a bisquit and wipe your eyes.
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:46:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Gallente Caliente
Wrong. You're a fool if you think CCP intends for people to die while logged off and having no knowledge that they've been agressed. That's this scenario, what are you talking about now?
Think being the main word here.. its all guesses show me documentation and stop whining.
So far no proof of it being an exploit has been posted only personal opinions!
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 09:26:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Zrevak Ashek
This is only your supposed interpretations of the wording. Nothing more! Being the BOB lover that you are, you will continue to twist anything in order to come out on top in this argument, and I predict Rightous Fury will follow you
And on the other side all bob haters will do the same. Listen to dekiri he put it much more smoothly than I. But I have to say he also interprets it as an exploit. which is again personal interpratation of how the game should work. What really would be nice was a documented statement!!! (I have seen none of these as of yet(and normally the acusers bear the burden of proof and the accused is innocent until proven guilty but that is offcourse only if you want a fair game :)))
None has been seen as of yet. and before itended mechaninchs are documented it is all a question about interpretation. and interpratation of the eula and personal feeling about how it should be are worth b...kiss-
It all comes down to: if there indeed is documented statements saying that it is not intended this way- its an exploit. if not. it is not an exploit. It can be made one for sure yeah. but since it hasnt been documented yet this is of now not an exploit and bob/ spy whoever cant be banned or whatever.(and titan wont be reimbursed)personal feelings are not and newer will be a source of documentation! I¦m sure that someone that accidently killed a boy in a car accident wont get put into the great sleep just because the parrents of that boy hates the man and considders it a murder.
iF or when this gets clearly defined an exploit ppl doing this will sufffer the consequences. But not before. Until then.. its just part of the game.... oh yeah the game!!!
and if you dont like the game just log into RL and grind some xp there.
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 10:02:00 -
[5]
Originally by: dalman
Originally by: Erika Hulme The kill looks well within the game mechanics, I can't see why we have 20+ pages of useless whining.
Any half decent low sec pirate knows that a safespot-ed and logged off freighter traveling with a webbing corpmate to speedup the warp can be easily probed down and killed due to friendly fire aggression time from the web. And this is just a common knowledge example.
Are smartbombs meant to damage stuff inside a POS bubble? If not it was obviously not a legit kill (if the titan was inside which is a bit of a problem with it's size).
Otherwise it's well within the game mechanics, but it's also BoB sinking to a new low.
screenshots shows it was outside of the shield
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 11:08:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Kaylana Syi
I'd say 75% of this game hasn't been documented. Your interpretation of the situation is flawed. The steps that BoB took to assassinate the Titan is not in question. They deserve every bit of credit for the work they put into geting things 'into place.' Its no different than the GHSC event that shook EVE in the scale and depth it took.
However, what is in question is how the final blow was struck. Every ounce of infiltration that leads up to this kill is, in my oppinion, made null and void by an exploitation in a game mechanic. Should the kill stand? Probably. Should it be the foundation of aggression warning for normal application exiting? Absolutely!
If you can't kill someone that wants to exit the game legitimately within 2 minutes then you don't deserve the kill.
Well the code allowed it so some sort of alternate documentation is lying around.
And stating that 75% of eve is not documented depends on your interpretation of documentation. Documentation in my world is every official post description agent info etc. given out. And in that sense things such as forum posts dev blog, known issues are documentation. and as soon as things get in these or arent working according to those its an exploit.
But no such violation has to my knowledge taken place.. I am very flexible to give in because I dont really see this as the most honourable kill. but its very well within game mechanics.
As soon as you direct me to item info, dev post, dev blog or anything remoptely connected to ccp I will be happy to classify it an exploit as well. But before ccp defines it as an not intended game mechaninc its simply is allowed.
btw. agression warning before logout nice idea. Check logs before logout nice idea. drop out of gang warp to safe cloak and then log ot... maybe the rigth thing to do.
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 11:40:00 -
[7]
Hehe well another interesting question came up here. Sportsmanship...
Well sportsmanship are good in game eve is a game and hence sportmanship is good in eve.
But looking at modern society wars are no longer about sportmanship. You stick to the geneve convention.. well mostly at least. and then you try to send in covert soldiers to take out strategic targets when they least expect it.
There are wars in eve. And if you focus on the war part well what goes RL goes eve. so if wars are part of eve. whyshouldnt war tactics be part of eve?
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 11:43:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Malachon Draco
Originally by: Ctharth Edited by: Ctharth on 17/02/2007 11:36:56 Hehe well another interesting question came up here. Sportsmanship...
Well sportsmanship are good in game eve is a game and hence sportmanship is good in eve.
But looking at modern society wars are no longer about sportmanship. You stick to the geneve convention.. well mostly at least. and then you try to send in covert soldiers to take out strategic targets when they least expect it.
There are wars in eve. And if you focus on the war part well what goes RL goes eve. so if wars are part of eve. whyshouldnt war tactics be part of eve?
I do in no way think its honourable or anything... but its efective.
Its a ******* game. What is so hard to understand about wanting a little sportmanship in a ******* game?
Why so upset.. I said it was a game... and therefore some would make think of sportsmanship(which I am totally supporting) but other see this as a game with wars and war tactics in it...
So chill down its a game..
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 11:57:00 -
[9]
Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 17/02/2007 11:48:49 It's actually fun to see that whatever we are saying and showing from the EULA, Edde Bebbi are still defending Band Of Cheaters, whatever we say.
Lets just petition this ass for beeing an idiot that only trolls and whine + are defending BoC when the EULA clearly shows that Edde Bebbi is wrong in all ways.
He's only here to make peoples angry.
EULA refers to the general rules in order to make use of it game mechanics should be used in a way it was not intended. since there not yet has been one prrof that this was not intended the paragraphs in the EULA doesnt mean a thing. The moment a gm or dev says otherwise the eula comes into play
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.18 12:05:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Internet Knight
Originally by: Arlenna Molatov A Dev posted HIMSELF..CCP DEV...Bob did NOTHING wrong. Everything they did was in line with the game mechanics.and NOTHING was an exploit.
Please point me to this post.
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=477648
|
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.18 12:50:00 -
[11]
Originally by: NightmareX If you only could have readed this: Then you will see that was to gain an unfair advantage over the titan pilot since he didn't got ANY indications on that he had been agressed, so therefor he logged off.
Yes he could probably have seen the damage if he have had the damage messages on, but if he choose to have it of, then it's not his problem anyways, since it will reduce the lag for him.
I know you have checked that CCP post and even now your questioning if it was an exploit. Sorry. its not... it was allowed. You could also argue that the pilot could do a lot more for his safety before logout. he didnt. and hence he only got himself to blame. and btw.
He could have used proper procedure. He didnt its obvius. Checked his dmg log - dont know this for sure but couldnt d2 have a thing to dock it in at the POS?
As the Eula so finely states:
Players have the responsibility of understanding how the game works and keeping themselves informed about changes to the game in order to comprehend what is deemed as an exploit.
This paragraph also indicates that the pilot of the titan should have kept himself aware of the mechanism of logout. it was his responsibility to do it rigth!
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.18 12:55:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Stitcher
Originally by: Ctharth
Bob: Bob did nothing wrong. it could be discussed wether it was honourable or not but they stayed within the boundries of the game. Bob has always played the game to the limits so this was to expect when the war was declared.
D2: Lied about having a passive targeter used so that it would seem that bob broke game rules. (what are the rules about relaying false information to gms?) and thankgodfully lost their titan with only themselves to blame since they didnt use proper logoff procedures.
OR, D2 just had it wrong. People make mistakes.
Hell, a lot of people thought it was the can bug at first. Then the passive targetter, long before D2 even made the announcement. Both those groups had it wrong. Were they lying? no. they just didn't have all of the information.
Yes I totally aggree here I just had to pur it on the edge to underline what I said. But you are rigth. I will change the statement to "D2 relayed false information. " which removes the accusation of lying.
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.18 13:18:00 -
[13]
Originally by: NightmareX
Dude, why is it NOT an exploit when the EULA clearly is saying that? The Cov Ops pilot got an advantage over the titan pilot, and then the titan pilot logged off. And he couldn't do a frack thing to save the ship either after that, so why is not not against what the EULA is saying on what i pointed from the EULA earlier?
And when i'm logging off with no enemies around me, i'm not gonna use 30 mins to check a billion different things to be sure i'm safe.
And you are saying that he could have checked his security before he logged off?, are you mad or something, he sat in the POS for over 3 hours without beeing agressed, so he WAS safe. So i'm sure he was pretty secure before he loged off with no enemies around him.
And i'm gonna say it again, the agression timer IS NOT meant to be used in this way. And for those who don't understand that better leave this game, since your playing the wrong game then.
Its not an exploit because: - a ccp employee says so - Because everyone else has the same option. that means it can be done by anyone. - the system wasnt clear of enemies, there was a spy. spies are allowed. - sitting 3 hours in a POS and considder it safe. is not proper precaution. (follow a better procedure next time. - Because you think this isnt how it supposed to work. Doesnt mean it isnt how it is supposed to work. I refer to the post of the CCP employee.
Simply saying it was unfair doesnt make it an exploit. I¦m sure 100 ppl gets killed in eve every day because they meet a buble camp are lagged out and killed before even noticing. That doesnt make it an exploit. but is an advantage as well.
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.18 14:59:00 -
[14]
Ok apparrently all at ccp is cheaters because they have had some individuals cheating. So since you are from a country with some liars thieves and murderers you are a lieing murdering thief. get it???
official release says it legit. Hence its legit
Calling people cheaters etc. wont make it the other way. and it certainly doesnt mean its true!
This is CCPs game. they have jurisdiction. you play under their rules. if you dont like their rules play something else. Dont pester the boards with undocumented accusations.
And personal belief is not and have never been proof. (it doesnt matter how you think it should work its how ccp think it should work that matters in this case.) Your belief migth start a change. but it will be a change from now and on. Doing otherwise would be like lowering the speed limit and sign out tickets to all the broke the new speed limit before it was even implemented.
And yes you can experience corp theft etc. while logged off.
I get everything your saying. but there is obviuosly people that dont get my points.
Personal interpratation of events and mechanics wont ever be documentation. CCP posts will...
Eve is not fair. RL is not fair. Hell ¦m not fair. but the solution to EVes fairness is easy... dont play.. the solution to RL is much less desireable.
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.18 18:10:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Goumindong
How many times is this going to come up...
"Because everyone else has the same option" is not an arguement as to whether or not something is an exploit. If there were a bug that allowed you to use a module to target through POS shields using said bug to target through a POS shield would still be an exploit.
But wait, both sides can use it! Yes they can, both sides can exploit, and you can ban both sides.
The position of "exploit" is not that it is "unfair", but that it uses a game mechanic in a way that it was not intended to gain an advantage that should not exist.
I.E. "Its unfair in a manner that is not intended by the creation of the game mechanic, and using that mechanic to specifically avoid the typical options available to you"
Cut that argument of the list and read the others then . it was not an exploit refer CCP post saying so or my earlier post for more argumentation.
This point was brougth up in relation to the definition as an exploit being an advantage. But I cant considder it an unfair advantage when all players have the same advantage. (remember its within approved game mechanichs)
|
|
|
|