EVE Search - This is NOT an exploit.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

This is NOT an exploit.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Veest FinFleet	Posted - 2007.06.09 23:28:00 - [61] Originally by: Acama Asante Originally by: The Ender Senior GMs must be getting an awful lot of escalations as it's now over 24 hours without reply from them :( Quick question - was all the pos fuel for the 8 days in one stack? I've heard of POSes going through one stack and then the shield going down, without "realising" there is more there. This may have been fixed some time ago though. I belive that the POS storage 'auto stacks' stuff these days, so that theory wouldn't come into it.
Bippa	Posted - 2007.06.09 23:43:00 - [62] Originally by: Ron White Yes we need to drop it when it stops being true.... POS Bowling wasnt a exploit till after bob used it.... Actually, your facts are wrong. It wasn't an exploit as long as BoB were the only ones doing it or at least not having it done to them. When AAA bumped a BoB carrier out of a pos and killed it, it was declared an exploit within two weeks.
DukeJoost1 The Last Solution Inc	Posted - 2007.06.09 23:53:00 - [63] Edited by: DukeJoost1 on 09/06/2007 23:53:03 From the FAQ http://www.eve-online.com/faq/faq_12.asp : Quote: 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. If there is a use of the game mechanics and/or the game rules, which allows the behaviour as described by the OP, all players should be made aware of this possibility. It is rather impossible to abide by the rules of this game when all are not aware of the rules and game mechanics !! So in my opinion the GMs should communicate on how this is possible soon(tm). This points to the urgent requirement of updated documentation ... especially on all "new" parts of the game, such as pos, invention, capitals, probing which were added to get more new players in. Despite the fact all original parts of the game are still rather buggy : reload all ? warp to zero ehh one ? Lets play some chess : pawn E2-E4, checkmate !, not possible, yes i changed the rules !!
Tortun Nahme Minmatar Heimatar Services Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.06.09 23:55:00 - [64] ok go ahead and start writing them and good luck Real turtles tank armor. Real men fly Pink.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.06.10 00:08:00 - [65] Oh for chrissake... Quote: OFFLINED/UNANCHORED STRUCTURES INSIDE POS SHIELDS (AS WELL AS UNPILOTED SHIPS INSIDE POS SHIELDS) CAN BE TARGETTED AND DESTROYED (or in case of ships, also boarded). ...don't you people READ ? _ New char creation guide \| Module/Rig stacknerfing explained
Dilsnik Celestial Horizon Corp.	Posted - 2007.06.10 00:21:00 - [66] When you quote something, always cite who said it, where, and when. If possible, give a link.
MorbidPenguin Hard Corp Brotherhood Of Steel	Posted - 2007.06.10 00:28:00 - [67] Originally by: Akita T Oh for chrissake... Quote: OFFLINED/UNANCHORED STRUCTURES INSIDE POS SHIELDS (AS WELL AS UNPILOTED SHIPS INSIDE POS SHIELDS) CAN BE TARGETTED AND DESTROYED (or in case of ships, also boarded). ...don't you people READ ? Don't you READ? The mobile labs were online and anchored. Same with my friend's POS. Join in-game channel Hard-Recruiting to get signed up.
Larusonyc Dleif	Posted - 2007.06.10 00:28:00 - [68] I think several people have struck the right answer here. If your tower is offline, you have no protective forcefield, but the tower itself still has shields. With no forcefield, you can pop all the anchored structures, loot the wrecks, and leave the tower alone if you dont have the guns to kill it.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.06.10 00:30:00 - [69] Originally by: MorbidPenguin Don't you READ? The mobile labs were online and anchored. Same with my friend's POS. you're right Walked right into that one. _ New char creation guide \| Module/Rig stacknerfing explained
Ron White	Posted - 2007.06.10 01:11:00 - [70] Originally by: Larusonyc Dleif I think several people have struck the right answer here. If your tower is offline, you have no protective forcefield, but the tower itself still has shields. With no forcefield, you can pop all the anchored structures, loot the wrecks, and leave the tower alone if you dont have the guns to kill it. BUT if the tower ISNT offline... Considering several times now dude has stated the tower wasnt offline "You cant fix stupid"

Larusonyc Dleif	Posted - 2007.06.10 01:26:00 - [71] Originally by: Ron White Originally by: Larusonyc Dleif I think several people have struck the right answer here. If your tower is offline, you have no protective forcefield, but the tower itself still has shields. With no forcefield, you can pop all the anchored structures, loot the wrecks, and leave the tower alone if you dont have the guns to kill it. BUT if the tower ISNT offline... Considering several times now dude has stated the tower wasnt offline Yes it must be super haxor!!!! its leet bobhaxwinrar!!!! Or, he could be wrong and the tower went offline. I can tell you this from obviously way more experience with POS warfare than you have: you can not even target things from inside a forcefield. You can not target things from inside the forcefield. If a shield password is set there is absolutely no possible way to blow up things that are inside a forcefield. Therefore: Either the tower was offline, or some random noobs in lowsec discovered the superleethaxomgwin@thegame method for blowing up pos modules from an online, forcefielded, passworded POS. Which of those sounds more likely? Based off your "can't fix stupid" quote, you may not even be able to tell. Oh well.
Elmicker The Phoenix Rising Vigilance Infinitas	Posted - 2007.06.10 02:16:00 - [72] Edited by: Elmicker on 10/06/2007 02:15:37 Originally by: Bippa Actually, your facts are wrong. It wasn't an exploit as long as BoB were the only ones doing it or at least not having it done to them. When AAA bumped a BoB carrier out of a pos and killed it, it was declared an exploit within two weeks. Leave the CAOD **** in CAOD, please. All parties who had the opportunity did it, and all were well documented as doing so, often long before the bandwagon jumped on the "bobdevhaxsploits" train. The least you could do is post with your main. I'm absolutely stumped. I've been dealing with POSes for a year, now, and i can't for the life of me think of any situation why a module (or for that matter why anything) inside an online POS would be targetable from the outside or the inside. One of the current core principles of POSes is that nothing, except the tower, inside the forcefield, is targetable while the tower is online and the forcefield password set. If there is a way, well. That could just about revolutionise pre-Rev2.0 POS warefare. Unfortunately, i dont have access to any POSes atm to test, but the only thing i can think of is that while you have the POS password entered you may be able to target things inside the POS forcefield (ostensibly for remote repping purposes). If someone would be able to test that, it'd probably help. However, that mean they have your POS password, though that would explain the GM's reluctance to tell you how they shot the mods, due to the rules about interference with ingame matters.
Terminal Entry New Fnord Industries Black Scope Project	Posted - 2007.06.10 02:51:00 - [73] Originally by: Akita T I can not find quickly the post(s) in question, I'll leave that to the forum search squad. I can tell you however with 100% certainty that somebody in the CCP team (some GM or some dev, again, can't recall) explicitly stated that... OFFLINED/UNANCHORED STRUCTURES INSIDE POS SHIELDS (AS WELL AS UNPILOTED SHIPS INSIDE POS SHIELDS) CAN BE TARGETTED AND DESTROYED (or in case of ships, also boarded). "Not an exploit, just another undocumented feature". I just tested it out, tried to lock an offline structure within the bubble of an online POS and was unable to lock it. Originally by: CCP kieron If you feel we as an entity are corrupt and abhorrent, we bid you good luck in finding a game and company that suits your interests.
Ron White	Posted - 2007.06.10 03:25:00 - [74] Originally by: Larusonyc Dleif Originally by: Ron White Originally by: Larusonyc Dleif I think several people have struck the right answer here. If your tower is offline, you have no protective forcefield, but the tower itself still has shields. With no forcefield, you can pop all the anchored structures, loot the wrecks, and leave the tower alone if you dont have the guns to kill it. BUT if the tower ISNT offline... Considering several times now dude has stated the tower wasnt offline Yes it must be super haxor!!!! its leet bobhaxwinrar!!!! Or, he could be wrong and the tower went offline. I can tell you this from obviously way more experience with POS warfare than you have: you can not even target things from inside a forcefield. You can not target things from inside the forcefield. If a shield password is set there is absolutely no possible way to blow up things that are inside a forcefield. Therefore: Either the tower was offline, or some random noobs in lowsec discovered the superleethaxomgwin@thegame method for blowing up pos modules from an online, forcefielded, passworded POS. Which of those sounds more likely? Based off your "can't fix stupid" quote, you may not even be able to tell. Oh well. OOOOoooooooo Uber leet 1337 1111one one!!!! Yer e***** has destroyed me utterly!!! IVE never even BEEN to a POS I was just noting that the dude in this thread has sed a billion times that the tower was online... And... Dumbass... Look up Ron White some time on Wikki or something an you'll understand "my 'you cant fix stupid quote'" ITS A COMEDY ROUTINE Deal with it lol "You cant fix stupid"
scabbsssjr Gallente M'8'S Frontal Impact	Posted - 2007.06.10 03:31:00 - [75] Heres a quick idea. When the shield is under attack it shrinks. You lost 1/3 of your shield so some of the stuff near the edge would be open to attack. Since a small pos has a small shield radius it appears as if you had your stuff to close to the edge. --------------------------- Originally by: Ductoris At this rate I'm going to ask for a BOB sub-forum.
Macs Nairegin Republic Military School	Posted - 2007.06.10 03:34:00 - [76] Originally by: scabbsssjr Heres a quick idea. When the shield is under attack it shrinks. Total misunderstanding of POS mechanics ftw
The Ender	Posted - 2007.06.10 15:02:00 - [77] Originally by: Macs Nairegin Originally by: scabbsssjr Heres a quick idea. When the shield is under attack it shrinks. Total misunderstanding of POS mechanics ftw Well me modules were near the edge of the shield but anchored within the defined distances from the control tower. This could be a plausible explanation if this is indeed the case. However, it would also be another undocumented feature by CCP.
hithereguys	Posted - 2007.06.10 15:44:00 - [78] Originally by: Terminal Entry Originally by: Akita T I can not find quickly the post(s) in question, I'll leave that to the forum search squad. I can tell you however with 100% certainty that somebody in the CCP team (some GM or some dev, again, can't recall) explicitly stated that... OFFLINED/UNANCHORED STRUCTURES INSIDE POS SHIELDS (AS WELL AS UNPILOTED SHIPS INSIDE POS SHIELDS) CAN BE TARGETTED AND DESTROYED (or in case of ships, also boarded). "Not an exploit, just another undocumented feature". I just tested it out, tried to lock an offline structure within the bubble of an online POS and was unable to lock it. Fit a passive targeter and try again
Phoenix Lord The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.06.10 16:00:00 - [79] Originally by: The Ender Originally by: Macs Nairegin Originally by: scabbsssjr Heres a quick idea. When the shield is under attack it shrinks. Total misunderstanding of POS mechanics ftw Well me modules were near the edge of the shield but anchored within the defined distances from the control tower. This could be a plausible explanation if this is indeed the case. However, it would also be another undocumented feature by CCP. Um holy crap, POS shields dont shrink man :P And near the edge doesnt mean outside of the shield. Arrow Capital Ship Sales
Rod Blaine Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.06.10 16:11:00 - [80] Edited by: Rod Blaine on 10/06/2007 16:11:11 I've seldomly seen a single thread with more bull** being offered as truth in it. Firstly, there never was a passive targeter exploit. I know, 'cause I was one of the guys supposedly using it to shoot some IMP guys inside a pos shield. That was due to lag/bugs, not due to passive targeters as I've yet to ever fit a passive targeter on any of my ships. Secondly, no you can not** under any normal circumstances target and destroy anything that is inside the forcefield of an online and passworded pos. Thirdly, there is no way to lock anything while you are inside a forcefield. Not when in gang, fleet, corp, alliance or whatever with the owner, somebody that's inside or any iother random combination of states. None of that works. Warping into the tower at zero doesn't let you target anything either. Fourthly, forcefields don't shrink. And finally, yes, if your tower was offline for some reason that would explain things. Is it perhaps a possibility that someone else inside your corp offlined the tower and onlined it again later ? Wouldn't know why someone would do that, but it is a possible explanation. Either way, those labs were either bugged, outside the forcefield, or there was no forcefield up. [center] Old blog

The Ender	Posted - 2007.06.10 16:24:00 - [81] Originally by: Rod Blaine Edited by: Rod Blaine on 10/06/2007 16:11:11 I've seldomly seen a single thread with more bull** being offered as truth in it. Firstly, there never was a passive targeter exploit. I know, 'cause I was one of the guys supposedly using it to shoot some IMP guys inside a pos shield. That was due to lag/bugs, not due to passive targeters as I've yet to ever fit a passive targeter on any of my ships. Secondly, no you can not** under any normal circumstances target and destroy anything that is inside the forcefield of an online and passworded pos. Thirdly, there is no way to lock anything while you are inside a forcefield. Not when in gang, fleet, corp, alliance or whatever with the owner, somebody that's inside or any iother random combination of states. None of that works. Warping into the tower at zero doesn't let you target anything either. Fourthly, forcefields don't shrink. And finally, yes, if your tower was offline for some reason that would explain things. Is it perhaps a possibility that someone else inside your corp offlined the tower and onlined it again later ? Wouldn't know why someone would do that, but it is a possible explanation. Either way, those labs were either bugged, outside the forcefield, or there was no forcefield up. The corp consisted of 5 members, all my alts. There is no other RL person in my corp. Yes I know I am a sad lonely person :P
Rod Blaine Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.06.10 16:32:00 - [82] Then I'd guess that this has to do with a bug. either with the pw or the forcefield. Either way, it probably helps if you ask the gm to check specifically wether the forcefield was up (tower online) and a password set for it at the moment those labs got destroyed. I'd guess that being specific in what the issue is can only help. If the GM replies that there was no pw, or no fuel, then it's a bug or fault of your own. If he replies that the tower was manually offlined you've got a pc security problem, and if he replies that there was a pw and a forcefield then you've got a mystery :p [center] Old blog
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.06.10 16:35:00 - [83] Originally by: Rod Blaine Then I'd guess that this has to do with a bug. either with the pw or the forcefield. Either way, it probably helps if you ask the gm to check specifically wether the forcefield was up (tower online) and a password set for it at the moment those labs got destroyed. I'd guess that being specific in what the issue is can only help. If the GM replies that there was no pw, or no fuel, then it's a bug or fault of your own. If he replies that the tower was manually offlined you've got a pc security problem, and if he replies that there was a pw and a forcefield then you've got a mystery :p A mystery and a legitimate reimbursement claim. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Rod Blaine Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.06.10 16:37:00 - [84] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Rod Blaine Then I'd guess that this has to do with a bug. either with the pw or the forcefield. Either way, it probably helps if you ask the gm to check specifically wether the forcefield was up (tower online) and a password set for it at the moment those labs got destroyed. I'd guess that being specific in what the issue is can only help. If the GM replies that there was no pw, or no fuel, then it's a bug or fault of your own. If he replies that the tower was manually offlined you've got a pc security problem, and if he replies that there was a pw and a forcefield then you've got a mystery :p A mystery and a legitimate reimbursement claim. Depends. PC security issue won't be reimbursed probably. Bug/own fault isn't easily determinable, so probably won't either, and we already know how many mystery reimbursements take place. [center] Old blog
Fryke Caldari CRESCENT Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.10 16:45:00 - [85] Very interesting topic.
The Ender	Posted - 2007.06.20 14:15:00 - [86] Just an update for you all. Had no PC Security problems at all. Still got all my isk and stuff :P However, I still have no reply from a Senior GM. Comparable to my friends petition of a lost ship due to lag, that got resolved in 24 hours by a regular GM, we now have queues in excess of 2 weeks for Senior GMs. BRING BACK GM ARKANON! :D 2 weeks lost research time :(
Sharupak	Posted - 2007.06.20 14:31:00 - [87]
w0rmy M. Corp M. PIRE	Posted - 2007.06.20 14:35:00 - [88] Originally by: scabbsssjr Heres a quick idea. When the shield is under attack it shrinks. You lost 1/3 of your shield so some of the stuff near the edge would be open to attack. Since a small pos has a small shield radius it appears as if you had your stuff to close to the edge. Heres a quick idea Learn the difference between a Shield and a Forcefield. Heres a hint, that big round bubble you see, is not a shield. Originally by: CCP Oveur I'm very sorry w0rmy, I beg your forgiveness. Originally by: Dianabolic I was never sworn to secrecy, w0rmy, sorry to dissappoint you.
Caia Gallente The Durandal Organization The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2007.06.20 14:50:00 - [89] Either the OP is leaving out some huge chunk of information, or this seems like an exploit. 1.) Everything was online. 2.) No non-alt corp members to fool with it. 3.) Password was set and reasonably hard to guess. 4.) No known security issues with his computer. 5.) Plenty of fuel. Definetly sounds like something strange is going on here.
Ashraaf Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2007.06.20 15:03:00 - [90] I really like to know what happen to this pos :) hope that ender give the info or have an info and /bow to Rod blaine for reading, thinking and answering



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: 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.