Whilst shooting WT PCOs that has just left RF the WTs swapped ownership to a neutral corp causing fleet to take sec hits and GCC for all PCOs that were destroyed


Hoping CCP will reply and confirm whether or not this is an exploit, it seems something that should have been spotted during testing.


If this is not an exploit and you are unable to defeat a hostile fleet you outnumber 3:1 on caps then you can feel free to troll your enemies by swapping ownership.

If this is not an exploit and you are unable to defeat a hostile fleet you outnumber 3:1 on caps then you can feel free to troll your enemies by swapping ownership.

Whilst shooting WT PCOs that has just left RF the WTs swapped ownership to a neutral corp causing fleet to take sec hits and GCC for all PCOs that were destroyed


Hoping CCP will reply and confirm whether or not this is an exploit, it seems something that should have been spotted during testing.


If this is not an exploit and you are unable to defeat a hostile fleet you outnumber 3:1 on caps then you can feel free to troll your enemies by swapping ownership.

Seeing as how changing corps in space/mid-fight etc is an exploit, i'd imagine this will be looked at in the same way.

This isn't exactly the same thing, though. Changing corps in space/mid-flight is an exploit because you can get someone CONCORDed because of it. CONCORD does not operate in low-sec and the only penalty you have is a relatively minor sec-hit which can be repaired in less than an hour.

This isn't exactly the same thing, though. Changing corps in space/mid-flight is an exploit because you can get someone CONCORDed because of it. CONCORD does not operate in low-sec and the only penalty you have is a relatively minor sec-hit which can be repaired in less than an hour.

Seeing as how changing corps in space/mid-fight etc is an exploit, i'd imagine this will be looked at in the same way.

Ya bitchin about sec hits killing **** in lowsec, are you a carebear or sumthin' or iz da big bad nasty man gettin a bad weputation bwowing stuff up?

**** me, everything is a exploit when someone takes it in the ring around here. HTFU and go rattin' when ya finished.

There are plenty of reasons why somebody wouldn't want to take sec hits or GCC in lowsec and it doesn't make them carebears, I am guessing you don't have much experience with low sec though.

Before you choose to take that "you lack of expertise" path, perhaps you need to explain why you bother with wardec at all if the intent is to pop their POCO's??

Perhaps the lack of expertise is on your part - you're applying highsec wankerism with lowsec shenanigans. It simply ain't neccessary.

GCC is temporary and sec loss is a marginal repair job. Been a "feature" of lowsec for sooooo long it's not funny. This is all a big deal over squat tbh.

EDIT: If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times. It's always an exploit when things don't go the way people want. Ya got outplayed squib. Deal with it.

The more and more I look at it the more and more this is a very ab-usable mechanic the way it currently exists.

I'll start by saying that this isn't a bug, it sounds like everything is functioning ok.

However I will raise this with the team to see if this is valid gameplay or if this is considered an exploit and report back here.

However I will raise this with the team to see if this is valid gameplay or if this is considered an exploit and report back here.

^^ Talk about jumping to conclusions. Let me give you a hint:

I'll start by saying that this isn't a bug, it sounds like everything is functioning ok.

I'll start by saying that this isn't a bug, it sounds like everything is functioning ok.

However I will raise this with the team to see if this is valid gameplay or if this is considered an exploit and report back here.

Ya bitchin about sec hits killing **** in lowsec, are you a carebear or sumthin' or iz da big bad nasty man gettin a bad weputation bwowing stuff up?

**** me, everything is a exploit when someone takes it in the ring around here. HTFU and go rattin' when ya finished.

Well I don't see how intended game mechanics can be an exploit.


Definition: An exploit is a software program that takes advantage of a bug, defect or glitch in another software program so that it executes in a way that the original writer did not intend. Usually this is done for malicious purposes.


I don't think you can exploit something if that is its intended function.

Either

A - The system is working fine, and everything you do with it is legit

or

B - There is a fault with the system, and abusing this fault for personal gain is an exploit

I'll start by saying that this isn't a bug, it sounds like everything is functioning ok.

However I will raise this with the team to see if this is valid gameplay or if this is considered an exploit and report back here.

Sounds simple enough to fix, in order for it to be transferred it has to be at 100% health and most defiantly not in post-reinforced mode.

I can see valid reasons for people wanting to transfer ownership after it has been put into reinforce so instead we might just guard against transferring when it has been attacked recently.

But like I said, I'm not giving any answers just yet because it is a Sunday and I need to talk with a few people first.

I'll start by saying that this isn't a bug, it sounds like everything is functioning ok.

However I will raise this with the team to see if this is valid gameplay or if this is considered an exploit and report back here.

You can't call this an exploit. It's an oversight. There was a failure to determine all the potential ripple effects these structures would introduce.

Well, now the ripples are reaching the shore.

Whilst shooting WT PCOs that had just left RF the WTs swapped ownership to a neutral corp causing fleet to take sec hits and GCC for all PCOs that were destroyed. If they had been even more cunning they would have changed it to a FW corp forcing us to take standing hits as well.

CCP post in this thread now confirms intended game design, so here is the helpful guide to decreasing hostile standings and security status. Remember all you need is to get one pilot -5 and their logi chain will GCC during normal combat so these security losses do matter.

Apparently although intended mechanics this may somehow still be an exploit so until we have further confirmation use this guide at your own risk.


FW players here is how to make a hostile fleet take a standing hit, security status loss and GCC if they want to destroy your structures


1. Set up PCO and use as normal, ideally in hostile space to gain maximum attention


2. Set up an alt corp in the hostile miltia (you probably already have one or two spare anyway)


3. Wait for the eve mail saying the PCO has been reinforced


4. When the hostile fleet start shooting it at after RF ends you swap ownership to the hostile militia corp and watch them all (including logi because CCP still haven't fixed that bug) take a large standing hit, security status loss and GCC.

You can either do this early on in the fight and give them the option to disengage or try and do it last minute, the WT red star remains on the targeted item so they probably won't notice in time.


5. Rinse and repeat untill hostile players start running out of standings.


6. ????


7. Profit and laugh at CCP's complete ineptitude at game design and continued neglect for FW

If you intend to keep the possibility of switching ownership while it's under attack, then in my opinion you absolutely *must* prioritise fixing of the FW standings loss bug. It's been with us for more than a year anyway which is Not Good, and with this mechanic it has become extremely exploitable as noted above.

Sounds simple enough to fix, in order for it to be transferred it has to be at 100% health and most defiantly not in post-reinforced mode.

1. Set up PCO and use as normal, ideally in hostile space to gain maximum attention


2. Set up an alt corp in the hostile miltia (you probably already have one or two spare anyway)


3. Wait for the eve mail saying the PCO has been reinforced


4. When the hostile fleet start shooting it at after RF ends you swap ownership to the hostile militia corp and watch them all (including logi because CCP still haven't fixed that bug) take a large standing hit, security status loss and GCC.

You can either do this early on in the fight and give them the option to disengage or try and do it last minute, the WT red star remains on the targeted item so they probably won't notice in time.


5. Rinse and repeat untill hostile players start running out of standings.


6. ????


7. Profit and laugh at CCP's complete ineptitude at game design and continued neglect for FW

Ok so an update on this, we are going to deny transferring ownership while the customs office is being attacked using the normal 15 min cool down on aggression. The real problem here is that players can be tricked into taking a security status hit or entering into combat outside of a wardec without realizing it.

Transferring ownership after a POCO has been put into reinforce for example is still valid and while this does allow owners to force an aggressor who they are at war with to take a security hit they will still be able to decide before hand if they want to do this and not unknowingly engage an owner they are not at war with.

I have hassled people today so that we can get this onto TQ this week but that will ultimately depend on QA checking it so fingers crossed.

I'll start by saying that this isn't a bug, it sounds like everything is functioning ok.

However I will raise this with the team to see if this is valid gameplay or if this is considered an exploit and report back here.

Ok so an update on this, we are going to deny transferring ownership while the customs office is being attacked using the normal 15 min cool down on aggression. The real problem here is that players can be tricked into taking a security status hit or entering into combat outside of a wardec without realizing it.

Transferring ownership after a POCO has been put into reinforce for example is still valid and while this does allow owners to force an aggressor who they are at war with to take a security hit they will still be able to decide before hand if they want to do this and not unknowingly engage an owner they are not at war with.

I have hassled people today so that we can get this onto TQ this week but that will ultimately depend on QA checking it so fingers crossed.

Pick one, CCP. Either it's valid to change corps in space in a way that people are not fully aware of the status of everything, or it's not.

edit: yay for logic prevailing. Also, i should have read the last page before replying. Still, my response to the initial dev response stands.

So can we infer then that if someone keeps the PCO under fire for the duration of it being reinforced, that they can prevent it changing hands?

(note: I'm far from expert on the mechanics of reinforced mode)

Not during shield reinforcement because you cannot target it to aggress it.

that will ultimately depend on QA checking it

Thank you for this, Nullarbor. That will help a lot.

Any comment on the additional problems this causes in militia regarding the faction standings loss bug alluded to several times above? The inability to switch ownership while it's actively under fire will go some way towards remedying the effect of that but ultimately the bug, and thus the problem, still exists - even if a militiamember chooses to take the GCC he still has the additional problem of having to take and petition the standings loss. Is anyone even aware of this (regularly petitioned and reported) bug, is there a fix coming?

How about area of effect weapons?

Not as part of this fix but I keep hearing faction warfare being mentioned in the planning for 2012, which I am quite excited about having flown in the militia myself for a while before joining CCP. So hopefully the issues with standings and alt corps messing with FW business can be reviewed soon(tm).

Addressing the obvious alt corp, alt T3 boosters and alt spying will go a long way to improving FW

Well I don't see how intended game mechanics can be an exploit.

Ok so an update on this, we are going to deny transferring ownership while the customs office is being attacked using the normal 15 min cool down on aggression. The real problem here is that players can be tricked into taking a security status hit or entering into combat outside of a wardec without realizing it.

Transferring ownership after a POCO has been put into reinforce for example is still valid and while this does allow owners to force an aggressor who they are at war with to take a security hit they will still be able to decide before hand if they want to do this and not unknowingly engage an owner they are not at war with.

I have hassled people today so that we can get this onto TQ this week but that will ultimately depend on QA checking it so fingers crossed.

Transferring ownership after a POCO has been put into reinforce for example is still valid and while this does allow owners to force an aggressor who they are at war with to take a security hit they will still be able to decide before hand if they want to do this and not unknowingly engage an owner they are not at war with.

Patchwork Fixes Aint Fixes when the Mechanic remains broken

Great... we can decide beforehand if we want to go gcc as we return to the poco of a corp we wardeced to find it in new alt corp hands.
We place a new wardec on the alt corp, get the pleasure of shooting it from 100% to reinf again. Comeback next day to finish it what will we find? That its been transfered to a new or old alt corp we are no longer at war with.

You fix the sudden standing hits, it dosent take away the problem with the poco hoping.
No. People that RP 'No GCC Ever because its against the law!' or FW people that will receive WTF standing hits and unable to fight an enemy because they gone gcc and cant remote rep etc eachother? People that play it by the books by using wardecs should not have to sit back and watch things hop around freely in an neverending tail of wardecs.
No its not the security hit iam arguing against or the rpers pov or even fw peoples pov. Its the principle that the mechanic as you intend it is broken. GCC means your a lawbreaker and you should NOT have to be that to perform an action against an enemy.

Do away with gcc or make it mean nothing! if going GCC is required in order to accomplish a task in the game it shouldnt come with the downfalls currently associated with it. Patchwork Fixes Aint Fixes when the Mechanic remains broken.

Edit
The simplest soloution for the 'Valid reasons to transfer':

TransferPocoScript:

If(MyCorp.InFactionalWarfare==Yes )
If PocoToTransfer.IsDamageD or isReinforced
Return "No you cannot transfer a damage or reinf poco while in factional warfare, ride the storm out chicken"

Elseif(MyCorp.InFactionalWarfare==No)
If Poco.TransferToCorp is InList(MyCorp.AtWarWithWho)
return "Yes, you can transfer poco to a corp your currently at war with, nevermind decshields thats a separate and hard cracked issue"
else
return "No, you cant sadly transfer the poco to that corp since its not one your at war with"

That would in essence, with littleish coding make it so that you cant transfer a poco around madly. You can give it as tribute to a corp/alliance your at war with, long as your not in fw(because then you transfer it to militia alt corp :P).

That or a 36hr transfer timer when at war could be simple things to sort the problem =)

Thanks. Peace and Good Night Iceland.

I agree and the concept of moving assets or characters between corporations at war is not limited to customs offices. So rather than make an exception here the whole system should be reviewed instead. A special case for customs offices would be both patchwork and inconsistent.

There is also value in allowing players to arrange an amicable transfer after having been put into reinforce.

That would in essence, with littleish coding make it so that you cant transfer a poco around madly. You can give it as tribute to a corp/alliance your at war with, long as your not in fw(because then you transfer it to militia alt corp :P).

Welcome to EVE, sir.

In response to the transfer of ownership as at end goal of the war since when is that in the spirit of eve? Given that we are seeing more and more inflation it seems silly to want less structures destroyed. This game needs more ISK sinks, not fewer (INB4 someone thinks I mean ship destruction and insurance..). If you want ownership of the PCO its as simple as killing it and replacing your own one, just like POS (In my opinion outposts should be this way as well but that comes with the issues of people inside).

Destroying a PCO is not a significant isk sink. No isk are removed from the game, only minerals, which are essentially infinite.

Destroying a PCO is not a significant isk sink. No isk are removed from the game, only minerals, which are essentially infinite.

I keep hearing faction warfare being mentioned in the planning for 2012