Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 34 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Edde Bebbi
Amarr The Griffin
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:21:00 -
[751]
Originally by: Milena Marich
Originally by: Edde Bebbi
Originally by: Milena Marich CCP... This IS an obvious exploit, absolutely disgusting from BoD forge.
Nice try alt. How is it an exploit?
Being shot by a "friendly" one second before you log off safely inside a POS is completely the exploit of game mechanics.
Why? also how do you know it was 1 second? And it WASNT inside a pos
|
Righteous Fury
Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:22:00 -
[752]
Edited by: Righteous Fury on 17/02/2007 08:19:37
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Edde Bebbi I've read it 10 times, and I've applied 4 years of knowledge of dealing with CCP at every level. You are trying to say that metagaming = exploiting, and that is simply retarded. If the functioning was all intended, then there CAN BE NO EXPLOIT.
Just as instajumps were metagaming but wernt an exploit because warping to a BM is supposed to work and BMing 15km off a gate is supposed to work.
you cant just say READ THE EULA when it and history supports what i am saying. Make an argument or stfu
No you haven't readed it a single time. Just read what i just wrote on the reply before this.
If i log off when there is no enemies around me, and don't have an agression timer from an ENEMY, and not friendly shoot, then the ship should not be killed whatever you do.
It doesn't get simpler than that.
So let me get this straight.
You're saying that, simply becuse of this incident, that friendlies should no longer be able to aggro each other? Ever since the pvp timer was implemented, every player on player action regardless of standings or affiliation caused an aggression timer. Anyone versed in the ways of 0.0 knows this, and knows that even just messing around with corp members at a gate or safespot could potentially lead to their death.
Why exactly should this mechanic be changed now?
|
NightmareX
Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:23:00 -
[753]
Originally by: Edde Bebbi
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Edde Bebbi
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Edde Bebbi I've read it 10 times, and I've applied 4 years of knowledge of dealing with CCP at every level. You are trying to say that metagaming = exploiting, and that is simply retarded. If the functioning was all intended, then there CAN BE NO EXPLOIT.
Just as instajumps were metagaming but wernt an exploit because warping to a BM is supposed to work and BMing 15km off a gate is supposed to work.
you cant just say READ THE EULA when it and history supports what i am saying. Make an argument or stfu
No you haven't readed it a single time. Just read what i just wrote on the reply before this.
If i log off when there is no enemies around me, and don't have an agression timer from an ENEMY, and not friendly shoot, then the ship should not be killed whatever you do.
It doesn't get simpler than that.
Where does it say that? Where does it say that seemingly FRIENDLIES cant give you an aggression timer? Whats next? Spys are against the EULA too? Cant do damage to + standings ships?
You are just making **** up
Well whatever you say, same peoples in the same corp / alliance should not get an agression timer by a friendly shot. It's not how the agression timer should work.
According to who? You? Its always worked this way and it was implemented this way.
What you are basically saying is YOU think the mechanics should change, and therefore making use of them as they are is an exploit. Please feel free to explain otherwise.
Noooo no no no no, it was not implented to the game to work in this way.
Read again what's written in THIS reply.
The EULA is clearly saying that this tactic is against the EULA, is it hard to understand?
Infinitus Odium - We Are The Bringers Of Hatred |
NightmareX
Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:25:00 -
[754]
Originally by: Righteous Fury So let me get this straight.
You're saying that, simply becuse of this incident, that friendlies should no longer be able to aggro each other? Ever since the pvp timer was implemented, every player on player action regardless of standings or affiliation caused an aggression timer. Anyone versed in the ways of 0.0 knows this, and knows that even just messing around with corp members at a gate or safespot could potentially lead to their death.
Why exactly should this mechanic be changed now?
The agression timer was implented to aviod peoples to log off WHILE in combat. And was the Titan in combat? nope
Infinitus Odium - We Are The Bringers Of Hatred |
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:26:00 -
[755]
"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?
|
Righteous Fury
Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:29:00 -
[756]
Edited by: Righteous Fury on 17/02/2007 08:26:02
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Righteous Fury So let me get this straight.
You're saying that, simply becuse of this incident, that friendlies should no longer be able to aggro each other? Ever since the pvp timer was implemented, every player on player action regardless of standings or affiliation caused an aggression timer. Anyone versed in the ways of 0.0 knows this, and knows that even just messing around with corp members at a gate or safespot could potentially lead to their death.
Why exactly should this mechanic be changed now?
