| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Karan Hanid
   |
Posted - 2007.04.05 11:49:00 -
[1]
Yarrr  ,
Dont know if this had been discussed already, but since I've recently been a victim of a Log On Trap, an idea sprung up in my mind - why not give newly logged on players a sort of "recalibration time" similar to the one Covert Ops ships have? I.E. do not allow newly logged on ships to lock targets for some time, for example 1 or 5 minutes.
Any other thoughts on the matter? Is there anyone that does not think that this is an exploit? Should ships be reimbursed if you fall a victim of such a trap?
Thanks for your contribution in advance.
Yarrr
|
Kazuma Saruwatari
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 11:51:00 -
[2]
5 minutes is too long, considering that some people log in for a quick belt rat run before logging out again, or log in an alt to rep a friendly then log him out
I'm all for a 1-2 min timer. Long enough for whoever's getting trapped to run his arse off
-
NPC Vendetta system, Local rehash, Probe decoys |
Ling Xiao
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 11:53:00 -
[3]
To paraphrase CCP, it's an exploit, but since it would be hard for GMs to enforce such a ruling, they allow it.
__________
If you think the game is rigged, why are you still playing? |
Roshan longshot
Gallente
Ordos Humanitas
FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 12:25:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Ling Xiao
To paraphrase CCP, it's an exploit, but since it would be hard for GMs to enforce such a ruling, they allow it.
sorry proof or you know......
Free-form Professions, ensure no limetations on professions. Be a trader, fighter, industialist, researcher, hunter pirate or mixture of them all.
[i]As read from the original box.
|
Misanth
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 12:33:00 -
[5]
I find this funny.. this is one of few aspects where actually World of Warcraft > EvE. On regular PvP servers noone care if you get corpsecamped there, it happens, people like to grief you for whatever reason. But on RP (or RP-PvP) servers if someone griefs you like that you can petition to a GM and report them for 'meta-gaming', as they are using game-mechanics to do stuff their characters never would realise they could.
Would be interesting to see the RP corporations in EvE to use similar arguments.
Either way, to get back on track, what someone said above; it's been said to be an exploit but.. too much work for GM's so well.. if you do want to petition about it, remember to put down timestamps. They're unlikely to bother tho as it's hard to prove, but if you *can* provide: 1) name 2) time of occation; then it's much easier for them to check logs. I used to be GM in an asian MMO and I know we only bothered to check logs if we had those 2 basic information, else it'd be a crapload of work and not worth the time. Still can't guarantee that EvE's GM's bother but yeah I seen the same info as provided here above, that they do consider it an exploit.
And well, I suggested myself to put in a 5min timer on both log-in and log-off, logging in a station would keep you clear from this timer but logging in space would give you that 5min timer. You could still be attacked tho, just not attack back. ;) Should provide an interesting feature to counter alot of cheezy tactics.
|
Kazuma Saruwatari
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 12:42:00 -
[6]
 They say this is an exploit but anyone with two braincells can figure out how to code in a counter.
But, we forget, its CCP...
-
NPC Vendetta system, Local rehash, Probe decoys |
Roy Batty68
Caldari
Immortal Dead
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 13:01:00 -
[7]
Ask yourself why people felt the need to use this tactic in the first place.
-------------------
Say What? |
Nyana
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 13:09:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Kazuma Saruwatari
5 minutes is too long, considering that some people log in for a quick belt rat run before logging out again, or log in an alt to rep a friendly then log him out
Hm, logging in to kill a belt of rats sounds fine. The second part sounds fishy though - not that it's a "trap" per se, but it's not really... what to say, "true" gaming, or whatever the opposite of metagaming is.
|
Sugar Queen
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 13:39:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Sugar Queen on 05/04/2007 13:35:27
It's sad to see people just giving up on talking/complaining to CCP...
It doesnt matter why people do this in the first place, what matters it is - how do you deal with such people? Of course, just getting on with it is one way...
Damn, ffs, posted with an alt. This is KARAN HANID.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 14:22:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Karan Hanid
Yarrr ,
Any other thoughts on the matter? Is there anyone that does not think that this is an exploit? Should ships be reimbursed if you fall a victim of such a trap?
Thanks for your contribution in advance.
Yarrr
Removing the recon function from Local chat would go some way towards allowing people to set up proper ambushes without resorting to metagaming. Until this happens there is absolutely no cause to call a logon trap an exploit or wine about reimbursements as a result of being on its receiving end.
...
|
|
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 14:23:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Ling Xiao
To paraphrase CCP, it's an exploit, but since it would be hard for GMs to enforce such a ruling, they allow it.
CCP had stated no such thing.
...
|
Ling Xiao
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 14:47:00 -
[12]
You're right, I must have dreamed it when Oveur posted such about a year ago. My bad.
__________
If you think the game is rigged, why are you still playing? |
Kalixa Hihro
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 14:58:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Ling Xiao
To paraphrase CCP, it's an exploit, but since it would be hard for GMs to enforce such a ruling, they allow it.
Someone from CCP told you this? They told us it's not an exploit. Dishonorable and dirty yes, but not an exploit. Essentially it would make logging in and shooting something an exploit. Give me a link because I don't believe it.
If it is an exploit, how long are you supposed to wait to shoot someone after logging in? Presumably if it's an exploit, there is a guideline. What's the limit?
To me, I look at a login trap the same way I do jumping into a system. Someone gets agro from you so you can't jump, and everyone comes into system to kill you. There is 0 difference. It's a pvp tactic as old as getting aggression.
-Kal
/*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
My opinion in no way represents that of my corp or anyone I am associated with, and is probably entirely wrong. |
St Dragon
NexGen Industries
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 15:17:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Kalixa Hihro
Originally by: Ling Xiao
To paraphrase CCP, it's an exploit, but since it would be hard for GMs to enforce such a ruling, they allow it.
Someone from CCP told you this? They told us it's not an exploit. Dishonorable and dirty yes, but not an exploit. Essentially it would make logging in and shooting something an exploit. Give me a link because I don't believe it.
If it is an exploit, how long are you supposed to wait to shoot someone after logging in? Presumably if it's an exploit, there is a guideline. What's the limit?
To me, I look at a login trap the same way I do jumping into a system. Someone gets agro from you so you can't jump, and everyone comes into system to kill you. There is 0 difference. It's a pvp tactic as old as getting aggression.
-Kal
Actually over posted that it was an exploit over a year ago. But since nothing can be done about it there is nothing they can do and for now its 'allowed'.
-----------------------------------------------
"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 |
St Dragon
NexGen Industries
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 15:22:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Ling Xiao
To paraphrase CCP, it's an exploit, but since it would be hard for GMs to enforce such a ruling, they allow it.
CCP had stated no such thing.
It is suprising then that someone who was here since 2003 doesant know this?
I can only think of 2 reasons you dont know of this statement already.
1. You use log-off tactics yourself.
2. You only recently started Forum whoring here.
-----------------------------------------------
"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 |
Plutoinum
German Cyberdome Corp
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 16:14:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Plutoinum on 05/04/2007 16:12:17
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Ling Xiao
To paraphrase CCP, it's an exploit, but since it would be hard for GMs to enforce such a ruling, they allow it.
CCP had stated no such thing.
They have stated that it's lame and don't like those tactics. That's something that they have definately said. ( My memory serves me quite well for such things. )
.... ok, I digged a bit, didn't believe I find it, but I did: logon traps
I seem that a dev has said more about it, maybe it's later in that thread, but now I'm too lazy to read that whole thing again. lol
___________
Muuuhhh !!! |
Deschenus Maximus
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 16:36:00 -
[17]
Logon traps are as much an exploit of game mechanics as logoffski is, as far as I'm concerned. It gets worse in 0.0, people just come to your system, logoff in a belt, and their's nothing you can do about it.
FLAMING
When you can't think of logical arguments and are too dumb to STFU |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 16:39:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Plutoinum
Edited by: Plutoinum on 05/04/2007 16:12:17
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Ling Xiao
To paraphrase CCP, it's an exploit, but since it would be hard for GMs to enforce such a ruling, they allow it.
CCP had stated no such thing.
They have stated that it's lame and don't like those tactics. That's something that they have definately said. ( My memory serves me quite well for such things. )
ThatÆs my recollection also.
However, CCP never stated that a login trap is an exploit. Calling it ôlameö is an opinion, and, like *******s, everyoneÆs got one.
...
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 16:48:00 -
[19]
Originally by: St Dragon
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Ling Xiao
To paraphrase CCP, it's an exploit, but since it would be hard for GMs to enforce such a ruling, they allow it.
CCP had stated no such thing.
noobish attempt at flaming removed - Razin
1. You use log-off tactics yourself.
I see nothing wrong with the logon traps (which is the subject of this thread) until the recon function is decoupled from Local.
...
|
Peter Armstrong
Caldari
5punkorp
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 16:48:00 -
[20]
i agree with the OP.
------------------------------------
"There is no avoiding war; it can only be postponed to the advantage of others" |
|
|
Loyal Servant
Caldari
The Short Bus Squad
The SUdden Death Squad
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 16:54:00 -
[21]
As a victim of -A- logon tactics.. (thats right, svetlana :P)
I agree it should not be allowed... BUT I never, not once, saw any official of CCP state that it was an illegal tactic.
Put up, or shut up (Prove it.)
TSBS - Eve's Premier podding service!
|
Sugar Queen
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 17:00:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Sugar Queen on 05/04/2007 16:57:34
Originally by: Kalixa Hihro
If it is an exploit, how long are you supposed to wait to shoot someone after logging in? Presumably if it's an exploit, there is a guideline. What's the limit?
The thread is about the fact that this SHOULD BE considered an exploit, it's not saying it already is considered, otherwise there would be no point... so there are no guidelines...
You SHOULD BE "supposed to" wait for maybe 5 minutes or whatever time CCP thinks is long enough. I'd say 2-3minutes minimum.
Originally by: Kalixa Hihro
To me, I look at a login trap the same way I do jumping into a system. Someone gets agro from you so you can't jump, and everyone comes into system to kill you. There is 0 difference. It's a pvp tactic as old as getting aggression.
The diffence between a log-on trap and jumping into a system is that it's YOUR fault you havent got eyes nearby, if you know you are in a hostile environment. However, if THERE IS NO WAY of knowing where your opponents can strike from, that's an exploit.
Even if the local chat was removed and you didnt know if there was anybody in the system, you could at least scan them with probes, or directional scanner using a Covert Ops. However, if they are logged off, you cant do this. Therefore, it still would be an exploit.
Perhaps CCP should create a new "battle-cloak" to allow for ambushes to happen... but simply stating that log on traps are a lame tactic just isnt good enough for Game Developers.
P.S. Damn, again... this is KARAN HANID.
|
podadot
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 17:07:00 -
[23]
I also recall dev's classifying it as an exploit. Guess all our memories are bad, except for some reason, the people that use these tactics.
|
Brugar
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 17:09:00 -
[24]
Very sorry to ask this...
but what is a Log On Trap?
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 17:15:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Sugar Queen
The diffence between a log-on trap and jumping into a system is that it's YOUR fault you havent got eyes nearby, if you know you are in a hostile environment. However, if THERE IS NO WAY of knowing where your opponents can strike from, that's an exploit.
There is a way: you could post a scout in the system for a long enough time to know whoÆs there. Therefore itÆs not an exploit.
Originally by: podadot
I also recall dev's classifying it as an exploit. Guess all our memories are bad, except for some reason, the people that use these tactics.
Speak for your own memory. Here's the link posted by Plutoinum with relevant CCP responses: CCP: Why is a Log-on Trap not an Exploit?
...
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 17:20:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Brugar
Very sorry to ask this...
but what is a Log On Trap?
ItÆs an ambush tactic where you pre-position your forces and log them off until such a time as the enemy shows up.
...
|
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 17:32:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Roy Batty68
Ask yourself why people felt the need to use this tactic in the first place.
.. because they can...?
|
Angellyne
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 17:37:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Razin
Speak for your own memory. Here's the link posted by Plutoinum with relevant CCP responses: CCP: Why is a Log-on Trap not an Exploit?
So everybody's right. From that thread: "It stopped being an exploit when..." So at some point, I guess that means it WAS an exploit - but now it's not.
So you can stop splitting hairs about who has a better memory. It's not an exploit, it's a perfectly legitimate tactic for unimaginative, "win at any cost", zero-sum players.
|
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 17:38:00 -
[29]
Make it possible to scan for recent warpsignatures, meaning ships recently logged off in the current system. That way you'll at least have a chance to spot a trap.
Also Known As |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 18:04:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Angellyne
Originally by: Razin
Speak for your own memory. Here's the link posted by Plutoinum with relevant CCP responses: CCP: Why is a Log-on Trap not an Exploit?
So everybody's right. From that thread: "It stopped being an exploit when..." So at some point, I guess that means it WAS an exploit - but now it's not.
So you can stop splitting hairs about who has a better memory. It's not an exploit, it's a perfectly legitimate tactic for unimaginative, "win at any cost", zero-sum players.
The refusal to accept someoneÆs erroneous generalizations is splitting hairs? Whether or not login traps were an exploit several years ago is totally irrelevant to this thread, as are your amateurish assessments of their utility.
...
|
|
|
Angellyne
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 18:27:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Angellyne
Originally by: Razin
Speak for your own memory. Here's the link posted by Plutoinum with relevant CCP responses: CCP: Why is a Log-on Trap not an Exploit?
So everybody's right. From that thread: "It stopped being an exploit when..." So at some point, I guess that means it WAS an exploit - but now it's not.
So you can stop splitting hairs about who has a better memory. It's not an exploit, it's a perfectly legitimate tactic for unimaginative, "win at any cost", zero-sum players.
The refusal to accept someoneÆs erroneous generalizations is splitting hairs? Whether or not login traps were an exploit several years ago is totally irrelevant to this thread, as are your amateurish assessments of their utility.
Wow, wordy.
People here said "I remember them called an exploit"... you say "They're not an exploit"... So when I say "you're both right", it's both correct and relevant. And yes, arguing about who remembers better is splitting hairs, in my opinion.
In a thread titled "Log on Traps", my opinions about their utility is just as relevant as any justification you might offer for using them.
So your verbose assessments of relevance are about as lame as log-on traps, one might say.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 18:44:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Razin on 05/04/2007 18:42:10
Originally by: Angellyne
People here said "I remember them called an exploit"... you say "They're not an exploit"... So when I say "you're both right", it's both correct and relevant. And yes, arguing about who remembers better is splitting hairs, in my opinion.
irrelevant BS removed û Razin
LetÆs see:
Originally by: Ling Xiao
To paraphrase CCP, it's an exploit, but since it would be hard for GMs to enforce such a ruling, they allow it.
Originally by: Kazuma Saruwatari
They say this is an exploit but anyone with two braincells can figure out how to code in a couner.
Originally by: Razin
CCP had stated no such thing.
YouÆre wrong.
And your opinion about logon traps is irrelevant because it involves insulting and demeaning to support itself.
...
|
Angellyne
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 18:56:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Razin
More hair-splitting
One could be insulted by just about anything, I suppose.
In this instance, "unimaginative" means lacking the creativity to deal with Local any way other than logging out. "Win at any cost" means you don't care if you're using tactics that can't be countered, that break immersion, etc. etc. - you just want to win. "Zero sum" means you're more interested in getting a kill - "zero sum gain" - than overpowering or outplaying your opponent, driving them out, etc. etc.
The fact that you take these statements personally doesn't make them invalid, irrelevant or wrong. Come to think of it, taking them personally is probably just a convenient way for you to dismiss them - certainly easier than thinking about them, responding to them rationally, that sort of thing.
Kinda hard to disuss the CONS to log-off traps without resorting to what you would consider demeaning comments, since the only other type of CONS would be the strategic or gameplay varieties, which don't exist.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 19:20:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Angellyne
Originally by: Razin
More hair-splitting
One could be insulted by just about anything, I suppose.
In this instance, "unimaginative" means lacking the creativity to deal with Local any way other than logging out. "Win at any cost" means you don't care if you're using tactics that can't be countered, that break immersion, etc. etc. - you just want to win. "Zero sum" means you're more interested in getting a kill - "zero sum gain" - than overpowering or outplaying your opponent, driving them out, etc. etc.
The fact that you take these statements personally doesn't make them invalid, irrelevant or wrong. Come to think of it, taking them personally is probably just a convenient way for you to dismiss them - certainly easier than thinking about them, responding to them rationally, that sort of thing.
Kinda hard to disuss the CONS to log-off traps without resorting to what you would consider demeaning comments, since the only other type of CONS would be the strategic or gameplay varieties, which don't exist.
Talking about the pot calling the kettle black!
Interesting approach there: for lack of any substantial arguments to use subjective personal preconceptions about other players as arguments in discussions about gameplay mechanics issues. What do you intend to gain?
...
|
Angellyne
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 19:50:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Razin
Talking about the pot calling the kettle black!
Interesting approach there: for lack of any substantial arguments to use subjective personal preconceptions about other players as arguments in discussions about gameplay mechanics issues. What do you intend to gain?
First, I didn't call you anything so I don't know what that cliche refers to.
Second, you still didn't respond. If you disagree - seeing how you're on a discussion forum - feel free to discuss why, as opposed to this dismissive labeling thing. For instance, do you have some other way to counter Local? Do you care more about "immersion" than winning? Do you care about the effect of tactics like this on the game as a whole, or do you just want that kill?
Third, you call this a discussion of "mechanics issues", but instead argue about the word "exploit". The OP suggests that something should be done to make them less effective, which calls subjective opinion into question on both sides, doesn't it? Should something be done or not? If so, what?
And finally, what do I hope to gain... the question drips hypocrisy tbh. I'm responding to you, not trying to win some contest. You're just filling space with hyperbole, not responding, so I guess the answer is: I expect to gain nothing. Not unless someone else steps up to bat for the pro-logon-trap team, anyway.
|
Mhaerdirne Solveig
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 19:52:00 -
[36]
hmm, oveur said outright that logging out and logging back in again with a load of people is officially not an exploit at all. The deciding factor was the emergency log out warp. So I don't see why the discussion continues 
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 20:11:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Angellyne
First, I didn't call you anything so I don't know what that cliche refers to.
The Pot Calling The Kettle Black ( to say something about someone else which is actually true of you yourself ... )
Quote:
Second, you still didn't respond.
I did respond. The game lacks mechanisms for stealth based tactics like an ambush which forces players to metagame. Removing the recon function from Local chat would mitigate this problem to a certain degree. This is where the discussion sits.
Quote:
Third, you call this a discussion of "mechanics issues", but instead argue about the word "exploit".
I was responding to a specific statement made in the thread. I quoted the statement I was replying to so you have only your reading abilities to blame for your misunderstanding.
Quote:
And finally, what do I hope to gain... the question drips hypocrisy tbh..
The question was purely hypothetical. You get what you got.
...
|
Angellyne
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 20:34:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Angellyne
First....
The Pot Calling The Kettle Black ( to say something about someone else which is actually true of you yourself ... )
Ah, you thought I meant I wasn't familiar with it - no I just meant it was a poor choice of cliches, since it doesnn't apply here. Sorry, I should have been more clear there.
Originally by: Razin
Quote:
Second....
I did respond. The game lacks mechanisms for stealth based tactics like an ambush which forces players to metagame. Removing the recon function from Local chat would mitigate this problem to a certain degree. This is where the discussion sits.
Not what I was talking about replying to. A reply generally comes after the statement it replies to. So, your response to my arguments against log-on traps would be... what again? Not just your dislike for Local -- that wouldn't be a response, do you understand?
Originally by: Razin
Quote:
Third...
I was responding to a specific statement made in the thread. I quoted the statement I was replying to so you have only your reading abilities to blame for your misunderstanding.
And still you never quite get around to discussing "mechanics issues". Pretty much my point there, thanks.
Originally by: Razin
Quote:
And finally, what do I hope to gain... the question drips hypocrisy tbh..
The question was purely hypothetical. You get what you got.
A hypothetical question can be hypocritical too. See, because you aren't gaining much here either, see?
I do understand, your dislike for Local is why you use log-on traps. I doubt there's anyone who doesn't understand that.
It seems you don't understand the flip side though. Lots of players don't use log-on traps - for many reasons, some of which I posted here, none of which you addressed. Still. Shocking.
Which means, in your own hyperbolic quote-a-licious way, you made my point for me. That is, these arguments against log-on traps have no real counter-arguments. So, er... thanks?
|
James Snowscoran
Coreli Corporation
Corelum Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 20:46:00 -
[39]
Way back, GMs used to reimburse people when they died to a login trap, which makes it a de facto exploit or at least abuse of game mechanics. The reason they stopped reimbursing in these cases was because the rule was extremely hard to enforce- the entire concept of a login trap hinges on the intent to use logging off and on to gain an advantage over your victim, and intent is rather hard to prove for a poor GM. Sometimes, people logon only to find some enemy situated right next to them- is it an exploit to attack him in this case? Definitely not. The GM ruling that established precedence stated, IIRC, that 'ccp can't judge when people are and are not allowed to log on and off, hence we can't punish people for login traps, even if we think it's distasteful and lame'. Or something to that effect anyway.
-----
|
Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Elite
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 20:53:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Karan Hanid
Yarrr ,
Dont know if this had been discussed already, but since I've recently been a victim of a Log On Trap, an idea sprung up in my mind - why not give newly logged on players a sort of "recalibration time" similar to the one Covert Ops ships have? I.E. do not allow newly logged on ships to lock targets for some time, for example 1 or 5 minutes.
Any other thoughts on the matter? Is there anyone that does not think that this is an exploit? Should ships be reimbursed if you fall a victim of such a trap?
Thanks for your contribution in advance.
Yarrr
I'd like to say WELL DONE!!!1 to whoever got him, pirates seem to favour unfair fights, yet when the fight is unfair against them, they go crying to CCP looking for a change 
As for the idea you proposed, that happens if you disconnect in a fight, you cant re-lock your targets? uhm...goonswarm node-drop anyone?
----------
|
|
|
Deschenus Maximus
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 20:58:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Razin
I did respond. The game lacks mechanisms for stealth based tactics like an ambush which forces players to metagame. Removing the recon function from Local chat would mitigate this problem to a certain degree. This is where the discussion sits.
Local does indeed make it hard for stealthers, but no way does it FORCE you to metagame. I've seen plenty of successful Recon pilots ply their trade and be successful without metagaming.
As for ambush tactics, they are quite feasible even with local and without a cloack.
Finally, there are plenty of loggers that don't try to use stealth at all. They just do it to get cheap kills.
FLAMING
When you can't think of logical arguments and are too dumb to STFU |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 21:24:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Angellyne
Originally by: Razin
I did respond. The game lacks mechanisms for stealth based tactics like an ambush which forces players to metagame. Removing the recon function from Local chat would mitigate this problem to a certain degree. This is where the discussion sits.
Not what I was talking about replying to. A reply generally comes after the statement it replies to. So, your response to my arguments against log-on traps would be... what again? Not just your dislike for Local -- that wouldn't be a response, do you understand?
My response to your original statement to me was specific to the subject of that sub-thread. You are welcome to reply to other messages in the thread that deal with gameplay mechanics based arguments for or against the login traps.
Originally by: Angellyne
Originally by: Razin
I was responding to a specific statement made in the thread. I quoted the statement I was replying to so you have only your reading abilities to blame for your misunderstanding.
And still you never quite get around to discussing "mechanics issues". Pretty much my point there, thanks.
Gee, I wonder what your complaint above this one was about? Does it have to be a game mechanic that you agree with to count? Or do you consider calling those who use the tactic ôunimaginative, "win at any cost", zero-sum playersö a discussion on "mechanics issues"?
Originally by: Angellyne
I do understand, your dislike for Local is why you use log-on traps. I doubt there's anyone who doesn't understand that.
It seems you don't understand the flip side though. Lots of players don't use log-on traps - for many reasons, some of which I posted here, none of which you addressed. Still. Shocking.
The reasons you posted are value judgments and opinions. A couple centuries ago some European generals thought it was dishonorable to attack at night since everyone needed sleep. Those generals got their arses handed to them eventually because their reasoning for refusing to fight at night had nothing to do with the side of reality that fighting is designed to deal with.
Originally by: Angellyne
Which means, in your own hyperbolic quote-a-licious way, you made my point for me. That is, these arguments against log-on traps have no real counter-arguments. So, er... thanks?
So, if I call you monumentally stupid do I automatically win the argument?
...
|
Misanth
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 21:27:00 -
[43]
So, let's see, why do people feel a need to post about this? Well, maybe because they have no defence against it, and thus feel it is an exploit.
You know, I personally lost a ship to a RA-log-on-trap once in KZF. We had a hostile jumping around in the belts when we were ratting, decided to root him out and our little group of 6 or 7 warped to where we saw him jump - the sun. Landing on the sun, still only see him there and no hostiles on local. Boom - WTF? Suddenly we are stuck in a bubble and have 20+ ships on us! Ehhhh..
..in that case, we were unable to even use the cheesy log-offski as we were stuck in the bubble. They were all on the same second, 20 people, with a bubble that wasn't there when we landed after the warp. All in 1 second. Now, I'm curious of how I would be able to warp off, or log off, or in any way defend myself against this? I can only tink of 1 way, and that'd be to allow hostiles to be in my systems and not to stalk them anywhere, as every place would be a potential log-on-trap.
In that sense, at least as I see it, it IS an exploit. If you are using game-mechanics to get an advantage that noone can defend themselves against (log-on/log-off comes to mind), then isn't that exactly what it is? Exploit. Think for a sec what that word means. "Abusing game-mechanics" sounds like a perfect example of describing it, doesn't it? We're not talking about hacking or using bugs. It's just ab-using systems. Like leeching on a social welfare system, pretending to be ill even tho you are not, is an exploit.
Doesn't matter what I think tho, those that use this will keep doing it, and nvm that. Am just asking CCP to give me some way to counter this. At least give me the chance to log-off in bubbles again to balance it, m'kay?
|
Angellyne
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 21:45:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Razin
My response to your original statement to me was specific to the subject of that sub-thread. You are welcome to reply to other messages in the thread that deal with gameplay mechanics based arguments for or against the login traps.
What sub-thread now? I'm talking about responding to me, not pretending there's nothing to respond to. You fail again.
Originally by: Razin
Gee, I wonder what your complaint above this one was about? Does it have to be a game mechanic that you agree with to count? Or do you consider calling those who use the tactic ôunimaginative, "win at any cost", zero-sum playersö a discussion on "mechanics issues"?
YOU called this a discussion of "mechanics issues". I'm simply pointing out that you're not actually discussing what you claim to be. You fail again.
Originally by: Razin
The reasons you posted are value judgments and opinions. A couple centuries ago... arses... at night....
Earlier in the thread you said you had no problem with logon traps, so long as Local was used for recon. That, by the way, is an opinion. I think I understand: your opinions are logical discussions of game mechanics... mine are simply opinions. You're an absolute hypocrite.
Originally by: Razin
So, if I call you monumentally stupid do I automatically win the argument?
If you type a bunch of words, you seem to think it's a response. Ask around - there's a bit more to it than that.
Bottom line, you just want your effortless kills. Any further discussion just turns into this sort of nonsense with you bottom-rung guys. (Well, second from the bottom rung I should say - counting players who've been banned.)
|
Ovale
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 21:53:00 -
[45]
I consider log on traps to be a cheat. You are able to cloak an entire fleet without putting one skill point toward cloaking requirements. You also don't have a targeting timer after uncloak. You can target immediately upon warp in.
If nothing else can be done, how about leaving players in the local chat window (with a red box status indicator) if they have logged off in that system within the last 30 or 60 minutes?
I know I would think twice before loitering in a 0.0 system where 40 players logged off within the last 30 minutes.
 |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 00:10:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Deschenus Maximus
Originally by: Razin
I did respond. The game lacks mechanisms for stealth based tactics like an ambush which forces players to metagame. Removing the recon function from Local chat would mitigate this problem to a certain degree. This is where the discussion sits.
Local does indeed make it hard for stealthers, but no way does it FORCE you to metagame. I've seen plenty of successful Recon pilots ply their trade and be successful without metagaming.
As for ambush tactics, they are quite feasible even with local and without a cloack.
Ambush tactics depend on circumstances. Being outnumbered or trying to catch a hardened and nearly invulnerable target are some examples where logon tactics are pretty much mandatory, unless you like dieing or spending hours online and never catching your prey. Labeling the tactic ôdishonorableö or ôunimaginativeö is a product of a tool mentality. Players will always do what it takes to win, no matter how ugly the method. The losers will always moralize and make up irrelevant excuses for their defeat. Ideally CCP should be working on a system that allows a truly persistent world where the ships never disappear after logoff, though I realize the chances of this are slim to none.
Local makes it impossible for ôstealthersö. The use of the cloaking device canÆt strictly be called stealth tactics since Local will always give you up, so the device behaves more like an ôinvulnerability fieldö rather than a stealth aid.
Quote:
Finally, there are plenty of loggers that don't try to use stealth at all. They just do it to get cheap kills.
What exactly do you mean by ôcheap killsö? Is Warp-to-Zero or Local Recon Tool cheap? They certainly donÆt cost you anything.
...
|
Devious Syn
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 00:15:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Razin
However, CCP never stated that a login trap is an exploit. Calling it ôlameö is an opinion, and, like *******s, everyoneÆs got one.
Yea but you would think a dev's opinion would count for a little more. 
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 00:20:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Ovale
I consider log on traps to be a cheat. You are able to cloak an entire fleet without putting one skill point toward cloaking requirements. You also don't have a targeting timer after uncloak. You can target immediately upon warp in.
I trained all the cloaking skills and I'm certainly not able to lock anyone after logon untill I align, warp, arrive, and load the grid. Am I allowed to do a logon trap?
Quote:
If nothing else can be done, how about leaving players in the local chat window (with a red box status indicator) if they have logged off in that system within the last 30 or 60 minutes?
Have you put a single skill point into "god-like-omniscience" to be able to know exactly who is in the system? Why don't you consider that a cheat?
...
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 00:22:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Devious Syn
Originally by: Razin
However, CCP never stated that a login trap is an exploit. Calling it ôlameö is an opinion, and, like *******s, everyoneÆs got one.
Yea but you would think a dev's opinion would count for a little more.
A little more what?
...
|
Iuris Proeliator
Caldari
Eve University
Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 01:42:00 -
[50]
It's a simple concept to me.
Would you be angry at someone if a fight was engaged, and they logged off to avoid destruction and deprived you of the kill? Yes.
Then the login trap is the exact same gimmick. It's cheap. Those who use it lack talent and skill, and try to make up for it with cheap tactics. Just because CCP hasn't found a way to deal with it doesn't make it right.
|
|
|
Meiijn Phatloot
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 02:33:00 -
[51]
Just to echo the OP, something needs to be done.
example of a recent event:
I'm in 0.0 and undock from an npc station. There is an enemy sitting 50+ km off the station. I figure we are both in BS, we'll have some pew pew...I approach and engage. He locks me back, promptly scrambles and webs me...I'm not too worried until suddenly 6 of his mates show in local...did they jump in from another system? No. They immediately undock from the station and proceed to kill me. Logon trap indeed... 
-Mei
|
St Dragon
NexGen Industries
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 02:45:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Brugar
Very sorry to ask this...
but what is a Log On Trap?
Basically you gat a fleet of ships to a designated gate then log off leaving an alt nearby to keep watch. Everyone in the logged off part of the fleet is on teamspeak with the Alt guy. when he sees an enermy fleet warp into the gate he lets his friends know and they all log on at the same time causing the victim fleet a lot of lag usually as these ships all warp in at pretty much the same time.
What ususally ahppens for the victim is one second all is ok second 2 some enermy ships warp in he goes to target them. Next second eve freezes for him. severall seconds later it unfreezes and he sees he has locked his target but none of his guns ahve fired as he hasnat activated them and if he is lucky he still ahs some Hull left.
This is a very Poor and very lame tacktic which is even worse than killing an AFK TiTan in my opinion but as CCP cant do anything much about it all they could do was ahve a random log on modyfyer to 'Fix' things.
So if your oponent uses this tactic get it on videao and feel free to broadcast it on the Eve Videos section so everyone can laugh at him/her.
-----------------------------------------------
"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 |
Lord Slater
Amarr
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 02:48:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Deschenus Maximus
Originally by: Razin
I did respond. The game lacks mechanisms for stealth based tactics like an ambush which forces players to metagame. Removing the recon function from Local chat would mitigate this problem to a certain degree. This is where the discussion sits.
Local does indeed make it hard for stealthers, but no way does it FORCE you to metagame. I've seen plenty of successful Recon pilots ply their trade and be successful without metagaming.
As for ambush tactics, they are quite feasible even with local and without a cloack.
Ambush tactics depend on circumstances. Being outnumbered or trying to catch a hardened and nearly invulnerable target are some examples where logon tactics are pretty much mandatory, unless you like dieing or spending hours online and never catching your prey. Labeling the tactic ôdishonorableö or ôunimaginativeö is a product of a tool mentality. Players will always do what it takes to win, no matter how ugly the method. The losers will always moralize and make up irrelevant excuses for their defeat. Ideally CCP should be working on a system that allows a truly persistent world where the ships never disappear after logoff, though I realize the chances of this are slim to none.
Local makes it impossible for ôstealthersö. The use of the cloaking device canÆt strictly be called stealth tactics since Local will always give you up, so the device behaves more like an ôinvulnerability fieldö rather than a stealth aid.
Quote:
Finally, there are plenty of loggers that don't try to use stealth at all. They just do it to get cheap kills.
What exactly do you mean by ôcheap killsö? Is Warp-to-Zero or Local Recon Tool cheap? They certainly donÆt cost you anything.
Sadly using Logon tactics shows yuo are a pretty Poor PvP person so really!!! why is everyone responding to yuo thats what i want to know?
-----------------------------------------------
YYAARRHH HAHAHA IM THE HAPPY PIRATE
|
Deschenus Maximus
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 02:48:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Razin
Ambush tactics depend on circumstances. Being outnumbered or trying to catch a hardened and nearly invulnerable target
Define "hardened" and "nearly invulnerable", please.
Originally by: Razin
are some examples where logon tactics are pretty much mandatory, unless you like dieing
If you're using a cloak, the chances of you dieing are slim (assuming you know what you're doing).
Originally by: Razin
or spending hours online and never catching your prey.
So its a patience thing? I'm sorry, but Eve is not CS. Its NOT action all the time. Yes, the waiting times can suck, but it just makes the kill all that more enjoyable.
Originally by: Razin
Labeling the tactic ôdishonorableö or ôunimaginativeö is a product of a tool mentality. Players will always do what it takes to win, no matter how ugly the method.
Sorry, but that is outright false. I use skill, patience and tactics to win. And you know what? It works. Metagaming is NOT a prerequisite for victory.
Originally by: Razin
The losers will always moralize and make up irrelevant excuses for their defeat.
Again false. When someone gets the best of me by using the aforementioned skill, patience and tactics, all I'll say is "gf".
As for "irrelevant excuses", the fact that there's not A DAMN THING YOU CAN DO TO PREVENT IT is irrelevant?
Originally by: Razin
Ideally CCP should be working on a system that allows a truly persistent world where the ships never disappear after logoff, though I realize the chances of this are slim to none.
This I would indeed like to see implemented.
Originally by: Razin
Local makes it impossible for ôstealthersö. The use of the cloaking device canÆt strictly be called stealth tactics since Local will always give you up, so the device behaves more like an ôinvulnerability fieldö rather than a stealth aid.
Your cloack does hide something: your shiptype and position. Yes, local tells them you're here, but your cloak prevents them from knowing what you're in and where you are.
Originally by: Razin
What exactly do you mean by ôcheap killsö? Is Warp-to-Zero or Local Recon Tool cheap? They certainly donÆt cost you anything.
By "cheap kills" I mean kills generated by using techniques which have next to zero chances of being countered. Log on traps fall into this.
By comparison, I could also use "cheap evasion" for people that log off at gates when they fall in a gatecamp.
FLAMING
When you can't think of logical arguments and are too dumb to STFU |
Valora Grear
Tau Ceti Global Production
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 02:50:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Razin
I did respond. The game lacks mechanisms for stealth based tactics like an ambush which forces players to metagame. Removing the recon function from Local chat would mitigate this problem to a certain degree. This is where the discussion sits.
The game's lack of a method for stealth tactics does not justify metagaming. You are taking a mechanic, logging off, and using it in a way it was not intended, logging on for a surprise attack, in order to give your self an advantage. Plain and simple.
Originally by: Razin
Ambush tactics depend on circumstances. Being outnumbered or trying to catch a hardened and nearly invulnerable target are some examples where logon tactics are pretty much mandatory, unless you like dieing or spending hours online and never catching your prey.
hmmm...I'm losing but instead of accepting that I think I'll cheat. Perhaps you should not pick a fight with someone who posesses better skills/resources? Or just suck it up that sometimes you mess up and die...that's why you have a clone.
Originally by: Razin
Labeling the tactic ôdishonorableö or ôunimaginativeö is a product of a tool mentality.
swah? Because he thinks you are cheating he's a tool? Can you define tool for me please.
Originally by: Razin
Players will always do what it takes to win, no matter how ugly the method.
That doesn't justify their actions or make what you are doing not metagaming. It just means some humans are sad little people that feel the need to cheat even when it's nothing beyond a silly game.
Originally by: Razin
The losers will always moralize and make up irrelevant excuses for their defeat.
Irrelevant, no...ineffectual...well ultimately that depends on CCP. However, either way it doesn't invalidate their argument...you are cheating...you won't be punished but punishment doesn't presuppose metagaming.
Originally by: Razin
Ideally CCP should be working on a system that allows a truly persistent world where the ships never disappear after logoff, though I realize the chances of this are slim to none.
True...and irrelevant...at best an excuse.
Originally by: Razin
Local makes it impossible for ôstealthersö. The use of the cloaking device canÆt strictly be called stealth tactics since Local will always give you up, so the device behaves more like an ôinvulnerability fieldö rather than a stealth aid.
as they say "Can I have your stuff?" I mean really not only has it been said that stealth works fine for spying...it just doesn't allow for stealth ganking atm...but I'd think you could find something else to do in Eve.
Originally by: Razin
What exactly do you mean by ôcheap killsö? Is Warp-to-Zero or Local Recon Tool cheap? They certainly donÆt cost you anything.
Uh, people who do not even try to justify their metagaming...but you know that right? Local is part of the game you chose to play...logging off/on to make a kill is NOT PART OF THE INTENDED DESIGN. Warp to zero is cheap but it's official, don't like it leave...you wanna metagame and continue what you're doing, fine, you probably won't be punished but don't try to make us believe your actions are anything but weak.
|
Valora Grear
Tau Ceti Global Production
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 03:00:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Lord Slater
Sadly using Logon tactics shows yuo are a pretty Poor PvP person so really!!! why is everyone responding to yuo thats what i want to know?
Because metagaming/macrobotting/hacking RUINS games. Has, does and will continue to...until players themselves stop it. Devs/GM/Mods/etc will never be able to stop all of it. It needs to stop being an exceptable practice among any group in online gaming. This isn't an naive expectation...I doubt this will ever happen but all the same seeing the ignorance frustrates the hell out of me. You win at the cost of destroying the game you cared so much about you felt the need to cheat in the first place.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 03:17:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Valora Grear
Originally by: Lord Slater
Sadly using Logon tactics shows yuo are a pretty Poor PvP person so really!!! why is everyone responding to yuo thats what i want to know?
Because metagaming/macrobotting/hacking RUINS games. Has, does and will continue to...until players themselves stop it. Devs/GM/Mods/etc will never be able to stop all of it.
They can sure as hell stop this one. All it needs is a set of fixes, nerfing Local and making ships persistent in space are among these.
However, if CCP even bring these up for discussion all the moralizers posting with their alts/mains in this thread will scream bloody murder and threaten to quit.
Skill and patience and tactics may arse.
Remember kids, there is no such a thing as a fair fight.
...
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 03:41:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Valora Grear
Originally by: Razin
What exactly do you mean by ôcheap killsö? Is Warp-to-Zero or Local Recon Tool cheap? They certainly donÆt cost you anything.
Uh, people who do not even try to justify their metagaming...but you know that right? Local is part of the game you chose to play...logging off/on to make a kill is NOT PART OF THE INTENDED DESIGN. Warp to zero is cheap but it's official, don't like it leave...you wanna metagame and continue what you're doing, fine, you probably won't be punished but don't try to make us believe your actions are anything but weak.
This is rich! CCP Oveur has stated numerous times that Local was never intended as a recon tool. CCP had also stated many times that Warp-to-Zero will never become possible by default and that their solution to instas will have drawbacks for those who like fast and safe travel. We know full well what happened to that plan. These make your "not part of the intended design" argument extremely weak, to put it mildly.
Logging on is part of the game, and EVE Voice OOG client that will be used to coordinate those (as TS is used now) is only a matter of time.
Don't like it? Leave.
...
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 03:51:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Deschenus Maximus
Originally by: Razin
What exactly do you mean by ôcheap killsö? Is Warp-to-Zero or Local Recon Tool cheap? They certainly donÆt cost you anything.
By "cheap kills" I mean kills generated by using techniques which have next to zero chances of being countered. Log on traps fall into this.
By your definition any kill involving a significant disparity in ship class or gang size is a "cheap kill" on par with a victory achieved by cheating.
...
|
Valora Grear
Tau Ceti Global Production
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 06:28:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Valora Grear
Originally by: Lord Slater
Sadly using Logon tactics shows yuo are a pretty Poor PvP person so really!!! why is everyone responding to yuo thats what i want to know?
Because metagaming/macrobotting/hacking RUINS games. Has, does and will continue to...until players themselves stop it. Devs/GM/Mods/etc will never be able to stop all of it.
Originally by: Razin
They can sure as hell stop this one. All it needs is a set of fixes, nerfing Local and making ships persistent in space are among these.
Look the idea is good, I like it myself though it's more complicated then just what you post but all that is moot. CCP is under no obligation to make the game work the way you want it to. And in no way are you justified in cheating if you don't like that fact.
Originally by: Razin
However, if CCP even bring these up for discussion all the moralizers posting with their alts/mains in this thread will scream bloody murder and threaten to quit.
This could be said about almost any topic in Eve of any importance...and local is in that category. So just leave the fluff out.
Originally by: Razin
Skill and patience and tactics may arse.
Spoken like a man who relies on an unfair advantage.
Originally by: Razin
Remember kids, there is no such a thing as a fair fight.
do you understand the concept of metagaming? do you really need me to explain the problem it causes? in the extreme why don't I just hack your account, sell all your things, transfer the money to me then delete your character and cancel your account...whatever it takes right? I win before you even log back on...
|
|
|
Valora Grear
Tau Ceti Global Production
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 06:39:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Valora Grear on 06/04/2007 06:43:44
Originally by: Valora Grear
Originally by: Razin
What exactly do you mean by ôcheap killsö? Is Warp-to-Zero or Local Recon Tool cheap? They certainly donÆt cost you anything.
Uh, people who do not even try to justify their metagaming...but you know that right? Local is part of the game you chose to play...logging off/on to make a kill is NOT PART OF THE INTENDED DESIGN. Warp to zero is cheap but it's official, don't like it leave...you wanna metagame and continue what you're doing, fine, you probably won't be punished but don't try to make us believe your actions are anything but weak.
Originally by: Razin
This is rich! CCP Oveur has stated numerous times that Local was never intended as a recon tool.
Fair enough but it does not make what you are doing morally or legally correct.
Originally by: Razin
CCP had also stated many times that Warp-to-Zero will never become possible by default and that their solution to instas will have drawbacks for those who like fast and safe travel. We know full well what happened to that plan. These make your "not part of the intended design" argument extremely weak, to put it mildly.
There is a HUGE difference between the plan changing and a third party, going beyond the obvious current intention of the designers. If CCP wanted logon/off traps as a 'feature' there'd be a button or skill or something worked clearly into the game solely for that purpose. Much of the problem is CCPs fault for it's disparity in rules and punishment...I mean really what do they expect when they cannot control their own house.
Originally by: Razin
Logging on is part of the game, and EVE Voice OOG client that will be used to coordinate those (as TS is used now) is only a matter of time.
this is relevant how?
Originally by: Razin
Don't like it? Leave.
I could just hack you account or call up you ISP with BS or steal your computer but I won't...you either play within the game or you don't...but I choose not to CHEAT and since I dont' even know you in game, do nothing.
|
Valora Grear
Tau Ceti Global Production
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 06:45:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Valora Grear on 06/04/2007 06:41:42
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Deschenus Maximus
Originally by: Razin
What exactly do you mean by ôcheap killsö? Is Warp-to-Zero or Local Recon Tool cheap? They certainly donÆt cost you anything.
By "cheap kills" I mean kills generated by using techniques which have next to zero chances of being countered. Log on traps fall into this.
By your definition any kill involving a significant disparity in ship class or gang size is a "cheap kill" on par with a victory achieved by cheating.
Stop being purposely dense. Your argument fails because foreseeably a person could train up a counter ship setup to whatever his opponent had and multiply as needed with friends or alts and win. There is no possible counter to being stuck in a logtrap that is not in itself metagaming. Now if a BS is camping a gate in .3 near a noob system and ganking them as they come through running missions...yes that's cheap and boderline griefing imo but not really cheating either.
|
Karan Hanid
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 11:45:00 -
[63]
First of all, I'd say that simply because you CAN do something doesnt mean you SHOULD. You can use log on traps right now, but as another wise poster here said - it's ruining the game we are playing. You can blow up your own house or ram your own car into a wall, but SHOULD you?
Somebody said that I should've had an alt in that system for a longer time, to see the people coming in and logging out. This is a silly suggestion. A) I cant just keep my second account alt who I trained for a long time to be a scout in just one out of 5000 or whatever systems ALL the time. B) Chances are those people will only log off when there is no one in system. C) I cant be bothered to bring more points, because your suggestion is just not well thought through.
One useful post here was from someone who said that if you get disconnected during a fight, you are aggroed but wont be able to lock anyone for some time after you relog, if my suggestion was ever implemented. Thx for a constructive comment... Perhaps then, we should log on in the same place as we logged off? Maybe after you log on you should be in a long warp, for maybe 10-30 seconds to a random location in the system? Although this would probably encourage/help those who log off during fights... Anyone has any other suggestions?
I think the suggestion of being able to see how many people have logged off during the last 30min is reasonable. Perhaps it should be a map statistic, but this could give away the home systems of alliances... Although the average pilots active kind of already does...
I think it's pointless to argue if Log On Traps are an exploit or not, because they clearly are. There is just no way to justify them. The thread was really meant to be a place to discuss the possible fixes for this problems and to find out why CCP arent doing their job...
P.S. To whoever (that carebear) posted some crap about me being a pirate and whining when I got ganked by unfair tactic - STFU. Plain and simple. You are missing the whole point of this thread and this game.
|
Deschenus Maximus
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 13:12:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Razin
By your definition any kill involving a significant disparity in ship class or gang size is a "cheap kill" on par with a victory achieved by cheating.
Nope. A disparity in ship class can be countered easily by bringing friends, and gang size can be countered by bringing more friends or using better tactics.
FLAMING
When you can't think of logical arguments and are too dumb to STFU |
Sir Drake
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 13:47:00 -
[65]
Funny that ppl now cry about log-on-traps but so few have put their heads up for the logoffski as for me its essentially the same thing.
Only difference is that logoffski helps avoiding getting killed and log-on-trap helps getting the kill.
Logoffski got sorted out by now but log-on-traps are still possible.
Easy solution: Make ppl that were logged out for more than a few (3-4) minutes warp in 5+AU from their original position.
1. This would give everyone a fair chance to run from a trap.
2. If you had a disconnect it would still be possible to get back to your original postion and continue whatever you were doing.
-------------------------------------------------------
Sig was removed due to derogatory comments towards a group of people. -Karl Chroimcer
I like that. 
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |