|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 15:30:00 -
[1]
What exactly were the issues that caused them to put the stop on? Was it the new feature (which incidentally is in the patch notes) about POS without passwords not having a force field any more or was it something about guns not shooting back? I've heard both from different sources.
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 15:45:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Spoon Thumb So is this the list of stuff that is broken with POS:
Guns won't fire back Problems with controlling POS guns Sovriegnty Requiring Modules doen't work: Cyno Damps don't work Jump bridge modules offline every DT Re-Onlined JB's only work for corp who own the towers, not alliance nor anyone else who may have standings to use them (as was possible before)
or is there anyhting more to add
- Some reactor/silo links just turned off for no reason. - POS with no password have no shield bubble. This is a feature but clearly the devs didn't consider that people could lock POS modules of online POS during wars. - Mobile labs apparently have about as much HP as a cargo container and can be suicide ganked with a frig.
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 15:49:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Admiral Nova
Originally by: Nyphur - POS with no password have no shield bubble. This is a feature but clearly the devs didn't consider that people could lock POS modules of online POS during wars.
This has always been the case (if you didn't set a password it said (inactive), and I have flown into many-a hostile POS and shot stuff etc for months, when they didn't have it set. Now though, the display bug is fixed, and you can actually see that they don't have a shield. Good when setting up a POS (no more false comfort), bad in that some pos's that have been unprotected for a while are now visibly so.
That's technically incorrect. The shield at least partially worked pre-patch without a password. With no password, someone could fly inside your shield and steal ships and stuff inside there but they couldn't attack POS mods because the field still prevented locking. Smartbombs also didn't work (and hopefully still don't) because the control tower absorbs the damage while online or the modules are immune to smartbombs or soemthing.
Right now, people can actually lock and shoot the modules while pre-patch this was not possible.
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 16:00:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Jesum How about attacking ships inside pos shields? Exploit, yeah?
Shouldn't be possible. You can't lock a ship inside the shield and you can't physically get inside without the password. If there's no password, there's no shield and no exploit.
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 16:01:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Yakoff So out of curiosity, say some one knocked a pos into reinforced mode and disabled it's arrays. This was before today's announcement. Will said knockers get banned?
No, GM rulings aren't applied retroactively. But it's annoying because the POS will come out of reinforced and can be repaired but you aren't allowed to finish it off.
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 16:05:00 -
[6]
Originally by: GM Spiral Some of your are asking why this was necessary.
This decree is to ensure the status quo holds until a fix can be deployed for those issues identified.
What issues? We're all talking about POS issues here but what exact issues prompted this ruling? That's what people are asking.
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 16:08:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Admiral Nova If you are really really lucky what was destroyed you can get back.
Yeah. To clarify, GMs can only give back what was destroyed. Anything that was dropped as loot cannot be given back because it was taken by another player and so giving it back would duplicate the items in question. Same as for ship reimbursements where you only get the destroyed modules.
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 16:32:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Nyphur on 09/12/2007 16:31:59
Originally by: Echon
Originally by: Nyphur What issues? We're all talking about POS issues here but what exact issues prompted this ruling? That's what people are asking.
A list from this thread:
Originally by: Spoon Thumb So is this the list of stuff that is broken with POS: -Echon
Yes, I did reference that list but you're not a GM. I asked specifically what broken game mechanics brought on the need for the pos warfare ban.
And as people have pointed out, this will not freeze the status quo. People can use POS to tactical advantage by hiding in the shields and telling their attackers that attacking the POS is a bannable offence. Reinforced timers are ticking, people can repair their POS without the attackers being able to stop them and labs, factories and reactors are still running but now without any risk until the bug is fixed. This is anything but status quo.
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 17:54:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Aliosis II Edited by: Aliosis II on 09/12/2007 17:41:26
Originally by: Nyphur Reinforced timers are ticking, people can repair their POS without the attackers being able to stop them
This isnt 100% true, there is nothing saying you can sit outside a POS shield and shoot the reppers... Your just not allowed to shoot the POS or its modules, players are fine.. Your still screwed with the passive recharge tho
Yes, but who's going to put enough of a force outside a POS to kill carriers and ospreys repairing the shield for several days straight until they're allowed to shoot the tower again? It's not feasible.
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 21:32:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Wyke Mossari
Originally by: GM Grimmi
EDIT: Clarification: Abusing the current POS warfare mechanics after the posting of the news item is considered an exploit. Those that participated in POS warfare prior to the news item will have nothing to fear.
It is common knowledge that benefiting from exploiting a known bug is against the EULA and bannable without further warnings. So why the change of policy now to let off those exploiting this for that last two days ? It not like this exploit was unknown. Cheating is Cheating and the exploitors should be made an example of and banned. If you don't ban these exploitors you are sending the message play by the rules and get shafted, cheat and get away with it.
Because it's not an exploit until a GM declares that it's an exploit. The people in that thread are not GMs and no GM ruling had been made until this thread. Punishing people retroactively would just be stupid. Would you like to log in to find that you'd been banned because GMs had decided that something that you did yesterday or last week which at the time wasn't against the rules wasn't allowed?
I'm all for punishing people for breaking the rules but that's not what you're asking for. You're asking for rules to be applied retroactively to punish people who didn't actually break any rules at the time.
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
|
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 00:17:00 -
[11]
Originally by: F'nog I gotta disagree with you there, Nyph. The old adage goes: "If it's too good to be true, it's probably an exploit."
The problem with that is where the line is drawn. At what point does something become "obviously" an exploit. For example, shooting at a POS that didn't fire back is not unheard of. The guns could be misconfigured in the management panel, couldn't they? And what if you kill an NPC BS and get 4% sec increase instead of 0.4%? Is that obviously an exploit or might you think it's intended?
The problem is that you'd be banning someone over their interpretation of some game mechanic. With the variety of players we have in eve from different countries and backgrounds, you can't just assume that all of them will instinctively know when a game mechanic is broken. Hell, I think webbing a ship that's aligned but not up to speed to make it instawarp is a bit broken but it's not officially an exploit and lots of people use it. If they decided tomorrow to make this an exploit, should I be banned for using it yesterday?
The only clear-cut way to make sure people are intentionally breaking the rules is to tell them it's against the rules and see if they continue to do it. For example, if you jettison 100 shuttles outside a station by accident, you will not be banned. Instead, if someone petitions, a GM will warn you not to do it again and only if you disobey the GM by doing it again will you be punished.
Quote: Do you really think that many people didn't realize that by attacking POSes that didn't fire back at all, with 0 RoF dreads wasn't a problem?
0 RoF dreads would be a serious issue but the guns not firing back could be user error.
Quote: The fact is that there were several, possibly many, corps out there who took advantage of this bug. They knew they were getting away with murder, but they continued to do it. I'm also sure these will be the first who stop attacking POSes, because they're also smart enough to read the news.
You're probably right about that but GMs really can't afford to spend hundreds of manhours hunting down every person who shot at a POS that didn't fire back and trying to determine whether or not they knew they were executing an exploit? This is the best they can do.
Quote: People have been banned in the past for exploiting things before something official was posted. The only reason CCP isn't doing anything this time is the workload of so many exploiting it.
As I said above, you're probably right about that but it's not just a matter of making it easier on themselves, it's also a question of quality of service. GM manhours spent thoroughly resolving this might be better spent on the dozens of other issues they're having to deal with.
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 00:23:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Jamie Hara Are you condoning the exploitation of bugs that was done before this news item was posted?
It wasn't an exploit until a GM declared it an exploit. That's the whole point.
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 02:48:00 -
[13]
Originally by: F'nog I'd hope that after almost 4 years we could have learned something from the Zombie incident.
Ah but even the Zombies weren't permabanned. They got temp bans, as I recall, because they should have known better. But of course they didn't stop when GMs asked them to, did they? Disobeying a GM and committing an exploit that has never officially been deemed an exploit are two different things. Someone shooting a POS after the announcement did the former and someone shooting one before the announcement did the latter. The former is the only one that will involk serious punishment because it shows informed intent to break the rules.
Taking advantage of things that seem too good to be true is what eve is all about, it does not show intent to break the game's rules.
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 11:37:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Tharrn
Originally by: Nyphur
Originally by: Jamie Hara Are you condoning the exploitation of bugs that was done before this news item was posted?
It wasn't an exploit until a GM declared it an exploit. That's the whole point.
If someone found a way to duplicate ISK or items he'd be banned as soon as the GMs found out. Then the exploit would be fixed and THEN it would be declared an exploit. An exploit is usually NOT only an exploit after it has been declared.
Do you have any evidence yo back this assumption up? Have people ever been banned for duplicating items or isk without warnings to stop from GMs first? I have yet to hear of GMs ever even temp-banning someone without first giving a warning to them to stop unless what they're doing is explicitly mentioned in the EULA. Even the zombies were told to stop and didn't listen to GMs.
But you also have to remember what you're asking for here. You're asking that everyone who has engaged in POS warfare since the patch be banned from Eve. Every major alliance's main pvp force would be banned and CCP would lose a substantial portion of their playerbase. You might as well ask them to ban all missionrunners because a certain mission NPC gives ten times higher bounty than it's supposed to(they aren't but it's an example). It's just not going to happen.
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 00:32:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Wyke Mossari
It's an exploit when :
Quote:
An exploit is when someone bypasses normal game mechanics, such as by utilizing a bug in the game, allowing him to take advantage of other players without them having any means of preventing it whatsoever.
http://support.eve-online.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=34
Fair enough. So 0 ROF dreads would be exploits but since having a password on your POS prevents shooting at the mods, someone wardeccing you and shooting your POS modules isn't?
Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened. |
|
|
|