The agression timer was implented to aviod peoples to log off WHILE in combat. And was the Titan in combat? nope
You can argue the reasoning behind why the pvp timer was implemented all you'd really like, but the reasoning means nothing. The only thing that matters is how the rules work. This is the facts of the matter:
The pvp timer has been in game for at least a year now. In that time, regardless of when combat/agressive action occured, a pilot was required to remain in space for 15 more minutes without being agressed or acting aggressively in order to disappear after logging out. In that whole time, every single person in Eve learned that just activating your guns ONCE or being webbed by a bored corpmate would flag you.
At what point did these facts change in the past 24 hours? BoB shot the titan, the titan pilot apparently did not notice, logged - and then, by the rules DEFINED by the code of the game, stayed in space because he was flagged.
There is absolutely no trickery here, but feel free to show me where I'm flawed.
|
w0rmy
Intensive CareBearz
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:29:00 -
[757]
A *** tactic indeed.
If ya cant beat them in game, wait till they log off!!
|
Zrevak Ashek
Beagle Corp
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:30:00 -
[758]
The BOB lovers will do anything in their power to twist this incident in their favour. And who could blame them?
The BOB haters, in return, will do the same ..obviously;P
|
Edde Bebbi
Amarr The Griffin
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:31:00 -
[759]
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Edde Bebbi
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Edde Bebbi
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Edde Bebbi I've read it 10 times, and I've applied 4 years of knowledge of dealing with CCP at every level. You are trying to say that metagaming = exploiting, and that is simply retarded. If the functioning was all intended, then there CAN BE NO EXPLOIT.
Just as instajumps were metagaming but wernt an exploit because warping to a BM is supposed to work and BMing 15km off a gate is supposed to work.
you cant just say READ THE EULA when it and history supports what i am saying. Make an argument or stfu
No you haven't readed it a single time. Just read what i just wrote on the reply before this.
If i log off when there is no enemies around me, and don't have an agression timer from an ENEMY, and not friendly shoot, then the ship should not be killed whatever you do.
It doesn't get simpler than that.
Where does it say that? Where does it say that seemingly FRIENDLIES cant give you an aggression timer? Whats next? Spys are against the EULA too? Cant do damage to + standings ships?
You are just making **** up
Well whatever you say, same peoples in the same corp / alliance should not get an agression timer by a friendly shot. It's not how the agression timer should work.
According to who? You? Its always worked this way and it was implemented this way.
What you are basically saying is YOU think the mechanics should change, and therefore making use of them as they are is an exploit. Please feel free to explain otherwise.
Noooo no no no no, it was not implented to the game to work in this way.
Read again what's written in THIS reply.
The EULA is clearly saying that this tactic is against the EULA, is it hard to understand?
Listen to me, I will speak slowly The EULA defines the an exploit as "to use the game mechanics in such a way as they were not intended".
If friendlies being able to activate the PVP timer was INTENDED, then there is no exploit
Nothing you or anyone else has said, or anything in the EULA, states that the PvP timer is NOT intended to apply to people in the same corp or alliance. In fact the devs embracing of spies eg in the GHSC affair show that they ACCEPT that people in the same corp/alliance may be hostile to each other.
you need to PROVE that friendly-aggro-timer ISNT intended. If this is the case, then using it knowingly is an exploit. But it IS intended
|
Great Guardian
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:34:00 -
[760]
Something what I call clear exploit of garbage game mechanics.
" I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Hah! Attack ships on fire, off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams, glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments.... will |
|
NightmareX
Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:36:00 -
[761]
Originally by: Edde Bebbi Listen to me, I will speak slowly The EULA defines the an exploit as "to use the game mechanics in such a way as they were not intended".
If friendlies being able to activate the PVP timer was INTENDED, then there is no exploit
Nothing you or anyone else has said, or anything in the EULA, states that the PvP timer is NOT intended to apply to people in the same corp or alliance. In fact the devs embracing of spies eg in the GHSC affair show that they ACCEPT that people in the same corp/alliance may be hostile to each other.
you need to PROVE that friendly-aggro-timer ISNT intended. If this is the case, then using it knowingly is an exploit. But it IS intended
12.1 What is an exploit?
The common definition of an exploit is ôto use the game mechanics in such a way as they were not intended for the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage over other players.ö 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.
Though every effort is made to avoid glitches that enable exploits to be used, they are occasionally discovered. 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. Those who are charged with employing the use of exploits will be reprimanded, which may include temporary suspension or a permanent ban of the account. Professing ignorance that you didnÆt know you were using an exploit will not prevent the enforcement of this rule.
Well it doesn't say anything exactly about the agression timer, but the way D2 lost their Titan is after what's written under "12.1 What is an exploit?" an exploit.
Infinitus Odium - We Are The Bringers Of Hatred |
putukas
Enterprise Estonia Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:38:00 -
[762]
Read what you are saying!!!
Friendly fire is exploit and against EULA Aggro timer from aggro is exploit and against EULA
Are you realy so retarded???
|
Edde Bebbi
Amarr The Griffin
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:39:00 -
[763]
Originally by: NightmareX
12.1 What is an exploit?
The common definition of an exploit is ôto use the game mechanics in such a way as they were not intended for the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage over other players.ö 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.
Though every effort is made to avoid glitches that enable exploits to be used, they are occasionally discovered. 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. Those who are charged with employing the use of exploits will be reprimanded, which may include temporary suspension or a permanent ban of the account. Professing ignorance that you didnÆt know you were using an exploit will not prevent the enforcement of this rule.
Well it doesn't say anything exactly about the agression timer, but the way D2 lost their Titan is after what's written under "12.1 What is an exploit?" an exploit.
Look, I know from dealings with you in the past that you have trouble with logical reasoning, but this is ridiculous. You have EVEN BOLDED the part that proves you wrong.
To be an exploit in that definition an exploit is to "use the game mechanics in such a way as they were not intended for the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage over other players"
The point is, EVERYTHING BOB did WAS an intended purpose of the game mechanics and therefore the advantage ISNT UNFAIR.
|
NightmareX
Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:39:00 -
[764]
Originally by: putukas Read what you are saying!!!
Friendly fire is exploit and against EULA Aggro timer from aggro is exploit and against EULA
Are you realy so retarded???
No i'm saying that a friendly fire should not cause an agression timer
Infinitus Odium - We Are The Bringers Of Hatred |
Gallente Caliente
Anti-BoB Flash Mob
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:40:00 -
[765]
Originally by: Edde Bebbi
I've read it 10 times, and I've applied 4 years of knowledge of dealing with CCP at every level. You are trying to say that metagaming = exploiting, and that is simply retarded. If the functioning was all intended, then there CAN BE NO EXPLOIT.
Just as instajumps were metagaming but wernt an exploit because warping to a BM is supposed to work and BMing 15km off a gate is supposed to work.
you cant just say READ THE EULA when it and history supports what i am saying. Make an argument or stfu
Keep reading it then, CCP is who determines what an exploit is, not whether or not its possible in game. I redirect you to my post here. Anyone with any common sense can see what constitutes an exploit. CCP does and they have yet to address this scenario. However using how they've addressed other possible yet dirty scenarios, its a very safe assumption that this is an exploit. ----------------------------------------------- www.nobob.info |
Kaleeb
S.Y.N.D.R.O.M.E.
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:41:00 -
[766]
Congrats on the kill bob and good luck in the war D2. This type of play isnt a good advert for eve tbh. It's a brilliant plan by bob and bob being bob will always use every means to win.
Pvp in this game is at an all time (low player skill) imo, hope ccp sorts these issues its alot of isk to lose on a technicality
|
putukas
Enterprise Estonia Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:42:00 -
[767]
Edited by: putukas on 17/02/2007 08:39:14
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: putukas Read what you are saying!!!
Friendly fire is exploit and against EULA Aggro timer from aggro is exploit and against EULA
Are you realy so retarded???
No i'm saying that a friendly fire should not cause an agression timer
Yeah it maybe shouldnt but it does atm and everybody know that and its intended to make agrotimer. So there is no exploit. Write about your ideas in "Features and Ideas Discussion" forum. Maybe they change it in the future.
|
Righteous Fury
Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:42:00 -
[768]
Originally by: NightmareX Well it doesn't say anything exactly about the agression timer, but the way D2 lost their Titan is after what's written under "12.1 What is an exploit?" an exploit.
You are simply arguing in circles now, without actually saying anything new.
Game mechanics were not modified in any way to give advantages. Mechanics that have been in use for over a year now were used in a new, inventive way - which is oddly enough not an exploit.
If using game mechanics in new ways was considered an exploit, Eve would not have changed since the day it was released. The new nano trend would be a bannable offense, jet can mining, gank-fitted armageddons, bump-setup ships, et al.
If you want to cling so tightly to your precious bit of the EULA, you might want to consider what other ramifications your narrowminded interpretation of it would bring.
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:43:00 -
[769]
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.
|
Edde Bebbi
Amarr The Griffin
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:43:00 -
[770]
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: putukas Read what you are saying!!!
Friendly fire is exploit and against EULA Aggro timer from aggro is exploit and against EULA
Are you realy so retarded???
No i'm saying that a friendly fire should not cause an agression timer
YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THAT OPINION
But CCP CLEARLY think otherwise!
SO IT IS NOT AN EXPLOIT.
Jesus ******* christ you are so dense.
|
|
Gallente Caliente
Anti-BoB Flash Mob
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:43:00 -
[771]
Originally by: Edde Bebbi
The point is, EVERYTHING BOB did WAS an intended purpose of the game mechanics and therefore the advantage ISNT UNFAIR.
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? ----------------------------------------------- www.nobob.info |
Edde Bebbi
Amarr The Griffin
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:44:00 -
[772]
Originally by: Gallente Caliente
Originally by: Edde Bebbi
I've read it 10 times, and I've applied 4 years of knowledge of dealing with CCP at every level. You are trying to say that metagaming = exploiting, and that is simply retarded. If the functioning was all intended, then there CAN BE NO EXPLOIT.
Just as instajumps were metagaming but wernt an exploit because warping to a BM is supposed to work and BMing 15km off a gate is supposed to work.
you cant just say READ THE EULA when it and history supports what i am saying. Make an argument or stfu
Keep reading it then, CCP is who determines what an exploit is, not whether or not its possible in game. I redirect you to my post here. Anyone with any common sense can see what constitutes an exploit. CCP does and they have yet to address this scenario. However using how they've addressed other possible yet dirty scenarios, its a very safe assumption that this is an exploit.
Why?
|
Edde Bebbi
Amarr The Griffin
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:44:00 -
[773]
Originally by: Gallente Caliente
Originally by: Edde Bebbi
The point is, EVERYTHING BOB did WAS an intended purpose of the game mechanics and therefore the advantage ISNT UNFAIR.
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?
Damage logs? If he had them turned of its his fault : If a bob inty had done the damage he would have been equally unaware.
|
Righteous Fury
Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:46:00 -
[774]
Originally by: Gallente Caliente
Originally by: Edde Bebbi
The point is, EVERYTHING BOB did WAS an intended purpose of the game mechanics and therefore the advantage ISNT UNFAIR.
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?
Do you think that, really? Because if thats true, I'll email you a list of all the npcers, cowardly combat pilots, and inept wartargets that I have killed over the years who logged off with an aggro timer and didn't know it.
You're a fool if you seriously belive that every time someone is killed while they are logged off is an exploit.
|
Ctharth
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:46:00 -
[775]
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!
|
Nessa Aldeen
Baltic StarFleet Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:47:00 -
[776]
Thats sneaky BOB..but that spy really did his job.
|
Gallente Caliente
Anti-BoB Flash Mob
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:48:00 -
[777]
Originally by: Edde Bebbi
Originally by: Gallente Caliente
Originally by: Edde Bebbi
The point is, EVERYTHING BOB did WAS an intended purpose of the game mechanics and therefore the advantage ISNT UNFAIR.
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?
Damage logs? If he had them turned of its his fault : If a bob inty had done the damage he would have been equally unaware.
How do you see a damage log when you've hit the escape button and are about to hit quit? And IN THIS SCENARIO there's no way a bob inty could've done it thanks to the POS he was parked at. As I said before CCP has the final say, however seeing how they have treated other circumstances (wreck shooting), this is obviously an abuse of a game mechanic. ----------------------------------------------- www.nobob.info |
Mortalitus Domino
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:50:00 -
[778]
Back on topic...
D2, good luck replacing the Titan, whether it be reimbursed or rebuilt. May it bring you many more BoB kill mails in the future.
|
Zrevak Ashek
Beagle Corp
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:53:00 -
[779]
The point is that this is a dubious exloit of a gamemechanic intended for the purpous of punishing players for logging off in the middle of a fight to save their pod or ship.
This was NOT the goddamned case with WOTANKINS Titan. Far from it! ..and THERE lies the goddamned exploit! Is it so goddamned hard to understand, you frackin morons?
|
NightmareX
Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.17 08:56:00 -
[780]
Originally by: Zrevak Ashek The point is that this is a dubious exloit of a gamemechanic intended for the purpous of punishing players for logging off in the middle of a fight to save their pod or ship.
This was NOT the goddamned case with WOTANKINS Titan. Far from it! ..and THERE lies the goddamned exploit! Is it so goddamned hard to understand, you frackin morons?
Aye, i'm trying to explain the noobcakes that it's exactly like that, but do they get it? nope
Infinitus Odium - We Are The Bringers Of Hatred |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 34 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |