EVE Search - CCP: POS Bowling Is Good for EVE

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CCP: POS Bowling Is Good for EVE

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Capt Rob Minmatar Black Omega Security GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.05.30 23:57:00 - [31] i like the idea of POS bowling, but i feel it should be allowed for any ship below supercapitals. For supercaps theres no risk at all. You can do it in carriers and dreads but there is actually a possibility you can die.
Farham AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2007.05.31 00:34:00 - [32] Quote: If your afraid of "BoB" being able to "contact" staff out of game, here is a really good suggestion, don't use the exploit. I don't even know how to respond to that... Is that how bad it has gotten that people don't bother to even defend CCP from allegations of improper out of game communications? Intrepid Crossing Diplomat and All Around Major Idiot
Shinigami Gallente Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.05.31 02:16:00 - [33] The problem is that you have people abusing the intended mechanics of the game. People weren't even using the storage structures. They would just place unmanned haulers for item storage. All risk is negated at this point without pos bowling. "Is someone sieging your pos? It's not a problem because you can just warp away your stuff to safety after they go to bed. There's no reason to defend because all you will lose is a control tower." --- Eve Comedy Gallery.
Jarne COMBINE Corporation G.U.A.R.D.	Posted - 2007.05.31 09:21:00 - [34] Edited by: Jarne on 31/05/2007 09:21:15 I still don't get it: Why doesn't CCP just change the POS shields in a way so they work like warp bubbles? Just don't let anyone enter the POS shields that is not allowed to. Ever. Can't be too hard technically... One other thing I was wondering about: If maintenance arrays are the intended method of storing ships at a POS, why can't those ships be stored with full cargo? It's totally cumbersome to first store the cargo in the hangar array, then put the ship into the maintenance array. Let's not even talk about how to keep apart different people's cargo contents in the hangar. And why does the hangar array go offline when the POS is reinforced, but the maintenance array does not? Without the hangar working, the maintenance array becomes totally useless. Who wants to fly with empty ships? So, in reinforced mode, having some ships outside the maintenance array is a must. I can see that it is intended by CCP to access ships at a POS in reinforced mode, because the maintenance array is still online. I can see that right now, it is nevertheless unusable because ships can not be stored with full cargo, and the hangar array is offline in reinforced mode. So there is only one resort: Letting your ships float inside the POS shields... And about the GM post: The statement is a first step, and I am happy about it. But without any means to enforce this new rule, nothing will change. I mean, I could try to FRAPS the POS bowling incident, but it normally occurs when the ship/POS owner is asleep, doesn't it? So again: Change the POS shield, so they aren't a "one way balloon" anymore, but a real rigid barrier. Please :). ---- Please paste generic Szun Tzu quote of your choice here
i take	Posted - 2007.05.31 14:25:00 - [35] loled you most be so stoned :P loled its SO much an exsploit!!! because exploits is something they didn't intend to put in so NO arguments will make it an feature instead of an exploit!.. ban the exploiters: suicide gank, pos bowling, lagmakers, can exploiting, etcetc etc
El'essar Viocragh Minmatar FSK23	Posted - 2007.05.31 14:28:00 - [36] Originally by: Selena 001 I was under the impression that the PoS bubbles were being changed to act similarly to warp bubbles, if you dont have access to the PoS. You dont fly into it, then bounce off, you simply drop out of warp on the edge... OFC, that could have just been said by someone for a giggle... but it sounds like a logical change... Word has it you drop out of warp 15km outside of the shields on the testserver already if you don't have access. Not verified it myself though, so, grain of salt applies.
iqplayer Caldari Dragon's Rage Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2007.05.31 14:46:00 - [37] Originally by: The Economist POS Bowling needs to be re-defined (again) as not being an exploit for two important reasons. 1: It forces people to use ship maintenance arrays; these were previously woefully underused. [this also gives everyone a very simple way to avoid being bowled....any ship losess to supercap bowling are directly attributable to sheer laziness rather than anything else] 2: The more ships there are on a grid, the more lag there is. Previously there was no way whatsoever to counter the massive lag generated at pos's by the countless ships carelessly left in space.[it has often been alleged of people that they leave said ships at pos purely to generate lag.] POS bowling gave the community a way to reduce the lag problems by removing the ships from the grid or forcing the offenders to use ship maintenance arrays for their intended purpose. In summary, I don't know what provoked yet another policy change on this issue, but please seriously consider reverting to the previous ruling for the reasons stated above. Cheers. While I feel some sympathy with your second point about masses of unpiloted ships causing lag, that's really a totally seperate issue from bowling, and in cases where you can show evidence that it's done solely to cause lag (ie, masses of noob ships or shuttles) it can be petitioned. Yes, I realize it's very difficult to make that case, but that still doesn't have anything to do with bowling. More important to the whole argument, is that your point #1 is totally flawed. It is impossible to compensate for POS bowling via the Ship Maintenance Array, because bowling works against piloted ships as well, with potentially devastating effects. This happened to me a while back, when a Titan pilot was trying to bump my Naglfar outside of the shields while I was in it. You cannot warp while moving above your max speed, so after leaving the shields you are quite vulnerable to fast moving tacklers until your ship slows to normal speeds - something that can take quite a while in a capital. In any case, the whole situation was quite silly to begin with. Why have shields if they aren't there to protect you? You already have the ability to destroy the shields (and the POS), I don't see any reason why there needs to be a way to make ships inside the shields vulnerable. That is, after all, what shields are for......
iqplayer Caldari Dragon's Rage Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2007.05.31 14:56:00 - [38] Edited by: iqplayer on 31/05/2007 14:58:09 Originally by: Shinigami The problem is that you have people abusing the intended mechanics of the game. People weren't even using the storage structures. They would just place unmanned haulers for item storage. All risk is negated at this point without pos bowling. "Is someone sieging your pos? It's not a problem because you can just warp away your stuff to safety after they go to bed. There's no reason to defend because all you will lose is a control tower." Maybe while we're at it, we need to make it so that as soon as one POS in a system is reinforced, all items inside an OP get locked down, and when the station is taken over, 50% are destroyed and 50% get handed over to the assaulting force?? I think it's just as ridiculous at the moment that anything you have stored in a POS is 100% vulnerable to a sneak attack in the middle of the night. While I'm sure you'd counter with the argument that you should defend the POS when it comes out of reinforced, the situation with the Capital Ship Array down in Bob's territory should illustrate very well that it's impossible for even a superior force to prevent a POS's destruction. As it stands now, items stored in POS's that cost Isk and effort to run are completely vulnerable, while items stored inside an OP are completely safe and can be evacuated. To me, this seems a little backwards..... In any case, once again this is a completely seperate issue from Bowling. If there's a problem with unmanned ships in a POS, then that should be fixed seperately. Allowing one flaw to become a feature just to 'fix' another flaw.....well, that sounds silly to me.
Agent Li	Posted - 2007.05.31 14:59:00 - [39] Originally by: Ion Flux Ya know one of the main reason i liked eve was it looked great..played Great and when i saw pos bowling i was appalled......this one thing just ruined it Bowling is stupid...ever watched a space movie and seen pos bowling....wait there is 5 deathstars lined up there....Right Han..we should bowl them....ok chewy......come on..this is exploit ...this is stupid..this is lame....lame lame lame and ccp should be ashamed of themselves for loosing control of this game....it justed seemed if they couldnt control it ...it wasnt an exploit.....nothing like sitting under the pos sheilds...try to stay safe and 15 Cap ships come in...i bounce out and get targeted..what fun ..NOT...( ya i know i suck at writing..) EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT Ion Well, you don't see the Millenium Falcon bumping Star Destroyers to keep them from aligning to warp, either. Usually, when something in Star Wars "bumps", the smaller ship explodes in a ball of flame... ------------------ "Don't be afraid to take advantage of your enemy's weaknesses. Becasuse winning is everything after all."
bloomich Trotter's Independent Traders Co	Posted - 2007.05.31 15:06:00 - [40] Edited by: bloomich on 31/05/2007 15:12:14 Originally by: Agent Li Well, you don't see the Millenium Falcon bumping Star Destroyers to keep them from aligning to warp, either. Usually, when something in Star Wars "bumps", the smaller ship explodes in a ball of flame... Incorrect. A Single A-Wing bumped a Super Star Destroyer into the deathstar. Watch the film for yourself!
Won Swunglow Caldari Dead By Dawn	Posted - 2007.05.31 15:06:00 - [41] Originally by: Shinigami signed lol just have a chat with the boss, it'll soon be forgoten about mate --
Agent Li	Posted - 2007.05.31 16:16:00 - [42] Originally by: bloomich Edited by: bloomich on 31/05/2007 15:32:47 Originally by: Agent Li Well, you don't see the Millenium Falcon bumping Star Destroyers to keep them from aligning to warp, either. Incorrect. A Single A-Wing bumped a Super Star Destroyer into the deathstar. Watch the film for yourself! Yes, but the A-Wing made a nice little explosion and did actual damage to the Super Star Destroyer. ------------------ "Don't be afraid to take advantage of your enemy's weaknesses. Becasuse winning is everything after all."
Phaedruss	Posted - 2007.05.31 16:55:00 - [43] If we could conveniently store ships in the SMA without having to unload everything from the cargo hold first, it might encourage more use of the SMA. On the other hand, I've seen ships being bowled out of a POS by a Titan while still being piloted too...
Shinigami Gallente Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.06.01 01:11:00 - [44] Originally by: Won Swunglow Originally by: Shinigami signed lol just have a chat with the boss, it'll soon be forgoten about mate POS bowling is a necessary evil just like ore stealing. Do I look like a mindless drone? --- Eve Comedy Gallery.
Krystian Caldari No Quarter. Vae Victis.	Posted - 2007.06.01 08:17:00 - [45] This is just another fine example of the endless 'haxorz' metagaming that persists in the community. Every single type of game out there you got your rules twisting, min/max twits who just cant stop trying to ruin the fun for everyone else. Its so old and lame.
Voculus E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2007.06.01 09:12:00 - [46] Edited by: Voculus on 01/06/2007 09:11:18 POS Bowling is just another ridiculous way to game the game. It's a clear exploit the game mechanics, and only serves to make Eve a worse game to play. So who does the OP belong to? Shrike or Orange Species? _________________________________________________________
Hoshi Blackguard Brigade Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.01 11:15:00 - [47] Originally by: Jimer Lins So if someone gets banned while in a ship... is the ship lost to the game? Or is their pod merely removed from it and it's left floating in space? Because either way, I can see how it would kind of suck for your Titan pilot to get caught doing this. banned Titan poof or banned Titan SNAG Ship and all assets that pilot is holding are frozen on the account. But I don't see the problem. If he was exploiting a know bug that he have been officially warned to not exploit then he deserves nothing else. ---------------------------------------- A Guide to Scan Probing in Revelations

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.