EVE Search - i consider this cheating

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

i consider this cheating

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Wyliee Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.01 16:39:00 - [1] we war decked a corp to do this we took a vote, 24hours wait then we decked them, 24 hours wait ok then good to go. they then joined imune empire aliance, then imediately left, 24 hours later we are left not being able to shoot them without redecking them again. i consider this cheating, and using a loophole that ccp should address.
Jimer Lins Gallente Pod Six Research	Posted - 2008.01.01 16:44:00 - [2] Looks like 2008 will be the year of the iMune whines. 2007 was the year of the Privateer whines. Which corp did you declare on (no k in "war declaration", btw)? Need a covops or scout? Recruit me!
Kelron Queldine Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2008.01.01 16:48:00 - [3] Originally by: Jimer Lins Looks like 2008 will be the year of the iMune whines. 2007 was the year of the Privateer whines. Privateers were just starting lots of wars, iMune are fairly clearly abusing the alliance war system. If decs were meant to have to be redeclared every 2 days, CCP would have made it that way. --------------------------- Vanilla Crazy Cake!
Richard Phallus	Posted - 2008.01.01 16:55:00 - [4] Well that's good at least. The more people that abuse this mechanic the sooner it'll get fixed. It'll still likely take a while like the privateers fix did.
techzer0 IDLE GUNS	Posted - 2008.01.01 16:57:00 - [5] Looks like you didn't win the iMune(ity) challenge eh? Got voted off the island? ____________________ Hi. I'm not an alt :)
Wyliee Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.01 17:04:00 - [6] i dont think war the privateers did was that bad, i coudlnt see the issue with it. but what imune are doing or 'offering' is abuse of game mechanics and recieving this message 'The war between Unethical Medical Services and Taurus Inc is coming to an end. Unethical Medical Services has surrendered to Taurus Inc. The war will be declared as being over after approximately 24 hours.' b4 we even get chance to engage the enemy, it is a problem. end up having to rewar deck them once every 2 days! FIX IT
Jimer Lins Gallente Pod Six Research	Posted - 2008.01.01 17:13:00 - [7] It's only abuse when the people you don't like do it. Need a covops or scout? Recruit me!
Admiral Nova Strike Team Nova	Posted - 2008.01.01 17:41:00 - [8] Hmm. This is no more or less of an exploit than what privateers did. Still means it needs to be fixed. When leaving an alliance the war dec needs to stay active against the corp until the next bill is due rather than 24 hours.
Admiral Nova Strike Team Nova	Posted - 2008.01.01 17:43:00 - [9] Oh, and keep in mind there are DOZENS of ways to avoid any losses to war decs, which are not exploits like this. If people really are that resistant to being war decced I don't think you're going to find any more targets from them if this loophole is closed.
Wyliee Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.01 17:45:00 - [10] Originally by: Jimer Lins It's only abuse when the people you don't like do it. thats typical answer i woudl expect from a carebear. as a merc corp, our game play revolves around war and empire war decs. there are many reasons for war dec's and not all of them are for mindless killing of noob's, often is it to take out stragetic targets in high sec. Removal of competition ETC ETC. all good game fun. at this rate wardecs wil be useless, and we wil not be able to remove a target pos from high sec ever, as you can put enough stront into a pos to protect it till the target corp can cheat thier way out of the dec.
Jimer Lins Gallente Pod Six Research	Posted - 2008.01.01 17:53:00 - [11] Edited by: Jimer Lins on 01/01/2008 17:54:18 Originally by: Wyliee Originally by: Jimer Lins It's only abuse when the people you don't like do it. thats typical answer i woudl expect from a carebear. as a merc corp, our game play revolves around war and empire war decs. there are many reasons for war dec's and not all of them are for mindless killing of noob's, often is it to take out stragetic targets in high sec. Removal of competition ETC ETC. all good game fun. at this rate wardecs wil be useless, and we wil not be able to remove a target pos from high sec ever, as you can put enough stront into a pos to protect it till the target corp can cheat thier way out of the dec. I didn't say it wasn't a problem, and I'm not saying you're griefing anyone. But way to go ad hominem with the "carebear" ***. Maybe I should have said something insipid like "griefer tears are the sweetest" or something, you know- just to keep up the standards of the forums by not allowing a post to go by without a personal attack. However, the hypocrisy about this has been pretty blatant. Can't claim what the Privateers were doing wasn't an abuse of war mechanics and then claim this is. Abuse is abuse, and if you're going to take a logically consistent stand, this is pretty much the extreme opposite of what the Privateers pulled off- mass evasion of war declarations via abuse of the game mechanics. Is it a problem? Maybe. Me, I'm just enjoying all the whining by the usual suspects who previously lambasted anyone who carped about the Privateers. The worm turns and eventually CCP will get around to plugging this loophole. Until they do, the shoe is on the proverbial other foot. Need a covops or scout? Recruit me!**
Hannobaal Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.01 17:55:00 - [12] Privateers used the war system the way it was intended. It's just that the system itself was broken. But what they did wasn't an exploit. This thing is completely different. You should definitely petition them.
Don J Doom Guard	Posted - 2008.01.01 17:57:00 - [13] Edited by: Don J on 01/01/2008 18:02:30 It completely breaks the standard wardec system, and i find it very difficult to believe CCP would intend the wardec mechanics to be used in this way. Hence, exploit. Privs just wardecced a buttload of people. It was a bit but hardly an exploit, and look what happened to them. Prepare for nerfbat imo. edit: Thinking on it some more, does this mean that if you wardec a buddies corp, who then pulls the imune trick, you get a nice 1 week base rate war against a load of people who may or may not be exploiting game mechanics? Because i love that idea.
Wyliee Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.01 18:10:00 - [14] Originally by: Don J Edited by: Don J on 01/01/2008 18:02:30 It completely breaks the standard wardec system, and i find it very difficult to believe CCP would intend the wardec mechanics to be used in this way. Hence, exploit. Privs just wardecced a buttload of people. It was a bit but hardly an exploit, and look what happened to them. Prepare for nerfbat imo. edit: Thinking on it some more, does this mean that if you wardec a buddies corp, who then pulls the imune trick, you get a nice 1 week base rate war against a load of people who may or may not be exploiting game mechanics? Because i love that idea. imune have only 17 members so it wouldnt be worth it.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.01.01 18:25:00 - [15] Originally by: Hannobaal Privateers used the war system the way it was intended. It's just that the system itself was broken. But what they did wasn't an exploit. This thing is completely different. You should definitely petition them. Try to find the difference between this two phrases: Imune used the war system the way it was intended. It's just that the system itself was broken. But what they did wasn't an exploit. The war system has several hole, privateers found one and it was plugged, Imune has found another and it will be plugged. Both action were within the rules boundaries when they were done (and Imune still is), what Privateers did was never sanctioned as an exploit, the system was changed as it was a broken mechanic. My bet is that the result of the Imune tactic will be exactly the same. Petitioning can accelerate the change, but it will not be declared an exploit.
Jimer Lins Gallente Pod Six Research	Posted - 2008.01.01 18:29:00 - [16] Originally by: Hannobaal Privateers used the war system the way it was intended. It's just that the system itself was broken. But what they did wasn't an exploit. This thing is completely different. You should definitely petition them. If that were correct, it wouldn't have been changed with a sliding scale. And what iMune is doing is using the war system in the way it was intended- arguably, it's still broken, just in newly understood and entertaining ways. But you can't have it both ways. Privateers needed nerfing, this will probably get the same treatment. In my opinion, "exploit" is probably not the correct term for either situation, but more correctly "abuse of unintended consequences of game mechanics". Need a covops or scout? Recruit me!
Yohanes Flame Point-Zero SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.01 18:33:00 - [17] I find it equally annoying with the wardec and insta restraction with the 24hrs of war. If your can call it that. ____________________________ One Thead to rule them all - Boot.ini pre-patch thread
Hannobaal Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.01 18:34:00 - [18] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Hannobaal Privateers used the war system the way it was intended. It's just that the system itself was broken. But what they did wasn't an exploit. This thing is completely different. You should definitely petition them. Try to find the difference between this two phrases: Imune used the war system the way it was intended. It's just that the system itself was broken. But what they did wasn't an exploit. The war system has several hole, privateers found one and it was plugged, Imune has found another and it will be plugged. Both action were within the rules boundaries when they were done (and Imune still is), what Privateers did was never sanctioned as an exploit, the system was changed as it was a broken mechanic. My bet is that the result of the Imune tactic will be exactly the same. Petitioning can accelerate the change, but it will not be declared an exploit. If what these people are doing is not an exploit then nothing is an exploit. I think any person with an ounce of common sense can see that this can not possibly be intended game mechanics. The Privateers on the other hand simply declared war on people. There is nothing about that could be an exploit. The problem was that being able to declare war so easily on so many people so easily was a very bad thing for the game. Saying that what the Privateers did was an exploit would be like saying that people who fit tons of inertial stabilizers on their Typhoons back in spring were exploiting.
Ponderous Thunderstroke Republic War Machine Industries	Posted - 2008.01.01 19:09:00 - [19] Originally by: Hannobaal Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Hannobaal Privateers used the war system the way it was intended. It's just that the system itself was broken. But what they did wasn't an exploit. This thing is completely different. You should definitely petition them. Try to find the difference between this two phrases: Imune used the war system the way it was intended. It's just that the system itself was broken. But what they did wasn't an exploit. The war system has several hole, privateers found one and it was plugged, Imune has found another and it will be plugged. Both action were within the rules boundaries when they were done (and Imune still is), what Privateers did was never sanctioned as an exploit, the system was changed as it was a broken mechanic. My bet is that the result of the Imune tactic will be exactly the same. Petitioning can accelerate the change, but it will not be declared an exploit. If what these people are doing is not an exploit then nothing is an exploit. I think any person with an ounce of common sense can see that this can not possibly be intended game mechanics. The Privateers on the other hand simply declared war on people. There is nothing about that could be an exploit. The problem was that being able to declare war so easily on so many people so easily was a very bad thing for the game. Saying that what the Privateers did was an exploit would be like saying that people who fit tons of inertial stabilizers on their Typhoons back in spring were exploiting. That it's an exploit is without question. It clearly is exploiting an unintended consequence of certain actions in regards to the wardec system. The 64 billion ISK question is...is it an exploit that CCP will do anything about? There are exploits that are allowed in EVE. Apparently, this 'feature' was PRE-petitioned before IMune started offering it, and was cleared. If that is true, then what? I'd say that the lack of a CCP response has shown that, at least in the present tense, it's not an actionable exploit. Whether they're still looking at it, waiting to see if it blows over, avoiding it like the plague so they don't have to fix the wardec system, or just get a perverse pleasure out of watching griefers get blueballed...well, that remains to be seen.
InigoMontoya Amarr KIA Corp KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.01 19:15:00 - [20] I would most definately say this was an abuse and exploit of game mechanics. I would sue Concord for breach of contract, you paid the fees, where is your pew pew?
Adonis 4174	Posted - 2008.01.01 19:37:00 - [21] Sounds similar to giving someone roles to stop them quitting to me. ---- Anything less is wasted effort
Kessiaan	Posted - 2008.01.01 19:38:00 - [22] Edited by: Kessiaan on 01/01/2008 19:39:18 I do think this an exploit but so long as there's a mechanic to escape wardecs people are going to do it. Whether it's this method, dissolving/reforming the corp, or everyone going back to the NPC corp you have to accept the fact that if people can escape and don't have anything to lose by doing it they will. In highsec I feel most people expect the balance of power to favor the carebears and mercs/privateers aren't going to get much sympathy for their cause. Perhaps a better course of action would be some sort of officially sanctioned method of war cancellation in Empire. Perhaps if people paid 'protection' money to CONCORD on a monthly basis they wouldn't allow wardecs against that corp unless the dec'ing corp paid 200-300% of the protection amount. Of course if anything like this happens all the existing loopholes would have to be taken out. ----- My in Eve Profile My BattleClinic Page
Karlemgne Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2008.01.01 19:50:00 - [23] Originally by: Kessiaan Edited by: Kessiaan on 01/01/2008 19:39:18 I do think this an exploit but so long as there's a mechanic to escape wardecs people are going to do it. Whether it's this method, dissolving/reforming the corp, or everyone going back to the NPC corp you have to accept the fact that if people can escape and don't have anything to lose by doing it they will. In highsec I feel most people expect the balance of power to favor the carebears and mercs/privateers aren't going to get much sympathy for their cause. Perhaps a better course of action would be some sort of officially sanctioned method of war cancellation in Empire. Perhaps if people paid 'protection' money to CONCORD on a monthly basis they wouldn't allow wardecs against that corp unless the dec'ing corp paid 200-300% of the protection amount. Of course if anything like this happens all the existing loopholes would have to be taken out. Yes, well the definition of an exploit is being able to use game mechanics in an unintended way for your advantage. If we used you're logic nothing would be an exploit. Find something in the game that allows you to duplicate ships at no cost, well it wouldn't be an exploit, after all it is in game and someone is going to use it. -Karlemgne
Kessiaan	Posted - 2008.01.01 19:55:00 - [24] Originally by: Karlemgne Yes, well the definition of an exploit is being able to use game mechanics in an unintended way for your advantage. If we used you're logic nothing would be an exploit. Find something in the game that allows you to duplicate ships at no cost, well it wouldn't be an exploit, after all it is in game and someone is going to use it. -Karlemgne The problem is that is the defination of an exploit... in other games. In Eve anything you can do using in-game mechanics is legal.. period. CCP may discourage some things but when was the last time you ever heard of any action being taken against anyone for any completley in-game action? That's why I think the mechanics themselves need to change. If you say "Oh noes that's cheating the carebears can't just jump around alliances it's not fair!" they're just going to point at everything equally shady that you've done and said in recent times and tell you learn to live wit it. And they'd be right. The best solution, and the only one that will permanantly solve any kind of issue with game mechanics, is to change those mechanics so they line up with CCP's vision of the game (and keep them in business, whichever is more important at the moment ) ----- My in Eve Profile My BattleClinic Page
Xaen Caldari Thunder Muffin	Posted - 2008.01.01 20:03:00 - [25] Originally by: Paper Rock is fine, nerf scissors. -- Support fixing the EVE UI \| Suggest Jita fixes
Jimer Lins Gallente Pod Six Research	Posted - 2008.01.01 20:05:00 - [26] Originally by: Xaen Originally by: Paper Rock is fine, nerf scissors. No, just boost paper. Need a covops or scout? Recruit me!
Firkragg Blue Labs Knights Of the Southerncross	Posted - 2008.01.01 20:11:00 - [27] Return decs to how they were and leave imune how it is. Everyones happy.
Ehranavaar	Posted - 2008.01.01 20:19:00 - [28] Originally by: Kessiaan In highsec I feel most people expect the balance of power to favor the carebears and mercs/privateers aren't going to get much sympathy for their cause. Perhaps a better course of action would be some sort of officially sanctioned method of war cancellation in Empire. Perhaps if people paid 'protection' money to CONCORD on a monthly basis they wouldn't allow wardecs against that corp unless the dec'ing corp paid 200-300% of the protection amount. Of course if anything like this happens all the existing loopholes would have to be taken out. the wars can happen because someone bribed the concord officials to look the other way. what eve needs is a mechanic to let the war decced party to bribe the officials to pay attention again. after that let the highest bidder prevail.
Kharadran Sullath Caldari Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2008.01.01 20:34:00 - [29] Edited by: Kharadran Sullath on 01/01/2008 20:34:07 Bah, nvm. ------ Originally by: Graveyard Tan I call bull** and troll. If you are deaf**, how are you even able to read this or type replies?
cal nereus Bounty Hunter - Dark Legion Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.01.01 20:37:00 - [30] Originally by: Jimer Lins Originally by: Xaen Originally by: Paper Rock is fine, nerf scissors. No, just boost paper. I never liked paper. It just isn't a realistic choice against a rock. --- Join BH-DL Skills
Jonny JoJo Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.01.01 20:42:00 - [31] Hold on Just re-dec the corp. Even if they try to join imune again, you can still shoot them, and nothing is worse for a carebear corp that has to spend all its time in imune with its dozens of wardecs Refresh to see next Real Life CCP sig(16 total)
Galsia Yovinda Gallente Dec Me Please	Posted - 2008.01.01 20:43:00 - [32] Originally by: Jonny JoJo Hold on Just re-dec the corp. Even if they try to join imune again, you can still shoot them, and nothing is worse for a carebear corp that has to spend all its time in imune with its dozens of wardecs Too simple and costs isk
CN 573	Posted - 2008.01.01 20:48:00 - [33] This is hilarious. I love seeing bullies cry.
Iria Ahrens Amarr 101st Space Marine Force Knights Of the Southerncross	Posted - 2008.01.01 21:05:00 - [34] Originally by: Ehranavaar the wars can happen because someone bribed the concord officials to look the other way. what eve needs is a mechanic to let the war decced party to bribe the officials to pay attention again. after that let the highest bidder prevail. This highly appeals to my sense of corruption in Eve.
Jonny JoJo Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.01.01 21:06:00 - [35] Originally by: Galsia Yovinda Originally by: Jonny JoJo Hold on Just re-dec the corp. Even if they try to join imune again, you can still shoot them, and nothing is worse for a carebear corp that has to spend all its time in imune with its dozens of wardecs Too simple and costs isk Thats the point of a wardec is it not? Just keep decing the corp and they will be stuck in imune with its 20 wars. Refresh to see next Real Life CCP sig(16 total)
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2008.01.01 21:27:00 - [36] Originally by: Jonny JoJo Thats the point of a wardec is it not? Just keep decing the corp and they will be stuck in imune with its 20 wars. Does this actually work though? I think it actually works like this: Mercs war dec Carebears 24 hours of "prep time" Carebears join iMune Carebears leave iMune War is transferred to iMune Mercs are at war with iMune Mercs are not at war with Carebears -- Mercs can now fight iMune Mercs war dec Carebears Carebears join iMune Carebears leave iMune New war is transferred to iMune Mercs are not at war with Carebears -- Mercs can now only fight Carebears for the 24 hours until the original war cancels. So in the end, even if you keep wardec'ing them, you'd only gain every second or third day to shoot them. -Liang -- Originally by: "QProQ" When they said to put 'stabs on your 'cane, they meant GYROSTABS!

GM Nova	Posted - 2008.01.01 21:35:00 - [37] This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support Senior Game Master


GM Nova	Posted - 2008.01.01 21:44:00 - [38] What the hell??? GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support

Gaven Blands	Posted - 2008.01.01 21:44:00 - [39] Owned. Thank god the st00pid is over. -- Awwwww Diddums! Did I wardec your highsec alt recently or something?
Suitonia Gallente interimo	Posted - 2008.01.01 21:45:00 - [40] I love you GM nova --- I've always wondered about those Vagabond pilots...
Jimer Lins Gallente Pod Six Research	Posted - 2008.01.01 21:45:00 - [41] Originally by: GM Nova What the hell??? OK, now I'm scared. Need a covops or scout? Recruit me!
Ki An Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum	Posted - 2008.01.01 21:45:00 - [42] Love ya Nova <3
Kransthow AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.01.01 21:48:00 - [43] Originally by: GM Nova What the hell??? QFT
Empyre Domestic Reform	Posted - 2008.01.01 21:55:00 - [44] Originally by: Kransthow Originally by: GM Nova What the hell??? QFT yeah i know. privateers got months of coming and going in wars at their leisure before any stance was taken and changes made. i'll repost my questions from the iMune thread: Originally by: Empyre why allow pos in hi-sec at all? it sounds to me like people are wanting to bring pvp as a function of capitalization into hi-sec. if this is the case then ccp should come clear with the actual intentions for hi-sec altogether. you can't have it both ways. if its meant to be a buffer for new players to have a relative safe haven then pvpers need to start respecting this. on the other hand, if their intention was to allow and condone complete capitalization and the use of force to remove competition completely and entirely from the game then they need to stop playing around trying to please both sides as well. either allow full utilization of pos in hi-sec (minus sov) or take them and moons completely out of hi-sec because they're worthless. I <3 empire.. usually.
Scott Ryder Infestation. The Cosa Nostra	Posted - 2008.01.01 22:00:00 - [45] Originally by: GM Nova What the hell??? Reported for profanity :o
Taua Roqa Minmatar Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2008.01.01 22:06:00 - [46] I think they said what the hell because their signature was doubled? -------------------------------------------- Threads are stacking-nerfed; the more posts you add the less effective those posts are. mooooooo.
Juliux Novi	Posted - 2008.01.01 22:07:00 - [47] Edited by: Juliux Novi on 01/01/2008 22:08:59 my 2 isk on this situation... I am an old player returning after several years break, so I must first state that I know almost zero about "privateers" corp. I have been reading the imune threads to keep up since it's semi-interesting and can effect many of us. I can't say I really support this, it does not fit my style of play. But thats just me, and everyone enjoys different things. However! CCP is only to blame here. From what I can tell, the imune guys started this when it happened to them. They petitioned the GMs, and the GM replied with "working as intended" or something... Probably feeling screwed over by CCP, these guys are simply having a little fun and/or revenge :) Deep down I hope they are doing this to open CCP's eyes, and not just to cause grief. So, to sum it up, its not an exploit, Imune pre-petitioned this before they went public. If anything, we should be directing our frustrations to the Devs to bring about change within the war dec system. Thanks for reading and Happy New Year EDIT: I didn't see GM Nova's post before I made my posting, does this mean the Imune thing is finally over?
steveid SkyMarshal Logistics iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.01 22:12:00 - [48] this was pre petitioned so I'll be interested to see how this turns out.
Windjammer	Posted - 2008.01.01 22:16:00 - [49] Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support A great pity that ganking ships in Jita and other high sec places is not afforded the same attention. However, I think everyone was expecting a comment of this sort from a GM or other CCP representative.
Jimer Lins Gallente Pod Six Research	Posted - 2008.01.01 22:16:00 - [50] Originally by: steveid this was pre petitioned so I'll be interested to see how this turns out. GM Nova is a Senior GM. Unless he or she is countermanded by someone higher up the food chain, I'd say you're hosed. Need a covops or scout? Recruit me!
Empyre Domestic Reform	Posted - 2008.01.01 22:17:00 - [51] Originally by: steveid this was pre petitioned so I'll be interested to see how this turns out. that just makes it interesting then. so which gm will lose their job? one of them seems to be making it up as they go if the petition result said the opposite. I <3 empire.. usually.
Jimer Lins Gallente Pod Six Research	Posted - 2008.01.01 22:17:00 - [52] Originally by: Windjammer Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support A great pity that ganking ships in Jita and other high sec places is not afforded the same attention. However, I think everyone was expecting a comment of this sort from a GM or other CCP representative. Ganking ships in Jita and other high sec areas is totally allowed, as long as you don't avoid the consequence (loss of your ship to CONCORD, loss of sec status). That's been status quo for years now. Need a covops or scout? Recruit me!
steveid SkyMarshal Logistics iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.01 22:19:00 - [53] well if your reading GM Nova, could you take a look at this as the alliance leaders pre - petitioned and went to some trouble and expense based upon that supposed knowledge. I'd just like clarification based upon the facts rather than the op.
Wyliee Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.01 22:20:00 - [54] it now seems we have upset imune - they have stated that they will contact every corp we ever war deck, and offer them the get out of jail free card. basicly wreaking our ability as a corp to do merc work in high sec. this leaves us with only a few choices. 1. not bother war deckin anyone ever again. 2. war deck random corps and use there arangement with imune to go after imune's core management (which i expect are a bunch of****gie alts). 3. petition them for game exploitation and harrasment. 4. cry. i think it wil be a combination of 2 and 3, but it is far from ideal.
Wyliee Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.01 22:23:00 - [55] Edited by: Wyliee on 01/01/2008 22:23:20 Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support you might wanna get rid of this thread then? http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=665774
Ki An Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum	Posted - 2008.01.01 22:25:00 - [56] Originally by: steveid well if your reading GM Nova, could you take a look at this as the alliance leaders pre - petitioned and went to some trouble and expense based upon that supposed knowledge. I'd just like clarification based upon the facts rather than the op. Originally by: Ashley Sky Not to burst your bubble or anything, but we pre-petitioned this and were told by a bug hunter that this is an intended feature. Originally by: Ashley Sky bug hunter
Empyre Domestic Reform	Posted - 2008.01.01 22:27:00 - [57] Edited by: Empyre on 01/01/2008 22:28:52 Originally by: Wyliee it now seems we have upset imune - they have stated that they will contact every corp we ever war deck, and offer them the get out of jail free card. basicly wreaking our ability as a corp to do merc work in high sec. this leaves us with only a few choices. 1. not bother war deckin anyone ever again. 2. war deck random corps and use there arangement with imune to go after imune's core management (which i expect are a bunch of**gie alts). 3. petition them for game exploitation and harrasment. 4. cry. i think it wil be a combination of 2 and 3, but it is far from ideal. by calling them**gie alts it kind of seems like you're doing #4 right now. and as for #2, that sounds like using another game mechanic to get at those that used another game mechanic against you, hey! (ps bug hunters don't count.. might have lost this one iMune) I <3 empire.. usually.
Speed Addict	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:01:00 - [58] Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support i could kiss you right now, but im afraid for a warning - - - Hi Speed Devil You are receiving this notice to inform you that your posting privileges have now been permanently terminated. now don't blame me for altposting :(
Tachuro Otapaku	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:08:00 - [59] I can see where people think it's cheating - but all it's going to accomplish is the creation of chat channels and bigger NPC corporations.
Warloxx Dominus Imperium	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:15:00 - [60] Steveid, Your game is over! Not sure how much more clarification you need. Ashley and Wynonia - mission accomplished, gj guys. Wisdom gained from study of the basic principles of war underscores that war is not the business of managers with checklists; it is the art of Combat Leaders.
SiJira	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:15:00 - [61] Originally by: Tachuro Otapaku I can see where people think it's cheating - but all it's going to accomplish is the creation of chat channels and bigger NPC corporations. gm nova cleared it up Trashed sig, Shark was here
Vadimik	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:16:00 - [62] Ok, now, I really don't like how it's going. With all due respect, posting in a ramdom thread is not the way to do it. It was not an exploit just about yesterday, and it was pre-petitioned to double-check. Want to change that, CCP ? Great, just don't do it via posting in a random forum thread noone really reads. Post in in news section, set a 48 hours period for people to read it, then deem it an exploit. And some explanations would be more than wellcomed as well. The whole issue seems just about as much of an exploit as many others, that have been confirmed to be exploits not.
Wyliee Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:17:00 - [63] Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support and thank you for making this clear :)
Wesley Baird Murder-Death-Kill	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:19:00 - [64] Originally by: Vadimik Ok, now, I really don't like how it's going. With all due respect, posting in a ramdom thread is not the way to do it. It was not an exploit just about yesterday, and it was pre-petitioned to double-check. Want to change that, CCP ? Great, just don't do it via posting in a random forum thread noone really reads. Post in in news section, set a 48 hours period for people to read it, then deem it an exploit. And some explanations would be more than wellcomed as well. The whole issue seems just about as much of an exploit as many others, that have been confirmed to be exploits not. turn on your corp ticker or post with your main....regardless this was an exploit and should be stomped out...the rules we never intended to give people a quick out... CCP is right to move quickly...
Vadimik	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:22:00 - [65] Originally by: Wesley Baird Originally by: Vadimik Ok, now, I really don't like how it's going. With all due respect, posting in a ramdom thread is not the way to do it. It was not an exploit just about yesterday, and it was pre-petitioned to double-check. Want to change that, CCP ? Great, just don't do it via posting in a random forum thread noone really reads. Post in in news section, set a 48 hours period for people to read it, then deem it an exploit. And some explanations would be more than wellcomed as well. The whole issue seems just about as much of an exploit as many others, that have been confirmed to be exploits not. turn on your corp ticker or post with your main....regardless this was an exploit and should be stomped out...the rules we never intended to give people a quick out... CCP is right to move quickly... Reading comprehension much ? I'm all for fixing broken stuff, just let's make the changes: a) public before they hit b) somewhat explained.
Pennwisedom	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:23:00 - [66] Originally by: Vadimik It was not an exploit just about yesterday, and it was pre-petitioned to double-check. Incase you haven't heard this the first one thousand times, what a Bug Hunter says doesn't mean anything at all, as they don't have any power.
Flinx Evenstar Minmatar Omniscient Order	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:23:00 - [67] Originally by: Vadimik It was not an exploit just about yesterday, and it was pre-petitioned to double-check. Never was sweety. Read the original thread. A bug hunter (not a GM) said it was an intended game feature that a war dec follows the alliance and not the corp That is ALL that was confirmed. (And he was right to say that) Good job to iMune if your goal was to publicize this obvious loophole.
Praxis1452 The Bastards	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:38:00 - [68] Well it's nice for people to not have a way out but seriously random GM's posting in this thread does not really help. Make an announcement or something. Personally I think that if it's within the mechanic's it's fine. So change the mechanic not warn people for doing something that's within game limits. If the loophole was there it's ccp's fault and they must fix it. Basically if the machine isn't working fix the machine, not add new things too it hoping it will. I mean at what point is it possible to say that joining iMune is not an exploit? if you stay for 1 day or 2 days, etc. Just seems like a bad fix. ôHe who must expend his life to prolong life cannot enjoy it, and he who is still seeking for his life does not have it and can as little enjoy it.ö
Mistrala DeLegra	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:39:00 - [69] Im surprised that a GM could call this action "Cheating"...please explain why this is cheating, when CCP have been alowing these so called merc corps to war dec any noob corp that they feel fit too for no other good reason than the fact that "They Can" The good people of eve and empire might as well just stay in there NPC corp from now on as the way im reading this is that its ok for these merc corps to grief noob players in empire....but god forbid the noobs fight back by finding a way to get out of a war dec. Good on you Imune, and Wyliee...if this corp you war decced could'nt fight and split up...would you also call that cheating and whine about it on the forums so quickly???
Praxis1452 The Bastards	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:41:00 - [70] Originally by: Mistrala DeLegra Im surprised that a GM could call this action "Cheating"...please explain why this is cheating, when CCP have been alowing these so called merc corps to war dec any noob corp that they feel fit too for no other good reason than the fact that "They Can" The good people of eve and empire might as well just stay in there NPC corp from now on as the way im reading this is that its ok for these merc corps to grief noob players in empire....but god forbid the noobs fight back by finding a way to get out of a war dec. Good on you Imune, and Wyliee...if this corp you war decced could'nt fight and split up...would you also call that cheating and whine about it on the forums so quickly??? It's within game mechanics to get war-decced by anyone. If you can't handle it join the npc corp. Get over it. Suicide ganking is just as fine as scamming. Oh I feel so much pity for the noob. . there's absolutely NOTHING they can do, right? I mean t1 frigates are expensive as hell. God my wallet can only afford 1 loss. I'm sure that these merc corps will ACTIVELY hunt these noobs in their lvl 1 missions in high-sec space. I mean t1 frigate loot is worth a lot right? ôHe who must expend his life to prolong life cannot enjoy it, and he who is still seeking for his life does not have it and can as little enjoy it.ö
Vadimik	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:42:00 - [71] Originally by: Flinx Evenstar Originally by: Vadimik It was not an exploit just about yesterday, and it was pre-petitioned to double-check. Never was sweety. Read the original thread. A bug hunter (not a GM) said it was an intended game feature that a war dec follows the alliance and not the corp That is ALL that was confirmed. (And he was right to say that) Good job to iMune if your goal was to publicize this obvious loophole. This trick was known for a looong time, and yet was not labeled an exploit up until now. And then again, it does not matter. Even if it was, in fact, confirmed to be legal at some point, CCP has all the rights to deem it an exploit now. What worries me, is the way they do it - in some random thread, without any explanation.
Praxis1452 The Bastards	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:47:00 - [72] Originally by: Vadimik Originally by: Flinx Evenstar Originally by: Vadimik It was not an exploit just about yesterday, and it was pre-petitioned to double-check. Never was sweety. Read the original thread. A bug hunter (not a GM) said it was an intended game feature that a war dec follows the alliance and not the corp That is ALL that was confirmed. (And he was right to say that) Good job to iMune if your goal was to publicize this obvious loophole. This trick was known for a looong time, and yet was not labeled an exploit up until now. And then again, it does not matter. Even if it was, in fact, confirmed to be legal at some point, CCP has all the rights to deem it an exploit now. What worries me, is the way they do it - in some random thread, without any explanation. yeah pretty much. ôHe who must expend his life to prolong life cannot enjoy it, and he who is still seeking for his life does not have it and can as little enjoy it.ö
Vadimik	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:48:00 - [73] Edited by: Vadimik on 01/01/2008 23:48:58 Originally by: Praxis1452 Originally by: Mistrala DeLegra Im surprised that a GM could call this action "Cheating"...please explain why this is cheating, when CCP have been alowing these so called merc corps to war dec any noob corp that they feel fit too for no other good reason than the fact that "They Can" The good people of eve and empire might as well just stay in there NPC corp from now on as the way im reading this is that its ok for these merc corps to grief noob players in empire....but god forbid the noobs fight back by finding a way to get out of a war dec. Good on you Imune, and Wyliee...if this corp you war decced could'nt fight and split up...would you also call that cheating and whine about it on the forums so quickly??? It's within game mechanics to get war-decced by anyone. If you can't handle it join the npc corp. Get over it. Suicide ganking is just as fine as scamming. Oh I feel so much pity for the noob. . there's absolutely NOTHING they can do, right? I mean t1 frigates are expensive as hell. God my wallet can only afford 1 loss. I'm sure that these merc corps will ACTIVELY hunt these noobs in their lvl 1 missions in high-sec space. I mean t1 frigate loot is worth a lot right? Sarcasm is not helping you, as one Mistrala's points is perfectly valid: it's nowhere obvious it's an exloit, and it's even less obvious why it's an exploit (cause it can be an exploit for various reasons). So some explanations are quite wellcomed.
Flinx Evenstar Minmatar Omniscient Order	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:51:00 - [74] Edited by: Flinx Evenstar on 01/01/2008 23:55:28 Originally by: Mistrala DeLegra please explain why this is cheating, when CCP have been alowing these so called merc corps to war dec any noob corp that they feel fit too for no other good reason than the fact that "They Can" Does that really need explaining? Edit: Vadimik, it became an exploit, when an alliance's soul purpose was to allow corps to dodge wars. Up until then, it was a feature of alliance warfare, for example we had a corp surrender tonight because they left he alliance we are at war with atm. If you cannot see the difference between a corp surrendering under an alliance war dec, and an alliance created purely to avoid war decs...then you have trouble seeing the forest for the trees
Vadimik	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:53:00 - [75] Originally by: Flinx Evenstar Originally by: Mistrala DeLegra please explain why this is cheating, when CCP have been alowing these so called merc corps to war dec any noob corp that they feel fit too for no other good reason than the fact that "They Can" Does that really need explaining? Yes, it does.
Wyliee Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:54:00 - [76] Originally by: Vadimik This trick was known for a looong time, and yet was not labeled an exploit up until now. And then again, it does not matter. Even if it was, in fact, confirmed to be legal at some point, CCP has all the rights to deem it an exploit now. What worries me, is the way they do it - in some random thread, without any explanation. GM's cant win they dont respond everyone is going come'on wh dont ccp respond.. they do and they get crap for not making some glorify anoucement. in my mind.. imediate respond to some threads is need, then followed by some anouncement of changes later when they decide what to do.
Mistrala DeLegra	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:55:00 - [77] Originally by: Praxis1452 Originally by: Mistrala DeLegra Im surprised that a GM could call this action "Cheating"...please explain why this is cheating, when CCP have been alowing these so called merc corps to war dec any noob corp that they feel fit too for no other good reason than the fact that "They Can" The good people of eve and empire might as well just stay in there NPC corp from now on as the way im reading this is that its ok for these merc corps to grief noob players in empire....but god forbid the noobs fight back by finding a way to get out of a war dec. Good on you Imune, and Wyliee...if this corp you war decced could'nt fight and split up...would you also call that cheating and whine about it on the forums so quickly??? It's within game mechanics to get war-decced by anyone. If you can't handle it join the npc corp. Get over it. Suicide ganking is just as fine as scamming. Oh I feel so much pity for the noob. . there's absolutely NOTHING they can do, right? I mean t1 frigates are expensive as hell. God my wallet can only afford 1 loss. I'm sure that these merc corps will ACTIVELY hunt these noobs in their lvl 1 missions in high-sec space. I mean t1 frigate loot is worth a lot right? It's clearly within game mechanics to get out of a war dec, but the fact that this corp managed to get out if it is being called cheating....why is it cheating if they managed to do it?...CCP made the loophole...not the corp. Maybe for the noob corps loosing there t1 frigs is an expense they cant afford, not every player as iskies coming out of there Arrrr.....ears....lol....i just find it brillient that imune got the better of Wyliee who runs around empire war deccing noob corps and then complains about it on the forums, this has to be doing his reputaion as a merc the world of good....lol Noobs are importent in game in my opinion, the more we look after them the better it is for the long term gameplay of eve.
Flinx Evenstar Minmatar Omniscient Order	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:57:00 - [78] Originally by: Vadimik Originally by: Flinx Evenstar Originally by: Mistrala DeLegra please explain why this is cheating, when CCP have been alowing these so called merc corps to war dec any noob corp that they feel fit too for no other good reason than the fact that "They Can" Does that really need explaining? Yes, it does. Read my post #77 I was obviously giving you way too much credit
Vadimik	Posted - 2008.01.01 23:59:00 - [79] Originally by: Wyliee Originally by: Vadimik This trick was known for a looong time, and yet was not labeled an exploit up until now. And then again, it does not matter. Even if it was, in fact, confirmed to be legal at some point, CCP has all the rights to deem it an exploit now. What worries me, is the way they do it - in some random thread, without any explanation. GM's cant win they dont respond everyone is going come'on wh dont ccp respond.. they do and they get crap for not making some glorify anoucement. in my mind.. imediate respond to some threads is need, then followed by some anouncement of changes later when they decide what to do. So far it's only a very short and somewhat cofusing GM respond in a thread, without any explanation or anouncement. And that's the problem. If Nova would have written something like "Now we see it as an exploit, more on it later", then it would seem much less random.
Kelron Queldine Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2008.01.02 00:02:00 - [80] Originally by: Vadimik If Nova would have written something like "Now we see it as an exploit, more on it later", then it would seem much less random. Does it really need explaining why they see it as an exploit, though? It's using the alliance system to end war decs prematurely. --------------------------- Vanilla Crazy Cake!
Flinx Evenstar Minmatar Omniscient Order	Posted - 2008.01.02 00:02:00 - [81] Originally by: Vadimik If Nova would have written something like "Now we see it as an exploit, more on it later", then it would seem much less random. How much more black and white do you want it It was so obviously a loophole. I bid you good night, and hope one day that you wipe the sleep from your eyes
Vadimik	Posted - 2008.01.02 00:03:00 - [82] Originally by: Flinx Evenstar Originally by: Vadimik Originally by: Flinx Evenstar Originally by: Mistrala DeLegra please explain why this is cheating, when CCP have been alowing these so called merc corps to war dec any noob corp that they feel fit too for no other good reason than the fact that "They Can" Does that really need explaining? Yes, it does. Read my post #77 I was obviously giving you way too much credit I want to hear reasons behind it the way CCP sees them. Cause I see various reasons would this can be an exploit.
Noel Edmunds	Posted - 2008.01.02 00:04:00 - [83] Originally by: Taua Roqa I think they said what the hell because their signature was doubled? I feel yet another war dec heading towards RUSE!!!
Kylar Renpurs Dusk Blade	Posted - 2008.01.02 00:05:00 - [84] I think anyone bailing from a corp to avoid a wardec just to reform a corp is pretty soft, and an indication of broken game mechanics. But cheating? Well,, I can understand "abuse of a broken mechanic", but not cheating, with the irony in that claim being when small corps complain about being wardecced by larger, more powerful corps who are (tounge-in-cheek) "Obviously griefing", they get told to "go to an NPC corp if you can't handle a war" Much irony lies in that some of the same people who would make that last statement are now having their advice followed, and are now claiming "It's cheating". Not saying I condone the whole "disband when you get decced" stuff, I think it's downright cowardly. Just pointing out some complete irony in the situation. Improve Market Competition!
Paulo Damarr	Posted - 2008.01.02 00:21:00 - [85] Originally by: Praxis1452 Oh I feel so much pity for the noob. . there's absolutely NOTHING they can do, right? I mean t1 frigates are expensive as hell. God my wallet can only afford 1 loss. I'm sure that these merc corps will ACTIVELY hunt these noobs in their lvl 1 missions in high-sec space. I mean t1 frigate loot is worth a lot right? Yes they would certain players do find it entertaining to pwn newbies just for kicks. But then again there are many reasons that war decs are issued sometimes its people wanting to rob and loot a wealthy industrial corp sometimes its the result of smacking or other bad behaviour and people look to get even, Should there be a mechanic to protect genuine newbie corps? possibly but War decs should be as interesting as the 0.0 wars and larger and older Empire industrial corps could put the squeeze on competitors or pirates do it to chase targets into high sec. sadly it doesn't seem to work like this. ----------------------------------------------- My new years resolution is to give up nonconstructive posting
Praxis1452 The Bastards	Posted - 2008.01.02 00:38:00 - [86] Originally by: Vadimik Edited by: Vadimik on 01/01/2008 23:48:58 Originally by: Praxis1452 Originally by: Mistrala DeLegra Im surprised that a GM could call this action "Cheating"...please explain why this is cheating, when CCP have been alowing these so called merc corps to war dec any noob corp that they feel fit too for no other good reason than the fact that "They Can" The good people of eve and empire might as well just stay in there NPC corp from now on as the way im reading this is that its ok for these merc corps to grief noob players in empire....but god forbid the noobs fight back by finding a way to get out of a war dec. Good on you Imune, and Wyliee...if this corp you war decced could'nt fight and split up...would you also call that cheating and whine about it on the forums so quickly??? It's within game mechanics to get war-decced by anyone. If you can't handle it join the npc corp. Get over it. Suicide ganking is just as fine as scamming. Oh I feel so much pity for the noob. . there's absolutely NOTHING they can do, right? I mean t1 frigates are expensive as hell. God my wallet can only afford 1 loss. I'm sure that these merc corps will ACTIVELY hunt these noobs in their lvl 1 missions in high-sec space. I mean t1 frigate loot is worth a lot right? Sarcasm is not helping you, as one Mistrala's points is perfectly valid: it's nowhere obvious it's an exloit, and it's even less obvious why it's an exploit (cause it can be an exploit for various reasons). So some explanations are quite wellcomed. I disagree that it is an exploit as perhaps some of my other posts ahve hinted at. I think that if it is not an intended game mechanic, which it isn't, then ccp need to change game mechanics instead of leaving the ability for a corp to escape a war-dec ambiguous. ôHe who must expend his life to prolong life cannot enjoy it, and he who is still seeking for his life does not have it and can as little enjoy it.ö
Praxis1452 The Bastards	Posted - 2008.01.02 00:40:00 - [87] Originally by: Mistrala DeLegra Edited by: Mistrala DeLegra on 01/01/2008 23:57:03 Originally by: Praxis1452 Originally by: Mistrala DeLegra Im surprised that a GM could call this action "Cheating"...please explain why this is cheating, when CCP have been alowing these so called merc corps to war dec any noob corp that they feel fit too for no other good reason than the fact that "They Can" The good people of eve and empire might as well just stay in there NPC corp from now on as the way im reading this is that its ok for these merc corps to grief noob players in empire....but god forbid the noobs fight back by finding a way to get out of a war dec. Good on you Imune, and Wyliee...if this corp you war decced could'nt fight and split up...would you also call that cheating and whine about it on the forums so quickly??? It's within game mechanics to get war-decced by anyone. If you can't handle it join the npc corp. Get over it. Suicide ganking is just as fine as scamming. Oh I feel so much pity for the noob. . there's absolutely NOTHING they can do, right? I mean t1 frigates are expensive as hell. God my wallet can only afford 1 loss. I'm sure that these merc corps will ACTIVELY hunt these noobs in their lvl 1 missions in high-sec space. I mean t1 frigate loot is worth a lot right? It's clearly within game mechanics to get out of a war dec, but the fact that this corp managed to get out if it is being called cheating....why is it cheating if they managed to do it?...CCP made the loophole...not the corp. Maybe for the noob corps loosing there t1 frigs is an expense they cant afford, not every player has iskies coming out of there Arrrr.....ears....lol....i just find it brillient that imune got the better of Wyliee who runs around empire war deccing noob corps and then complains about it on the forums, this has to be doing his reputaion as a merc the world of good....lol Noobs are importent in game in my opinion, the more we look after them the better it is for the long term gameplay of eve. I'm not disagreeing about what is or is not an exploit. I'm disagreeing with your need to protect noobs. Either they are able to handle themselves or they are not. I don't think people should play EVE because it's some game like CS where oh you just respawn and get more money. It's challenge is the point. ôHe who must expend his life to prolong life cannot enjoy it, and he who is still seeking for his life does not have it and can as little enjoy it.ö
NereSky Gallente Trinity Nova	Posted - 2008.01.02 00:46:00 - [88] Just change the mechanic where a corp cannot join a Alliance while a war is active.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2008.01.02 00:46:00 - [89] Well, there's clarification! <3 Nova for posting -Liang -- Originally by: "QProQ" When they said to put 'stabs on your 'cane, they meant GYROSTABS!
Tsanse Kinske WeMeanYouKnowHarm	Posted - 2008.01.02 01:48:00 - [90] Edited by: Tsanse Kinske on 02/01/2008 01:48:57 Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support Thanks for spelling this out. :) Hopefully some wardec mechanics changes to support it are on the way. * * * In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -Douglas Adams, writing about EVE
Aramova Gallente Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.01.02 01:50:00 - [91] War Dec Empire Corp Empire Corp who can't match you joins alliance Whine on Eve-O forums ???? Profit! --
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2008.01.02 01:54:00 - [92] Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support Now this is rather interesting. Dodging wars in this manner, or similar manners was declared an exploit by CCP before I even started the game. This was over two years ago. Two years! What is your excuse for ignoring this "loophole" for so long? It's not like it wasn't well known. Should we expect to see a fix before or after the next major graphics upgrade?
Kessiaan	Posted - 2008.01.02 02:36:00 - [93] Edited by: Kessiaan on 02/01/2008 02:44:14 Originally by: Wet Ferret Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support Now this is rather interesting. Dodging wars in this manner, or similar manners was declared an exploit by CCP before I even started the game. This was over two years ago. Two years! What is your excuse for ignoring this "loophole" for so long? It's not like it wasn't well known. Should we expect to see a fix before or after the next major graphics upgrade? That's what I was saying earlier. The GMs come on the forum and say "Don't do it" but that doesn't stop anyone. Sure some CEOs might get a slap on the wrist but I'd be really surprised if any serious action (banning, corp dissolution and losing everyting in your corp hangers, etc) ever happens. If they don't want people to do something, especially in a game like Eve where the overwhelming majority of players have an 'anything-goes' mentality, the actual mechanics have to change. Personally if I was in charge, if a corp left an alliance, or dissolved, all members would remain wartargets for however long the wardec had left before it had to be renewed. Also if people who joined iMune actually stayed there and fought their wars out with their new pvp-oriented friends they might learn a few things and nobody would be complaining. Industrial corps that are part of alliances with strong pvp-oriented corps don't get decked for ****s and giggles. ----- My in Eve Profile My BattleClinic Page
Praxis1452 The Bastards	Posted - 2008.01.02 02:37:00 - [94] Originally by: Aramova War Dec Empire Corp Empire Corp who can't match you joins alliance Whine on Eve-O forums ???? Profit! ôHe who must expend his life to prolong life cannot enjoy it, and he who is still seeking for his life does not have it and can as little enjoy it.ö
Rectoress	Posted - 2008.01.02 02:40:00 - [95] I am really disappointed the GMs have bowed to this pressure against Imune. I understand the larger corps war dec transfer has its isk issues. Immune may have originally been setup to absorb Wardecs and rattle a few cages, but I think it could have a great dynamic in the game of helping the underdog, which I have not seen so far. The only help I have had is being called a noob and endured distastful flaming. What I have seen, are the only corps to be penalised are they PvP corps who don't actually PvP. What I mean by this is they wardec carebears, who have no intention of fighting. Is this game for solely PvP?, I think not. So high sec is a buffer ground for new players to learn the game and build their character. Also we have new players that want to pvp and start something new for themselves, they can't successfully fight older corps or alliances and are so pushed to practice on carebears or they are the corps that get the kicks out of wardec easy targets. So now what I can see by the forums are people mostly from these plebian PvP corps actually complaining they have to fight against corps in immune that also want to PvP. I also understand that pirate corps are there for piracy and theft, but the underhand tactics of wardeccing noob corps for easy kills, surely isnt a game mechanic either ccp? With this in mind I feel extremely sorry for your future custom. As well as a reduced playing experience you have built for new players there will be the problem of keeping them and the game turning into the name of its predecessor Elite. I mean with the introduction of GTC's after you preaching about isk farmers and people selling isk, has turn this game into a business for players. Business and pleasure don't mix. My conclusion to this is that the game mechanics makes gamers who joined a game for fun, being sucked into having to play longer or not at all. 'Well leave then', I hear you all say (obviously not ccp) you want my money. It is irrelevant what I do, but I am no doubt expressing views of players that haven't been in the game long and the feelings of your future noobs. The Dr
Johnathan Roark Caldari Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.01.02 02:51:00 - [96] This is not an exploit, I asked the GMs once a while back. Never used this method, never had the reason too. The entire war system needs a redesign. Its too cheap to declare wars. Corporation Management Improvement
Windjammer	Posted - 2008.01.02 02:52:00 - [97] Originally by: Jimer Lins Originally by: Windjammer Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support A great pity that ganking ships in Jita and other high sec places is not afforded the same attention. However, I think everyone was expecting a comment of this sort from a GM or other CCP representative. Ganking ships in Jita and other high sec areas is totally allowed, as long as you don't avoid the consequence (loss of your ship to CONCORD, loss of sec status). That's been status quo for years now. That's rather my point. It's a circumvention of the intent in game mechanics and it's been allowed to remain the status quo for years. It's so bad you've got this guy Tank CEO bragging about being able to do it in Jita with a group of -10 sec pirates. Assuming he's not blowing smoke up someone. Obviously they're not supposed to be able to be there much less do anything when they are. Yet no change is proposed to game mechanics, no announcement is made regarding the legality of the activity or consequences, no change to Concord or the faction police......in short nothing is done that I've been able to see.
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2008.01.02 02:59:00 - [98] Originally by: Johnathan Roark This is not an exploit, I asked the GMs once a while back. Never used this method, never had the reason too. The entire war system needs a redesign. Its too cheap to declare wars. It was announced on the forums as a petitionable offense, by the devs themselves. Personally I think it should be allowed up until the day CCP decides to fix it. Perhaps if this was a recent problem I might feel otherwise. But they have let it go for a very long time!
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.01.02 03:00:00 - [99] Originally by: Windjammer That's rather my point. It's a circumvention of the intent in game mechanics and it's been allowed to remain the status quo for years. It's so bad you've got this guy Tank CEO bragging about being able to do it in Jita with a group of -10 sec pirates. Assuming he's not blowing smoke up someone. Obviously they're not supposed to be able to be there much less do anything when they are. Yet no change is proposed to game mechanics, no announcement is made regarding the legality of the activity or consequences, no change to Concord or the faction police......in short nothing is done that I've been able to see. Sorry but you dont understand the game mechanics at all. Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Kreul Intentions ([email protected])
Caldreean Dawnwalkers	Posted - 2008.01.02 03:02:00 - [100] I don't really care one way or another about this issue. If anything, props to IMUNE for the good idea. What I do care about is, how many other rules can I get warned/banned for that only appear in random threads like this? Sorry, but I don't follow Dev posts, and I refuse to have to read every one so I can keep current with the rules. If something is broke, fix it, don't declare it an exploit. Not very professional of GM Nova /shrug
Galsia Yovinda Gallente Dec Me Please	Posted - 2008.01.02 03:06:00 - [101] So how long does a corporation have to stay in an alliance for it not to be an exploit? 12 hours, 1 day, 2 days?
Kelron Queldine Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2008.01.02 03:11:00 - [102] Originally by: Galsia Yovinda So how long does a corporation have to stay in an alliance for it not to be an exploit? 12 hours, 1 day, 2 days? My opinion would be at least a week, as that's the length of the war paid for before the corp joins the alliance. But that would be something that needs clarification by CCP. --------------------------- Vanilla Crazy Cake!
Ashley Sky Mesopotamia iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.02 03:20:00 - [103] Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support Until you actually provide clarification we will continue. Perhaps you should clear things up with your team and provide an official statement... Here's what we were told... Thank you for your bugreport - ID:45773 Title: Wardec Immunity Mechanic for Player Corps The problem you have described as an intended game feature, and not a bug. Your bugreport has been closed. The BugHunter Team Report ID: 45773 Title: Wardec Immunity Mechanic for Player Corps Description: Corps with unwanted wars can join a dummy alliance for a brief moment, once they leave alliance the war becomes retracted with the corp. All that¦s needed is a one man dummy alliance with a sole purpose of absorbing wars from empire corporations. To reproduce what I¦m saying, see the reproductions steps below. Reproduction Steps: War is declared on Corp "A" Corp "A" joins alliance //24 hours waiting War propagates from Corp A into alliance Corp A leaves alliance War goes into retracted mode with Corp A //This lasts for 24 hours Corp A is now war free and has an unfair advantage of being immune to war. Execute these steps within one minute of receiving the initial war declaration mail, and a war with Corp A will only last one minute //We checked this and it is NOT possible to do this all within one minute. You have a 24h timer for joining the alliance and you have another 24h of war after leaving the alliance, till the war runs off. The method of shortening the war to 24h is apparently within current game mechanics and not a bug. - BH Lenider
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate	Posted - 2008.01.02 03:43:00 - [104] Edited by: Cambarus on 02/01/2008 03:44:20 I do believe what the BugHunter said was that it was not a bug, doesn't mean it's not an exploit and doesn't mean it's not against the rules. When a senior GM comes on to the forums and says, very clearly, that it's cheating, then it'd probably be in your best interest to stop. I mean really, blatantly stating on the forums that you're going to ignore the ruling of a GM can't be a good idea... Edit: Oh and "This is cheating, plain and simple." seems pretty clear to me. What possible clarification were you hopeing for?
Cori4n Caldari principle of motion	Posted - 2008.01.02 03:48:00 - [105] Originally by: Cambarus Edit: Oh and "This is cheating, plain and simple." seems pretty clear to me. What possible clarification were you hopeing for? Dunno, I for one was hoping for a response along the lines of, "What the hell???"
Anaalys Fluuterby Caldari	Posted - 2008.01.02 03:53:00 - [106] All that keeps running through my mind is when CCP specifically asks why 37% of all characters with more than 2m skill points are in NPC corps, they get 6 pages of threads saying: "Wardecs". Now Nova turns around and proclaims that shifting the wardec to someone else is an "exploit", even though this has been around forever. Makes me wonder exactly how many players CCP wants in NPC Corps Originally by: Audri Fisher On the other, the emo tears being cryed in this thread tell me that just because you shoot somebody for a living, does not mean you aren't a carebear
Ashley Sky Mesopotamia iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.02 04:12:00 - [107] Edited by: Ashley Sky on 02/01/2008 04:13:11 It looks like this was the official statement, since it was posted last. :) Originally by: GM Nova What the hell??? But seriously, I'm not ignoring what the GM said. I just think they should post clarification of what exactly is cheating, so I can avoid it. For example, the statement above... Quote: they then joined imune empire aliance, then imediately left, 24 hours later we are left not being able to shoot them without redecking them again. i consider this cheating, and using a loophole that ccp should address. What does that mean exactly? Does it mean they have to remain in our alliance for 1 day, or 1 week? Where are the lines drawn between what you tell us we can do and what the game mechanics allow? Please tell us so we don't break any of your magical rules.
Dianeces Minmatar Repo Industries R.E.P.O.	Posted - 2008.01.02 04:22:00 - [108] Originally by: GM Nova What the hell??? lolwut?
Ki An Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum	Posted - 2008.01.02 04:27:00 - [109] Originally by: Dianeces Originally by: GM Nova What the hell??? lolwut? It's because of her sig showing twice in the same post, Di. Anyone trying to see that as a sign that the GM wasn't being sincere is reaching.
Dianeces Minmatar Repo Industries	Posted - 2008.01.02 04:31:00 - [110] Edited by: Dianeces on 02/01/2008 04:31:49 Originally by: Ki An Originally by: Dianeces Originally by: GM Nova What the hell??? lolwut? It's because of her sig showing twice in the same post, Di. Anyone trying to see that as a sign that the GM wasn't being sincere is reaching. ITT I fail, c/d? Fake Edit: Oh, God. Kill the alliance ticker.
Anaalys Fluuterby Caldari	Posted - 2008.01.02 04:34:00 - [111] Originally by: Ki An Originally by: Dianeces Originally by: GM Nova What the hell??? lolwut? It's because of her sig showing twice in the same post, Di. Anyone trying to see that as a sign that the GM wasn't being sincere is reaching. Then maybe something good will actually come of this whole thing and thread: They will fix the stupid forums Originally by: Audri Fisher On the other, the emo tears being cryed in this thread tell me that just because you shoot somebody for a living, does not mean you aren't a carebear
Jaabaa Minmatar Dental Drilling Corporation	Posted - 2008.01.02 04:44:00 - [112] Edited by: Jaabaa on 02/01/2008 04:44:53 Originally by: Ashley Sky Until you actually provide clarification we will continue. Perhaps you should clear things up with your team and provide an official statement... CCP Game Master > Every Bug Hunter I think you should consider what a "Senior Game Master" said publicly and on record, to be just about as official as it gets. So, just for you, an official statement by one of CCP's Senior Game Masters: Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support -- EVE Mobile Skill Planner V2 http://evemsp.sourceforge.net/
techzer0 IDLE GUNS	Posted - 2008.01.02 04:52:00 - [113] Originally by: Jaabaa Edited by: Jaabaa on 02/01/2008 04:44:53 Originally by: Ashley Sky Until you actually provide clarification we will continue. Perhaps you should clear things up with your team and provide an official statement... CCP Game Master > Every Bug Hunter I think you should consider what a "Senior Game Master" said publicly and on record, to be just about as official as it gets. So, just for you, an official statement by one of CCP's Senior Game Masters: Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support The way that is written, it doesn't say weather corps transfering wars to iMune alliance is cheating, or the joining and leaving within an hour is cheating. So... can corps still join iMune and stay for a week, or can this mechanic not be used at all period. I'd say Ashley Sky is right, it isn't very clear as to what will be allowed and what will not. ____________________ Hi. I'm not an alt :)
Ralek Talen Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2008.01.02 04:55:00 - [114] Originally by: GM Nova What the hell???
Jaabaa Minmatar Dental Drilling Corporation	Posted - 2008.01.02 04:56:00 - [115] Originally by: techzer0 The way that is written, it doesn't say weather corps transfering wars to iMune alliance is cheating, or the joining and leaving within an hour is cheating. So... can corps still join iMune and stay for a week, or can this mechanic not be used at all period. I'd say Ashley Sky is right, it isn't very clear as to what will be allowed and what will not. I'd say that the alliance executor CEO and the corp trying to dodge the war dec will both get warnings. One for accepting it, the other for applying. GM Nova used the plural for a reason you know: Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support -- EVE Mobile Skill Planner V2 http://evemsp.sourceforge.net/
Ki An Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum	Posted - 2008.01.02 04:58:00 - [116] Originally by: techzer0 The way that is written, it doesn't say weather corps transfering wars to iMune alliance is cheating, or the joining and leaving within an hour is cheating. So... can corps still join iMune and stay for a week, or can this mechanic not be used at all period. I'd say Ashley Sky is right, it isn't very clear as to what will be allowed and what will not. Well, until CCP actually gets the coding done to change this, I'd say we have to use our common sense. Joining and instantly leaving an alliance to escape a war dec is cheating, so don't do it. Don't try to beat the system by thinking "what if we join for a day maybe it'll be ok". Petitions about corps pulling stunts like this will be raining down on the GMs, so go easy on them.
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.01.02 05:08:00 - [117] Originally by: Ashley Sky Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support Until you actually provide clarification we will continue. Perhaps you should clear things up with your team and provide an official statement... Here's what we were told... Thank you for your bugreport - ID:45773 Title: Wardec Immunity Mechanic for Player Corps The problem you have described as an intended game feature, and not a bug. Your bugreport has been closed. The BugHunter Team Report ID: 45773 Title: Wardec Immunity Mechanic for Player Corps Description: Corps with unwanted wars can join a dummy alliance for a brief moment, once they leave alliance the war becomes retracted with the corp. All that¦s needed is a one man dummy alliance with a sole purpose of absorbing wars from empire corporations. To reproduce what I¦m saying, see the reproductions steps below. Reproduction Steps: War is declared on Corp "A" Corp "A" joins alliance //24 hours waiting War propagates from Corp A into alliance Corp A leaves alliance War goes into retracted mode with Corp A //This lasts for 24 hours Corp A is now war free and has an unfair advantage of being immune to war. Execute these steps within one minute of receiving the initial war declaration mail, and a war with Corp A will only last one minute //We checked this and it is NOT possible to do this all within one minute. You have a 24h timer for joining the alliance and you have another 24h of war after leaving the alliance, till the war runs off. The method of shortening the war to 24h is apparently within current game mechanics and not a bug. - BH Lenider I feel sorry for you buggers. At least though CCP kneecapped you right at the beginning, not after you had spent an age building something up. There is no space for anything new in EVE... get your mining lasers out ladies.. its the future! CRUEL CCP... OUT DAMN SPOT! SKUNK
Norma Cenza	Posted - 2008.01.02 05:28:00 - [118] Just wait for a senior GM to start banning people. iMune should just be disbanded and their stuff given away in jita
Ashley Sky Mesopotamia iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.02 05:40:00 - [119] Originally by: Jaabaa I think you should consider what a "Senior Game Master" said publicly and on record, to be just about as official as it gets. That's a good point, I have to concede and say that you're right. They went and changed the rules on us with a very ambiguous response to a forum, rather than doing appropriate customer service. I would like to see... 1. An official statement telling us what is right and what isn't with alliances, and perhaps an update to their alliance and war mailing documentation. 2. A code fix. Right now, here is what you get when you declare war on someone, in regards to alliance (concord mail) Quote: If you are at war with a corporation that joins an alliance then the war will change from being against the corporation to being against the alliance. If you are at war with an alliance and a corporation leaves that alliance then you will still be at war with the alliance but also temporarily at war with the corporation that left. The war against the corporation that leaves an alliance lasts 24 hours during this period you can attack them until the war expires. Should you wish to resume hostilities against such a corporation then you need to declare war again. I have petitioned to see if we can get a proper resolution to this matter.
Ademaro Imre Caldari Eye of God	Posted - 2008.01.02 06:29:00 - [120] Edited by: Ademaro Imre on 02/01/2008 06:29:36 CCP still thinks that Login Traps are not exploits - but this is cheating?
techzer0 IDLE GUNS	Posted - 2008.01.02 07:38:00 - [121] Originally by: Ademaro Imre Edited by: Ademaro Imre on 02/01/2008 06:29:36 CCP still thinks that Login Traps are not exploits - but this is cheating? you are right sir ____________________ Hi. I'm not an alt :)
fasfhadtrv	Posted - 2008.01.02 07:39:00 - [122] Originally by: Wyliee we war decked a corp to do this we took a vote, 24hours wait then we decked them, 24 hours wait ok then good to go. they then joined imune empire aliance, then imediately left, 24 hours later we are left not being able to shoot them without redecking them again. i consider this cheating, and using a loophole that ccp should address. Immune alliance isn't going to be around long... mark my words It isn't a loophole you idiot. Join an anti immune alliance pirate alliance.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2008.01.02 08:04:00 - [123] Originally by: Ashley Sky I have petitioned to see if we can get a proper resolution to this matter. The proper resolution is, in this case, don't do it. Don't look like you're doing it. It came down from the top, FFS. -Liang -- Originally by: "QProQ" When they said to put 'stabs on your 'cane, they meant GYROSTABS!
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Dark-Rising	Posted - 2008.01.02 08:33:00 - [124] Originally by: Ademaro Imre Edited by: Ademaro Imre on 02/01/2008 06:29:36 CCP still thinks that Login Traps are not exploits - but this is cheating? Tbh anyone that thinks login traps are not exploit of game mechanics is an idiot. It totally voids the local-system where you can always see how many people are in a system. --------------------------------------------- [Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice
Tek'a Rain Gallente Collegium Mechanicae	Posted - 2008.01.02 08:55:00 - [125] Originally by: Aramova War Dec Empire Corp Empire Corp who can't match you joins alliance Whine on Eve-O forums ???? Profit!
cal nereus Bounty Hunter - Dark Legion Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.01.02 09:02:00 - [126] Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that the "loophole" is the part about prematurely ending a war, and that quickly joining and leaving an alliance is in and of itself not the loophole. --- Join BH-DL Skills
ElCoCo KIA Corp KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.02 10:13:00 - [127] Originally by: Ashley Sky [They went and changed the rules on us with a very ambiguous response to a forum, rather than doing appropriate customer service. Ambiguous? There was nothing ambiguous about it. Tbh, I'm pretty angry with CCP's inconsistency that's why I partly sympathise with you. HOWEVER, you're lucky I'm not a GM or dev cause you'd have gotten a pretty strict warning. People like you, abusing obvious loopholes (yeah yeah I know, it's not an exploit until CCP says so), add nothing to the future of this game as you'll immediately jump to the very next bug you think will be exploitable but not -yet- an offence. CCP is far too lenient.
Jakus Cemendur Caldari The Graduates Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.01.02 10:18:00 - [128] Personally i would think a senior GMs word > member of bug hunting teasm(eg seeing if code's broken, doesn't really concern themselves with exploits).
General Coochie The Bastards	Posted - 2008.01.02 10:56:00 - [129] I'm sorry for ya imune. Anyone could see it coming even though game mechanics allow it. Oh well. Sig removed, lacks Eve-related content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes
Yuki Itakura	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:03:00 - [130] Edited by: Yuki Itakura on 02/01/2008 11:07:00 So X war decs Y. Y joins alliance. Y leaves alliance to avoid war with X. Hmmm... Industry corp joins Merc alliance for protection, providing Merc corp ships and weapons to do so at reasonable rates. Merc corp joins Industrial alliance to be protection, or for supply of ships and/or modules to further their actions. "We can't fight this war, can you take it for us?" Something goverments and corporations have been doing for a long time. I do think it's a bit lame that a corporation would join iMune, and then leave right after to avoid it. I mean if it's a mining corp looking for protection, then they should be providing iMune with the means to fight the war. Maybe I missed it somewhere, but can't X corp declare war on Y, then X join an alliance, X leaves alliance dropping thier war with Y? Then Y would be stuck in a war with an alliance? Then Y could join an alliance then leave, leaving the original war dec with that alliance? Now we are back at the start. X war dec's Y, Y joins alliance....... I thought the basics were this. 0.0 = It's on. Big corporations and Alliance turf wars. Destroy them, they destroy you. Along with great resources and other faction stuff. Don't like it leave. 0.1 - 0.4 = Grey area. Minimum rules, kill people, lose standings, don't fly with what you can't afford to lose, or take protection. 0.5 -1.0 = "Relatively safe". Industrial corps trying to make a mark, police protection, pirates, gate camps, suicide runs, new pilots trying to figure things out. The bounderies of what happens in each basic sector is elastic at best. If you look at the big picture Eve is by far one the best thought out games ever. Different races, factions, corporations, can pretty much do what you want here. Eve is HUGE. I don't think what iMune is doing is "cheating", but I'm not condoning it either. I think what they are doing by not making any money from it is pretty stupid, and over all being a bunch of pansies. Like I said I don't think it's cheating, maybe swindled or cheated out of what you wanted. The real world isn't perfect, neither is Eve, thats what makes it great. People, corporations, goverments, even animals "exploit" or "cheat" everyday for survival. Can anyone really say they have never cheated, lied or exploited to their own advantage? Probably not. With 37k pilots (did I see 39k today) Eve is not getting any smaller. A far cry from the few thousand I used to see on a Saturday night, when I bought the game off the shelf when it first came out. X war decs Y. Neither X nor Y can join alliance. That's boring. So if you are the small corp and huge corp wants to crush you, and you know that you have no chance in beating them, what would you do? Would you still be calling cheating if they had joined an alliance and stayed there and that alliance could crush you back into NPC corp land? The fix should be a set time the corp has to be in alliance anyway. Or if the corp joins bringing thier war into the alliance, then decides to leave (withing a set period), money from that corporation should go to the corporation that started it, declaring it a financial victory and the pansie corp takes the loss, financially and on thier record. The post by the GM saying it's cheating, and the bughunter saying it's not. Isn't CCP a rather small in the terms of corporate numbers? It seems that the checks and balances part isn't working. If a bughunter answered the petition wouldn't he have a guidline of the game rules, and the GM with the same guideline? Makes you wonder doesn't it? All in the spirit of Eve. Posted with an alt, for security reasons. Sorry about your loss. If they don't want to be war declared, they should go back under a rock and stay crushed. But if they took all the politics out of it, then we would basically be playing deathmatch.
Wynona Mesopotamia iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:23:00 - [131] Yeah, we pre-petitioned this, the answer they gave us was "not an exploit". In fact they gave the same answer to a corp who's war we took, they petitioned it right up to the top and got the same answer. Trust me, we did our homework before launching this project. Throwing out the 'cheat' card seems a hasty after we've been a virtual *sticky for almost 2 weeks. I'll be open minded and assume GM Nova just walked in the door from a long holiday. Click here for Free War Removal Service
Lil'Red Ridin'Hood Snake Assault	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:25:00 - [132] Actually, I find it rather funny that there's a game mechanic available for noob corps to stave off wars from corps that are more powerful... If some noob corp CEO came in here to complain about a strong corp arbitrarily declaring war on them, he'd be covered in forum molotov*****tails within 10 minutes.
Jakus Cemendur Caldari The Graduates Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:27:00 - [133] Originally by: Wynona Yeah, we pre-petitioned this, the answer they gave us was "not an exploit". In fact they gave the same answer to a corp who's war we took, they petitioned it right up to the top and got the same answer. Trust me, we did our homework before launching this project. Throwing out the 'cheat' card seems a hasty after we've been a virtual *sticky for almost 2 weeks. I'll be open minded and assume GM Nova just walked in the door from a long holiday. You bug reported it, so you got a response from their Bug Hunters, or at leasts that's what Ashely Sky posted earlier looked like.
Kay Han Caldari FroZen SoulS	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:28:00 - [134] Edited by: Kay Han on 02/01/2008 11:28:19 didn¦t experience that myself so far. But from the understanding, i totally agree that this is somekind of exploit, even if it¦s within the game mechanics. so a one week waiting period until the alliance can be left again sounds pretty resonable to me. Everything else is just fubar... Originally by: CCP Atropos Personally I think Amarr ships should consume slaves in a similar way that other ships consume ammunition.
Malcanis Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:28:00 - [135] Originally by: Windjammer Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support A great pity that ganking ships in Jita and other high sec places is not afforded the same attention. However, I think everyone was expecting a comment of this sort from a GM or other CCP representative. High Sec ganking is explicitly allowed. read this: http://support.eve-online.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=341 CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Ziw Pineapple Caldari	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:30:00 - [136] Well i think it is fair that "noob" - corps don't need to fight "pro" - corps.. Many use the corp feature to have a nice time, chat with friends. Relax and do missions together.. It's only fair if they don't need to fight "gank"-hungry "elites".
Tsia Synthetic Frontiers	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:31:00 - [137] Whiners, GET OVER IT. 'nuff said.
Wynona Mesopotamia iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:32:00 - [138] Originally by: Jakus Cemendur You bug reported it, so you got a response from their Bug Hunters, or at leasts that's what Ashely Sky posted earlier looked like. Trust me, it was pre-petitioned. Using the in-game petition system under the heading of Exploit. There is no misdirection here, in fact quite the opposite. and.... It was bug reported after that, just to be sure. Click here for Free War Removal Service
Kay Han Caldari FroZen SoulS	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:34:00 - [139] Originally by: Ziw Pineapple Well i think it is fair that "noob" - corps don't need to fight "pro" - corps.. Many use the corp feature to have a nice time, chat with friends. Relax and do missions together.. It's only fair if they don't need to fight "gank"-hungry "elites". dude. This isn¦t wow or some other **ty game. The PvP part of eve makes eve an awesome game, even if it sucks from time to time. You want to Fly missions in Peace, without beeing harmed? > Stay in a NPC corp Once you join a Player driven corp, you need to live with the wars and stuff. having said this, hf a nice day and go back Playing WoW Originally by:** CCP Atropos Personally I think Amarr ships should consume slaves in a similar way that other ships consume ammunition.
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:48:00 - [140] All the "exlpoit yellers" should have a nice cup of STFU. There is no exploit, just perfectly legal useage of ingame mechanics. That the mechanics in question are flawed is another story. It's kind of like saying that claiming your bounty with an alt is an exploit.
Wyliee Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:50:00 - [141] to get a real sense of whats going on here. taurus war dec'ed a corp. the decked corp joined imune, imune didnt even have contact with them prior to joining, thier policy is to accept any applications they get, and imediately boot the corp out of the aliance, hence taking over the war. we went after imune core members, and we killed battle cruiser and some other stuff within 30mins of the war being transfered. trouble is they have 16 members of thier own. Most corps in thier aliance are 1 memeber corps, and they run around if inty's knowing they are hopelessly out classed (i mean no offence to imune). its not like they want to fight wars for other people, they cant even begin to do that, they just wish to abuse a game mechanic (maybe to highlight it who knows). here is thier offical page http://ephemeral.dreamhosters.com/wiki/doku.php if war targets were to run and join an alliance, then stay in the allianace so they can seek shelter, i think that is fair enough - but that clearly isnt happening here.
Ki An Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:54:00 - [142] Originally by: Drasked All the "exlpoit yellers" should have a nice cup of STFU. There is no exploit, just perfectly legal useage of ingame mechanics. That the mechanics in question are flawed is another story. It's kind of like saying that claiming your bounty with an alt is an exploit. Except a GM just said it was cheating.
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:54:00 - [143] Originally by: Wyliee to get a real sense of whats going on here. taurus war dec'ed a corp. the decked corp joined imune, imune didnt even have contact with them prior to joining, thier policy is to accept any applications they get, and imediately boot the corp out of the aliance, hence taking over the war. we went after imune core members, and we killed battle cruiser and some other stuff within 30mins of the war being transfered. trouble is they have 16 members of thier own. Most corps in thier aliance are 1 memeber corps, and they run around if inty's knowing they are hopelessly out classed (i mean no offence to imune). its not like they want to fight wars for other people, they cant even begin to do that, they just wish to abuse a game mechanic (maybe to highlight it who knows). here is thier offical page http://ephemeral.dreamhosters.com/wiki/doku.php if war targets were to run and join an alliance, then stay in the allianace so they can seek shelter, i think that is fair enough - but that clearly isnt happening here. Saying that imune is doing this for the sole purpose of abusing game mechanics is kind of petarded, don't you agree?
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 11:56:00 - [144] Originally by: Ki An Originally by: Drasked All the "exlpoit yellers" should have a nice cup of STFU. There is no exploit, just perfectly legal useage of ingame mechanics. That the mechanics in question are flawed is another story. It's kind of like saying that claiming your bounty with an alt is an exploit. Except a GM just said it was cheating. You mean in the same way as calling a random customer support 3 times will give you 3 totally diffrent answers? A senior GM classed this as legal use of game mechanics.
Orravan	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:00:00 - [145] Originally by: Ashley Sky But seriously, I'm not ignoring what the GM said. I just think they should post clarification of what exactly is cheating, so I can avoid it. (...) Ashley Sky hit you with a perfectly hypocritical shot Even with a bug-hunter misreponding you, you perfectly know this is breaking the game's mechanics. For your problems to understand how the Imune trick is an exploit and absolutely don't fit with Eve features : 1) The game's mechanics allow a corporation to declare war upon another -> you spend isk to fight them. 2) When you can instant-broke this system, where is the purpose of declaring war ? I'll answer it for you -> nowhere. It's killing the Eve wars system, period. Is this so hard to understand ? By the way, being able to do something ingame don't mean it's not an exploit, just because it's not yet repaired. It's why, mmm... sometimes the devs clearly say to not use a feature until it's fixed (yes it can hurt but there's no perfect software, especially on mmorpgs). If they say "this is an exploit, don't do it", well... they are 100% right. Since they are the devs of their game, and they know how they want their game to work. ____________________ Finicky diplomat. Suicidal explorer. Faithful ally.
Ki An Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:00:00 - [146] Originally by: Drasked You mean in the same way as calling a random customer support 3 times will give you 3 totally diffrent answers? A senior GM classed this as legal use of game mechanics. Excuse me, but how would you know that? Have you petitioned it to a senior GM (if so, please name him/her as he/she can take it up with GM Nova), or are you just repeating what the iMune guys are saying? GM Nova, a senior GM, has in this thread said it was cheating. It doesn't get much clearer than that.
Wyliee Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:15:00 - [147] Originally by: Drasked Originally by: Wyliee to get a real sense of whats going on here. taurus war dec'ed a corp. the decked corp joined imune, imune didnt even have contact with them prior to joining, thier policy is to accept any applications they get, and imediately boot the corp out of the aliance, hence taking over the war. we went after imune core members, and we killed battle cruiser and some other stuff within 30mins of the war being transfered. trouble is they have 16 members of thier own. Most corps in thier aliance are 1 memeber corps, and they run around if inty's knowing they are hopelessly out classed (i mean no offence to imune). its not like they want to fight wars for other people, they cant even begin to do that, they just wish to abuse a game mechanic (maybe to highlight it who knows). here is thier offical page http://ephemeral.dreamhosters.com/wiki/doku.php if war targets were to run and join an alliance, then stay in the allianace so they can seek shelter, i think that is fair enough - but that clearly isnt happening here. Saying that imune is doing this for the sole purpose of abusing game mechanics is kind of petarded, don't you agree? no not at all, if you read the threads on this matter your note that imune petitioned this issue a while back. and when they didnt get the answer they wanted they decided to go ahead with a buisness that messed with this mechanic, no other reason.. they are not even charging people for the service.
Steve Hawkings	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:16:00 - [148] I considor this crying
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:18:00 - [149] Edited by: Drasked on 02/01/2008 12:21:47 Originally by: Ki An Originally by: Drasked You mean in the same way as calling a random customer support 3 times will give you 3 totally diffrent answers? A senior GM classed this as legal use of game mechanics. Excuse me, but how would you know that? Have you petitioned it to a senior GM (if so, please name him/her as he/she can take it up with GM Nova), or are you just repeating what the iMune guys are saying? GM Nova, a senior GM, has in this thread said it was cheating. It doesn't get much clearer than that. So anyone who claims his bounty with an alt is getting a warning? So anyone who does exploration and runs multiple scans is getting a warning? Etc, etc, etc, etc, you see where im going?? Just like Privateers they should be allowed to use this untill the game mechanics are changed, or i want that same gm to monitor EVERY game mechanic in this game that is not being used as its intended and hand out warnings for eveyrone that misuses them.
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:20:00 - [150] Edited by: Drasked on 02/01/2008 12:21:07 Originally by: Wyliee Originally by: Drasked Originally by: Wyliee to get a real sense of whats going on here. taurus war dec'ed a corp. the decked corp joined imune, imune didnt even have contact with them prior to joining, thier policy is to accept any applications they get, and imediately boot the corp out of the aliance, hence taking over the war. we went after imune core members, and we killed battle cruiser and some other stuff within 30mins of the war being transfered. trouble is they have 16 members of thier own. Most corps in thier aliance are 1 memeber corps, and they run around if inty's knowing they are hopelessly out classed (i mean no offence to imune). its not like they want to fight wars for other people, they cant even begin to do that, they just wish to abuse a game mechanic (maybe to highlight it who knows). here is thier offical page http://ephemeral.dreamhosters.com/wiki/doku.php if war targets were to run and join an alliance, then stay in the allianace so they can seek shelter, i think that is fair enough - but that clearly isnt happening here. Saying that imune is doing this for the sole purpose of abusing game mechanics is kind of petarded, don't you agree? no not at all, if you read the threads on this matter your note that imune petitioned this issue a while back. and when they didnt get the answer they wanted they decided to go ahead with a buisness that messed with this mechanic, no other reason.. they are not even charging people for the service. Well then you should respect them a lot, they are trying to get the game mechanics fixed for you.
Ki An Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:22:00 - [151] Originally by: Drasked So anyone who claims his bounty with an alt is getting a warning? So anyone who does exploration and runs multiple scans is getting a warning? Etc, etc, etc, etc, you see where im going?? Has a senior GM said that either of those constituted cheating? Nope. Originally by: Drasked Just like Privateers they should be allowed to use this untill the game mechanics are changed, or i want that same gm to monitor EVERY game mechanic in this game this is not being used as its intended and hand out warnings for eveyrone that misuses them. The Privateers wheren't exploiting or cheating. CCP just changed the game. Much like they changed escrow to contracts. Those who where using escrow wheren't exploiting. A GM has just said this is cheating. Therefore it's cheating.
Ponderous Thunderstroke Republic War Machine Industries	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:26:00 - [152] Which part is the cheating? The joining iMune? the leaving? Leaving after 1 second? Leaving to get the wardec off? Do you wait for 2 seconds instead? 20 minutes? Do you leave a 'leaving note' saying "my corp is leaving because we don't like the alliance", and then you're covered because you didn't leave to lose the wardec? CCP's hasty and ill-advised post leaves a lot of room that is just going to cause a crapload more petitions and forums posts until some strong boundaries are laid down.
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:30:00 - [153] Originally by: Ki An Originally by: Drasked So anyone who claims his bounty with an alt is getting a warning? So anyone who does exploration and runs multiple scans is getting a warning? Etc, etc, etc, etc, you see where im going?? Has a senior GM said that either of those constituted cheating? Nope. Originally by: Drasked Just like Privateers they should be allowed to use this untill the game mechanics are changed, or i want that same gm to monitor EVERY game mechanic in this game this is not being used as its intended and hand out warnings for eveyrone that misuses them. The Privateers wheren't exploiting or cheating. CCP just changed the game. Much like they changed escrow to contracts. Those who where using escrow wheren't exploiting. A GM has just said this is cheating. Therefore it's cheating. Well one only has to read kutsugumen to know that GM's in this game are in fact "lollerskates" But if a GM can go around and class stuff as "cheating" without giving any proper explenation about why, then so be it.
Lil'Red Ridin'Hood Snake Assault	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:38:00 - [154] Heheh, this thread is hilarious. The whinees become whiners. Boofricketyhoo, smaller victims found a game mechanic to avoid one way of being ganked. That's cheating, obv.
Kay Han Caldari FroZen SoulS	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:38:00 - [155] Originally by: Drasked Well one only has to read kutsugumen to know that GM's in this game are in fact "lollerskates" you just disqualified yourself. made my day TBH Originally by: CCP Atropos Personally I think Amarr ships should consume slaves in a similar way that other ships consume ammunition.
Loyal Lady	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:39:00 - [156] Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support I agree that this is a bit of a loophole. However, how about before you drop a big clear statement like this, you take a few moments to fix the f-ing war dec mechanics. war dec fees on an individual corp should be 50M isk and they should be 200M on an alliance. Right now wars are little more than a 2 cent tool for griefers.
Xandria Pearl KIA Corp	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:39:00 - [157] Originally by: Ponderous Thunderstroke Which part is the cheating? The joining iMune? the leaving? Leaving after 1 second? Leaving to get the wardec off? Do you wait for 2 seconds instead? 20 minutes? Do you leave a 'leaving note' saying "my corp is leaving because we don't like the alliance", and then you're covered because you didn't leave to lose the wardec? Honestly you must be joking. We can't have everything idiot proof and some common sense is needed. When that fails, whatever CCP says is the deal. Obviously, joining iMune is not cheating. Leaving them is not cheating in itself either. The joining and instantly leaving is obviously an exploit but for arguments sake let's say you just instantly changed your mind... if you are re-decced and do it again would you still say it's ok? A simple change is needed to stop this crap... just make it so that you can't leave an alliance before 7 days have passed, or that the war declared at your corp is carried with you for the full 7 days.
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:43:00 - [158] Originally by: Xandria Pearl Originally by: Ponderous Thunderstroke Which part is the cheating? The joining iMune? the leaving? Leaving after 1 second? Leaving to get the wardec off? Do you wait for 2 seconds instead? 20 minutes? Do you leave a 'leaving note' saying "my corp is leaving because we don't like the alliance", and then you're covered because you didn't leave to lose the wardec? Honestly you must be joking. We can't have everything idiot proof and some common sense is needed. When that fails, whatever CCP says is the deal. Obviously, joining iMune is not cheating. Leaving them is not cheating in itself either. The joining and instantly leaving is obviously an exploit but for arguments sake let's say you just instantly changed your mind... if you are re-decced and do it again would you still say it's ok? A simple change is needed to stop this crap... just make it so that you can't leave an alliance before 7 days have passed, or that the war declared at your corp is carried with you for the full 7 days. Ok so what the GM said in this thread can be considered void because the loophole it opens is so fricking huge its not even "lollerskates" anymore.
Orravan	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:46:00 - [159] Originally by: Xandria Pearl ... Better to not waste your time to respond to brickwalls. To you all, arguing that what is doing Imune is not an exploit : What is the purpose of war mechanisms in Eve if you can avoid it ? Can't you answer a so basic question ? ____________________ Finicky diplomat. Suicidal explorer. Faithful ally.
Le Donkey	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:46:00 - [160] Originally by: Drasked Ok so what the GM said in this thread can be considered void because the loophole it opens is so fricking huge its not even "lollerskates" anymore. Erm, he didn't open a loophole, he attempted to make clear that ppl shouldn't use this already open loophole. If you fail or don't want to accept it, that's your problem.
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:51:00 - [161] Originally by: Le Donkey Originally by: Drasked Ok so what the GM said in this thread can be considered void because the loophole it opens is so fricking huge its not even "lollerskates" anymore. Erm, he didn't open a loophole, he attempted to make clear that ppl shouldn't use this already open loophole. If you fail or don't want to accept it, that's your problem. But what if my corp is wardecced and i actually want to join imune but leave seconds after because one of their members called me "party boy" in alliance chat. Then the corp that dec'd me notices this and redecs my corp, but seconds after that the leader of imune convos me to talk with me about my sudden departure and convinces me to join back up again and mute the person that called me party boy, but the guy that called me party boy has an alt and called me party boy again, so i leave again. At what point is it a cheat? if a GM can't be clear about this then its pretty save to stay away from statements like this alltogether.
Ki An Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:54:00 - [162] I think I understand now why CCP usually keeps their mouths shut and just sneak a fix in a patch once people have argued amongst each other for six months. Seems they can't please the player base. If they would have kept quiet about this, they would be drowned in petitions about all the corps that would use this 'service' to dodge wars. As they instead clearly states that this is not supposed to happen, and is illegal to use, they get loads of people yelling "you aren't clear enough", and who looks in every nook and cranny after ways to beat the system. Ffs, use your nuggin! Common sense is apparently a commodity.
Le Donkey	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:57:00 - [163] Originally by: Drasked At what point is it a cheat? if a GM can't be clear about this then its pretty save to stay away from statements like this alltogether. First time you do it you get a cozy warning. Second time you get a nice ban, kk?
PhantomVyper Darkness Inc. Blood Blind	Posted - 2008.01.02 12:59:00 - [164] Originally by: Drasked Originally by: Le Donkey Originally by: Drasked Ok so what the GM said in this thread can be considered void because the loophole it opens is so fricking huge its not even "lollerskates" anymore. Erm, he didn't open a loophole, he attempted to make clear that ppl shouldn't use this already open loophole. If you fail or don't want to accept it, that's your problem. But what if my corp is wardecced and i actually want to join imune but leave seconds after because one of their members called me "party boy" in alliance chat. Then the corp that dec'd me notices this and redecs my corp, but seconds after that the leader of imune convos me to talk with me about my sudden departure and convinces me to join back up again and mute the person that called me party boy, but the guy that called me party boy has an alt and called me party boy again, so i leave again. At what point is it a cheat? if a GM can't be clear about this then its pretty save to stay away from statements like this alltogether. At the exact point that you get reported for it and a GM gives you a nice little warning or ban.
Ponderous Thunderstroke Republic War Machine Industries	Posted - 2008.01.02 13:01:00 - [165] Originally by: Xandria Pearl Originally by: Ponderous Thunderstroke Which part is the cheating? The joining iMune? the leaving? Leaving after 1 second? Leaving to get the wardec off? Do you wait for 2 seconds instead? 20 minutes? Do you leave a 'leaving note' saying "my corp is leaving because we don't like the alliance", and then you're covered because you didn't leave to lose the wardec? Honestly you must be joking. We can't have everything idiot proof and some common sense is needed. When that fails, whatever CCP says is the deal. Obviously, joining iMune is not cheating. Leaving them is not cheating in itself either. The joining and instantly leaving is obviously an exploit but for arguments sake let's say you just instantly changed your mind... if you are re-decced and do it again would you still say it's ok? A simple change is needed to stop this crap... just make it so that you can't leave an alliance before 7 days have passed, or that the war declared at your corp is carried with you for the full 7 days. OK, you say 7 days. CCP hasn't said squat. Except that "It's cheating". So we're then left to explore the boundaries of what the cheating is. Can I leave my alliance after 6 days, or do I get a warning? Sounds like something someone should petition to see if it's OK...oh wait, somebody did that, got a response, and now is getting railroaded with a contradictory response. In fact, all we know about it's illegality is that "it's cheating" and "CEO's will get a warning". How many warnings? Can IMune accept 50 corps in/out, and get 50 warnings? Once again, it's an open ended, vague ruling that sounds like it was made on the heels of looking at 5 pages of complaints from wounded griefers and mercs and taking action from there. In the interestes of fairness, I'm sympathetic to the mercs' plight. Not a shred to the griefers. There has to be a more concrete fix here, something involving oh, I dunno, maybe FIXING THE WARDEC SYSTEM or something.
Arctur Ceti	Posted - 2008.01.02 13:02:00 - [166] It's funny how this is considered an exploit but using the gang mechanic to group up as a team can be used to gank victims in high security space without concord intervention. Talk about double standard.
Xandria Pearl KIA Corp	Posted - 2008.01.02 13:09:00 - [167] Originally by: Ponderous Thunderstroke OK, you say 7 days. CCP hasn't said squat. Except that "It's cheating". The GM replied to this thread regarding to the OP, which clearly describes a corp joining and instantly leaving the alliance. You say it's vague? I say you're just avoiding the real issue.
Kransthow AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.01.02 13:10:00 - [168] Originally by: Arctur Ceti It's funny how this is considered an exploit but using the gang mechanic to group up as a team can be used to gank victims in high security space without concord intervention. Talk about double standard. /fail
Ponderous Thunderstroke Republic War Machine Industries	Posted - 2008.01.02 13:13:00 - [169] Edited by: Ponderous Thunderstroke on 02/01/2008 13:15:15 Originally by: Xandria Pearl Originally by: Ponderous Thunderstroke OK, you say 7 days. CCP hasn't said squat. Except that "It's cheating". The GM replied to this thread regarding to the OP, which clearly describes a corp joining and instantly leaving the alliance. You say it's vague? I say you're just avoiding the real issue. Hey, no problem then! We just won't instantly leave if we choose to avail ourselves of IMune.
Kransthow AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.01.02 13:30:00 - [170] Originally by: Ponderous Thunderstroke Hey, no problem then! We just won't instantly leave if we choose to avail ourselves of IMune. It's cheating to join and leave a alliance to lose your war dec on your corp, time dosen't come into the matter
Le Donkey	Posted - 2008.01.02 13:35:00 - [171] Originally by: Ponderous Thunderstroke Hey, no problem then! We just won't instantly leave if we choose to avail ourselves of IMune. Oh my. I'm planning on sueing a shoe company. I forgot to tie my shoelaces and tripped and hurt my knees. On second thought, I'll sue the goverment too... they should have made pillowed pavements just to prevent ppl from getting hurt if they fall. Irrelevant? Think about it. Playing dumb ftl...
PhantomVyper Darkness Inc. Blood Blind	Posted - 2008.01.02 13:35:00 - [172] Originally by: Arctur Ceti It's funny how this is considered an exploit but using the gang mechanic to group up as a team can be used to gank victims in high security space without concord intervention. Talk about double standard. Its not a double standard because the "victim" of this "exploit" can simply NOT join the gang and thus be completly immune to it. The "victim" of the iMune aliance scheme (i.e. the Merc / agrieved / ganker corp that initiated the wardec), can do absolutely nothing to avoid it, except spending even more ISK to continue the wardec that could be as easilly voided as the first one...
Ponderous Thunderstroke Republic War Machine Industries	Posted - 2008.01.02 13:41:00 - [173] Originally by: Le Donkey Originally by: Ponderous Thunderstroke Hey, no problem then! We just won't instantly leave if we choose to avail ourselves of IMune. Oh my. I'm planning on sueing a shoe company. I forgot to tie my shoelaces and tripped and hurt my knees. On second thought, I'll sue the goverment too... they should have made pillowed pavements just to prevent ppl from getting hurt if they fall. Irrelevant? Think about it. Playing dumb ftl... My point is, adjudicating whether or not someone is exploiting will be a judgement call. And as we have already seen in this IMune saga, how the judgement call will go depends on who you talk to and at what time. Yeah, I know, that's the point of a JUDGEMENT call. But why bother with the screechings of "UNFAIR!" from either side, when you could just fix the freaking wardec system and eliminate all uncertainty? Oh yeah, btw. "I didn't leave that alliance 10 minutes after joining because I wanted my corp to dodge the wardec. I left because the alliance leader was a meanie head and called my pilots noobs." Reserving the above excuse for if I decide to use IMune.
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 13:49:00 - [174] Originally by: PhantomVyper Originally by: Arctur Ceti It's funny how this is considered an exploit but using the gang mechanic to group up as a team can be used to gank victims in high security space without concord intervention. Talk about double standard. Its not a double standard because the "victim" of this "exploit" can simply NOT join the gang and thus be completly immune to it. The "victim" of the iMune aliance scheme (i.e. the Merc / agrieved / ganker corp that initiated the wardec), can do absolutely nothing to avoid it, except spending even more ISK to continue the wardec that could be as easilly voided as the first one... Just like the victims of privateer alliance where just able to NOT get wardecced.. oh wait..
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 13:55:00 - [175] Originally by: Kransthow Originally by: Ponderous Thunderstroke Hey, no problem then! We just won't instantly leave if we choose to avail ourselves of IMune. It's cheating to join and leave a alliance to lose your war dec on your corp, time dosen't come into the matter Ok so if i leave multiple times because they keep calling me "party boy" in alliance chat then it's ok??
The'Chosen	Posted - 2008.01.02 14:12:00 - [176] Edited by: The''Chosen on 02/01/2008 14:12:13 Originally by: Drasked Originally by: PhantomVyper Originally by: Arctur Ceti It's funny how this is considered an exploit but using the gang mechanic to group up as a team can be used to gank victims in high security space without concord intervention. Talk about double standard. Its not a double standard because the "victim" of this "exploit" can simply NOT join the gang and thus be completly immune to it. The "victim" of the iMune aliance scheme (i.e. the Merc / agrieved / ganker corp that initiated the wardec), can do absolutely nothing to avoid it, except spending even more ISK to continue the wardec that could be as easilly voided as the first one... Just like the victims of privateer alliance where just able to NOT get wardecced.. oh wait.. So some 2 man griefer corp spends 2M isk to war dec a small group of industrialists who have all their SP in mining and industry. These industrialists can do NOTHING to avoid this war. (I'm agreeing wit you Drasked) Seriously... if you guys are going to throw this out as a cheat, then you REALLY need to re-evaluate the current war dec system. It's so fantastically broken that you are fully alienating anyone who doesn't have SP spent on PvP. It's not good for the EvE community/game and for CCP, it's not good for business.
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 14:14:00 - [177] Originally by: Orravan Originally by: Xandria Pearl ... Better to not waste your time to respond to brickwalls. To you all, arguing that what is doing Imune is not an exploit : What is the purpose of war mechanisms in Eve if you can avoid it ? Can't you answer a so basic question ? What is the purpose of the bounty system if you can claim your own bounty?? If it's not obvious by now that we need this fixed sooner rather then later and that a GM quote like that is only going to make things more complicated then i dont know what the hell you guys are all smoking but i'll take 3.
Angel DeMorphis Gallente	Posted - 2008.01.02 14:24:00 - [178] Originally by: Ponderous Thunderstroke My point is, adjudicating whether or not someone is exploiting will be a judgement call. And as we have already seen in this IMune saga, how the judgement call will go depends on who you talk to and at what time. There seems to be a lot of people in this thread that do not know the Eve definition of an exploit. So here it is, taken from the knowledgebase: "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." In Eve, the definition of exploit is when someone bypasses normal game mechanics. Using or abusing normal game mechanics, such as the alliance handling of a war dec, then, by definition, is not an exploit. Sometimes CCP does label these as possible bannable offenses, however, such as jet can spamming to lag an opponent long enough for your to crush them. But until CCP calls it such, it is not an exploit. -- My sig taken from this site, so thoroughly explains the people I speak with on the forums.
PhantomVyper Darkness Inc. Blood Blind	Posted - 2008.01.02 14:28:00 - [179] Originally by: Angel DeMorphis But until CCP calls it such, it is not an exploit. CCP has already called it an exploit (not exactly an exploit, but "cheating that can get you banned", so same thing actually)
Angel DeMorphis Gallente	Posted - 2008.01.02 14:35:00 - [180] Originally by: PhantomVyper Originally by: Angel DeMorphis But until CCP calls it such, it is not an exploit. CCP has already called it an exploit (not exactly an exploit, but "cheating that can get you banned", so same thing actually) Darn. I should have read every freaking page! /sigh -- My sig taken from this site, so thoroughly explains the people I speak with on the forums.
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 14:35:00 - [181] Edited by: Drasked on 02/01/2008 14:36:14 Originally by: PhantomVyper Originally by: Angel DeMorphis But until CCP calls it such, it is not an exploit. CCP has already called it an exploit (not exactly an exploit, but "cheating that can get you banned", so same thing actually) Problem is that the GM said in his post "this is a cheat" without quoting anything, so that leaves us to assume (see what i did there) that he was referring to the OP, in wich case there are like 100 ways to circumvent this and still be able to use this perfectly legal and intended game mechanic to the fullest.
Wyliee Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.02 14:38:00 - [182] Edited by: Wyliee on 02/01/2008 14:40:50 Originally by: The'Chosen Seriously... if you guys are going to throw this out as a cheat, then you REALLY need to re-evaluate the current war dec system. It's so fantastically broken that you are fully alienating anyone who doesn't have SP spent on PvP. consider. eve has many deverse things you can do in it. there is no set story, it is up to you what you train in, and where you invest your skill points. if you decide to invest your skill points into mining, then you can, you can use the invested skills to make you money. if on the other hand you choose to invest all your time and skill points in PVP - you should also be alowed to turn this investment into money. hence PVP is bourne, it is inconceivable that high sec minering corps should be alowed to make huge amounts of money unchallenge-able. it is also stupid to expect pvp skill invested players to not do what they need to do inorder to make money too. whats more - every ship pvper's blow up is another ship miners can sell ore to make. it seems they can make reams of isk, and never ever be at risk, whilst benifiting from the work of PVP'ers just as long as it doesnt hurt them.
Angel DeMorphis Gallente	Posted - 2008.01.02 14:38:00 - [183] Edited by: Angel DeMorphis on 02/01/2008 14:38:11 Originally by: Drasked Problem is that the GM said in his post "this is a cheat" without quoting anything, so that leaves us to assume (see what i did there) that he was referring to the OP, in wich case there are like 100 ways to circumvent this and still be able to use this perfectly legal and intended game mechanic to the fullest. Except that he went on to say "CEOs exploiting this loophole...", so it has to do with CEOs and loopholes and the only thing there in this thread at that time was the iMune cheat. -- My sig taken from this site, so thoroughly explains the people I speak with on the forums.
Lil'Red Ridin'Hood Snake Assault	Posted - 2008.01.02 14:38:00 - [184] Originally by: Drasked Problem is that the GM said in his post "this is a cheat" without quoting anything, so that leaves us to assume... You, sir, are indeed a Party Boy.
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 14:38:00 - [185] Originally by: Angel DeMorphis Originally by: PhantomVyper Originally by: Angel DeMorphis But until CCP calls it such, it is not an exploit. CCP has already called it an exploit (not exactly an exploit, but "cheating that can get you banned", so same thing actually) Darn. I should have read every freaking page! /sigh I guess that is why most professional companys dont do their offcial announcements in some backwater thread on a forum that not every subsciber of their product visits.
Orravan	Posted - 2008.01.02 14:41:00 - [186] Originally by: Drasked What is the purpose of the bounty system if you can claim your own bounty?? If it's not obvious by now that we need this fixed sooner rather then later and that a GM quote like that is only going to make things more complicated then i dont know what the hell you guys are all smoking but i'll take 3. Sure. This is the kind of issue that can deeply affect politics, economy and gameplay of Eve. I don't think you need anything else to smoke. - Consequence of claiming his own bounty : some ISK in the wallet of one man. By the way (or maybe it's the major point), everyone know that the bounty system don't work correctly (sad, indeed), and no-one is forced to put a bounty over the head of an outlaw. It's seriously not affecting the game itself. - Consequence of freaking the war mechanisms : destruction of a major feature of Eve that concern thousands of people, and dynamics of the game. It's potentially a destruction of empire wars, no more, no less. If you want a removal of the wardecs, say it so, and don't act with so much hypocrisy. Also, it's an issue the devs plan to fix, it's in the drawing board (for a long time now, that makes me believe it's not a critical issue for them, too). But it's not the thread subject, is it ? By the way, you don't answer me, you just jump on something else. As usual. ____________________ Finicky diplomat. Suicidal explorer. Faithful ally.
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 14:41:00 - [187] Originally by: Angel DeMorphis Edited by: Angel DeMorphis on 02/01/2008 14:38:11 Originally by: Drasked Problem is that the GM said in his post "this is a cheat" without quoting anything, so that leaves us to assume (see what i did there) that he was referring to the OP, in wich case there are like 100 ways to circumvent this and still be able to use this perfectly legal and intended game mechanic to the fullest. Except that he went on to say "CEOs exploiting this loophole...", so it has to do with CEOs and loopholes and the only thing there in this thread at that time was the iMune cheat. Again, people now risk getting warned for nothing if a corp with a wardec joins them, then gets booted for whatever reason other then to take over the wardec. There are so many ways to go around this that the only logical solution would be to leave the mechanics running as they where intended untill they fix it and then still leave everything running as intended.
Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.02 14:50:00 - [188] Originally by: Orravan Originally by: Drasked What is the purpose of the bounty system if you can claim your own bounty?? If it's not obvious by now that we need this fixed sooner rather then later and that a GM quote like that is only going to make things more complicated then i dont know what the hell you guys are all smoking but i'll take 3. Sure. This is the kind of issue that can deeply affect politics, economy and gameplay of Eve. I don't think you need anything else to smoke. - Consequence of claiming his own bounty : some ISK in the wallet of one man. By the way (or maybe it's the major point), everyone know that the bounty system don't work correctly (sad, indeed), and no-one is forced to put a bounty over the head of an outlaw. It's seriously not affecting the game itself. - Consequence of freaking the war mechanisms : destruction of a major feature of Eve that concern thousands of people, and dynamics of the game. It's potentially a destruction of empire wars, no more, no less. If you want a removal of the wardecs, say it so, and don't act with so much hypocrisy. Also, it's an issue the devs plan to fix, it's in the drawing board (for a long time now, that makes me believe it's not a critical issue for them, too). But it's not the thread subject, is it ? By the way, you don't answer me, you just jump on something else. As usual. Well people are not forced to wardec someone, you see? Both are game mechanics that are not being used as intended, the ONLY and i say ONLY way to fix this is to adjust the game mechanics, a gm reply on this matter will only make things worse. I dont want the wardec system removed, i want it fixed. And if people are going to get warned about using flawed game mechanics then people should also be warned for abusing ANY flaw and not just this one because people whine the most about it.
Orravan	Posted - 2008.01.02 14:58:00 - [189] First, I highly doubt that there is so much corps (honnestly) joining an alliance and then get booted just after. Usually... you don't add a corporation to your alliance after a 10 seconds meeting, without knowing the situation of the corp you're accepting with you. Second, the point is not to warn people because a wardec corp join them and then quit. Of course, it happen, for whatever reason. But the point here is to show how the war mechanism is broke by such things. Quote: I dont want the wardec system removed, i want it fixed. And then, your opinion join all those you are debating against. And... of course, people aren't forced to wardec. But if you cannot see the difference between the two issues, and how it affect the virtual universe you play in, then, at this point it's hopeless, a lot of people before have tried to explain it here, and I personally got tired to debate with brickwalls these last years and thus will no more try. ____________________ Finicky diplomat. Suicidal explorer. Faithful ally.
Agent Pandora Minmatar Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.02 15:26:00 - [190] Edited by: Agent Pandora on 02/01/2008 15:26:03 You know it, I know it and God knows this is a blatant misuse of the game mechanics. We have had war decs against other corps in the past who have then in turn joined an alliance. Some corps did it because it was a plan already in the works prior to us decc'ing them, others did it just to screw up our war dec....but they stayed in the alliance for more then two minutes unlike the weaselly tactics that are being used here by iMune. In what fantasy world do people live in that they think they can form a corporation or an alliance and never get war decc'ed? That is a risk you take when you join a corp or an alliance. Deal with it or stay in the NPC corps. So iMune discovered a loophole and then did the stupidest thing ever....came into the forums and flaunted it. All they accomplished was undermining themselves and help the rest of us drawn the attention of a GM to this loophole that has now been deemed "cheating." Was this the intended method to their madness? I doubt it....I think they thought they were half a** slick and its backfiring badly. As I said before if you don't want to deal with possible war decs stay in the NPC corps....and if you are a mining/industrial/carebear corp that does get war decc'ed do what every respectable mining/industrial/carebear corp does....stay docked and bore us to death, not use the weaselly tactics offered by iMune. Carry on with your epic thread now
Paulo Damarr	Posted - 2008.01.02 17:24:00 - [191] The thing is now will we see iMune and their alts crying and whining all over the forums for the next 20 years about how they where "nerfed" like the privateers are doing. ----------------------------------------------- My new years resolution is to give up nonconstructive posting
Kessiaan	Posted - 2008.01.02 18:02:00 - [192] Originally by: Agent Pandora You know it, I know it and God knows this is a blatant misuse of the game mechanics. This is true, but so are log-on traps, alt corp spies, can baiting noobs, exploiting gang mechanics to get some easy kills, etc, etc. We all know it and it's what gives Eve its anything-goes reputation. The problem with a GM coming on and saying "Don't do this" instead of quietly fixing a broken mechanic is that people on other forums and in other games who might be thinking of trying Eve and hear that it's a griefer haven get directed into huge threads like this and come away with the impression that the GMs are saying "OK, you can lie, cheat, scam, metagame, and grief all you want. Dodge a wardec? OH NO THAT'S AN EXPLOIT YOU CAN'T DO THAT!". It doesn't help anyone. Of course, saying it's an exploit and actually doing anything about it are totally different and we all may just be making a big deal out of nothing. ----- My in Eve Profile My BattleClinic Page
WulfWestphal Minmatar Niflhel TALIONIS ALLIANCE	Posted - 2008.01.02 18:45:00 - [193] Edited by: WulfWestphal on 02/01/2008 18:48:17 Originally by: Drasked Edited by: Drasked on 02/01/2008 14:36:14 Originally by: PhantomVyper Originally by: Angel DeMorphis But until CCP calls it such, it is not an exploit. CCP has already called it an exploit (not exactly an exploit, but "cheating that can get you banned", so same thing actually) Problem is that the GM said in his post "this is a cheat" without quoting anything, so that leaves us to assume (see what i did there) that he was referring to the OP, in wich case there are like 100 ways to circumvent this and still be able to use this perfectly legal and intended game mechanic to the fullest. oh man, get a grip. you want a GM saying "bannable offense" on every 100 ways to circumvent the alliance thing cosidered "cheating"? hint: common sense. joining an alliance to get rid of your war decc is considered "cheating" or "bannable offense". in which ways that is considered this way is up to GMs and the DEVs, so the war deccer has probably file an exploit petition if they feel offended and escalate it to a senior GM if the decced corp leaves after 2 days for example. common sense will be the best way to find out if its a "bannable offense" or not. for a while this has to be enough till CCP does a sneak patch and fixes the hole in a way mentioned in this thread. if you dont want to clogg the petition system just use common sense and your brain and dont do something that is or gets near a "bannable offense". though, i can understand the anger of the people used this system till now to their advantage, everything ends, and sometimes things change. just. use. common. sense. and dont let your anger clog your vision or thinking. edit: and ffs, this isnt about suicide ganking or deccing noobcorps. this is about getting your war cancelled for free without a way for the deccer to prevent it. so stop using non-arguments. it just makes you look silly. ---
Osunn	Posted - 2008.01.02 19:19:00 - [194] Hmm - an exploit hey? Not like war corps,run by one alt - you get war decced, ten people join after the war is hot and leave three days later. Most of the wars in empire are like that. Its been that way for a year or more- can someone explain the why that is not an exploit? Talk about avoiding war -
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.01.02 19:38:00 - [195] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: Ademaro Imre Edited by: Ademaro Imre on 02/01/2008 06:29:36 CCP still thinks that Login Traps are not exploits - but this is cheating? Tbh anyone that thinks login traps are not exploit of game mechanics is an idiot. It totally voids the local-system where you can always see how many people are in a system. Your calling CCP idiots? GASP. SKUNK
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.01.02 19:39:00 - [196] Edited by: Le Skunk on 02/01/2008 19:39:26 Originally by: Paulo Damarr The thing is now will we see iMune and their alts crying and whining all over the forums for the next 20 years about how they where "nerfed" like the privateers are doing. I hope so .. CCP need reminding how utterly incompetent they are SKUNK
Ursula LeGuinn	Posted - 2008.01.02 19:42:00 - [197] Originally by: Kessiaan Originally by: Agent Pandora You know it, I know it and God knows this is a blatant misuse of the game mechanics. This is true, but so are log-on traps, alt corp spies, can baiting noobs, exploiting gang mechanics to get some easy kills, etc, etc. We all know it and it's what gives Eve its anything-goes reputation. Quoted for truth. Good call, Kessiaan. I pretty much agree with everything you said there.
Tsanse Kinske WeMeanYouKnowHarm	Posted - 2008.01.02 20:11:00 - [198] Originally by: Kessiaan Originally by: Agent Pandora You know it, I know it and God knows this is a blatant misuse of the game mechanics. This is true, but so are log-on traps, alt corp spies, can baiting noobs, exploiting gang mechanics to get some easy kills, etc, etc. We all know it and it's what gives Eve its anything-goes reputation. The problem with a GM coming on and saying "Don't do this" instead of quietly fixing a broken mechanic is that people on other forums and in other games who might be thinking of trying Eve and hear that it's a griefer haven get directed into huge threads like this and come away with the impression that the GMs are saying "OK, you can lie, cheat, scam, metagame, and grief all you want. Dodge a wardec? OH NO THAT'S AN EXPLOIT YOU CAN'T DO THAT!". It doesn't help anyone. I'm not sure what you're trying to say. That EVE either should have no rules whatsoever or that everything you listed should be verboten too, because you don't like any of it? Exploits are always artificial constructions defined by the game's designers, in line with their vision of the game's ethos. If they say that this is an exploit but scamming is not, what is so hard to understand? You truly don't see the difference between scamming (for instance) and easy immunity to wardecs? If not, here it is: the former is one of EVE's signature game features, while the renders one of the game's signature features meaningless. Now I'm sure there are people who can't understand why scamming would be acceptable, and wardecs would be desirable, but they're going to be much happier playing other games with an ethos they appreciate. * * * In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -Douglas Adams, writing about EVE
Hamfast Gallente	Posted - 2008.01.02 20:55:00 - [199] LetÆs see... Had a GM posted on any of the ton of "Nerf the Privateers" threads to call what the Privateers a cheat would the change to fix what they were doing have been needed? Should that post have been made? I say Yes... what the Privateers used to do showed a flaw in the war dec system, they were not "exploiting" anything in the negative sense, they were using a game mechanism to excess... that flaw was fixed. What iMune is doing also shows a flaw in the system, we can find a bunch of threads that are complaining about this tactic (using a game mechanism to excess) what they are doing is no more an exploit in the negative sense then what the Privateers did... The only read difference is that someone with Bars around their post said that this was a cheat... the same post should have been made for the Anti-Privateers. On another note, it has always been said that avoiding the consequences of the game (get away from Concord was mentioned earlier, recycling alts to avoid the security hit for shooting others) have been classified as an "Exploit" in the negative sense... so why would anyone think that joining and leaving an alliance to avoid a war dec is not going to be looked at as abusing the system? --------*****-------- It takes 43 muscles to frown and 17 to smile, but it doesn't take any to just sit there with a dumb look on your face.
Deanna Nuchi	Posted - 2008.01.02 21:00:00 - [200] Edited by: Deanna Nuchi on 02/01/2008 21:05:39 Edited by: Deanna Nuchi on 02/01/2008 21:03:55 Originally by: Angel DeMorphis Originally by: Ponderous Thunderstroke My point is, adjudicating whether or not someone is exploiting will be a judgement call. And as we have already seen in this IMune saga, how the judgement call will go depends on who you talk to and at what time. There seems to be a lot of people in this thread that do not know the Eve definition of an exploit. So here it is, taken from the knowledgebase: "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." In Eve, the definition of exploit is when someone bypasses normal game mechanics. Using or abusing normal game mechanics, such as the alliance handling of a war dec, then, by definition, is not an exploit. Sometimes CCP does label these as possible bannable offenses, however, such as jet can spamming to lag an opponent long enough for your to crush them. But until CCP calls it such, it is not an exploit. Incorrect, I have petitioned instances that fulfill these criteria perfectly, and escalated through several GMs, only to be told to .. go away .. Edit (doh) : The problem is a complete lack of consistancy by GMs/CCP One thing is fine until someone else uses it, then it becomes an exploit. Another thing is fine, because a GM/Dev thinks it is funny. Another is fine until there is a hoo-har on the forums. Edit (2) : It might have been more useful if a certain person had thought through the implications of what they said, given that it contradicts what has been said before.
Kessiaan	Posted - 2008.01.02 21:33:00 - [201] Originally by: Deanna Nuchi Edit (doh) : The problem is a complete lack of consistancy by GMs/CCP One thing is fine until someone else uses it, then it becomes an exploit. Another thing is fine, because a GM/Dev thinks it is funny. Another is fine until there is a hoo-har on the forums. Edit (2) : It might have been more useful if a certain person had thought through the implications of what they said, given that it contradicts what has been said before. This is my point. I completely understand (and agree with) the devs saying war-dodging by joining and leaving an alliance is an exploit and it shouldn't happen. But in a game that advertises itself as a completely free-form do-what-you-want-regardless-of-the-moral-or-ethical-implications game, having the devs draw a line in the sand and say "OK, everything else is fine, but THIS is off-limits" comes off as being very hypocritical, regardless of their intentions. And then we get all these crazy threads at mmorpg.com and elsewhere about dev bias and it's not entirely unwarranted. It's really simple, you don't want people to do it, just change the mechanics so decs follow you (perhaps a new dec with a fresh timer) if your corp leaves an alliance. ----- My in Eve Profile My BattleClinic Page
Xilimyth Derlin The Funkalistic SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.02 22:22:00 - [202] I guess from a rules standpoint the sitaution is clear. The system assumes if you are wardeced and joined an alliance, you're joining an alliance to get some help fighting it. This makes sense. However, during prolonged combat, a corp that could not continue fighting decides to leave an alliance, they would be declared a non-combatant. This makes sense as well. The system from that standpoint is fine, it may just be the time it takes to LEAVE an alliance. Technically, it could be longer to solve this one problem, but then you create another problem of 'troublesome' alliance members needing to be removed instantly, and then you break something else to fix one problem. I think the INTENT on the alliance system is perfectly clear, it's just being used for the wrong reasons. This whole scenario is just skewing a game mechanic way past the intended red line, nothing more. Within the rules yes, but now pushing that limit too far is going to just get the rules changed and break something else...
Halkin D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.02 22:34:00 - [203] Originally by: Drasked Originally by: Ki An Originally by: Drasked All the "exlpoit yellers" should have a nice cup of STFU. There is no exploit, just perfectly legal useage of ingame mechanics. That the mechanics in question are flawed is another story. It's kind of like saying that claiming your bounty with an alt is an exploit. Except a GM just said it was cheating. You mean in the same way as calling a random customer support 3 times will give you 3 totally diffrent answers? A senior GM classed this as legal use of game mechanics. :twistedpanties: Originally by: InigoMontoya - re: iMune alliance situation I would sue Concord for breach of contract, you paid the fees, where is your pew pew?
Halkin D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.02 22:36:00 - [204] Originally by: Drasked Originally by: Angel DeMorphis Originally by: PhantomVyper Originally by: Angel DeMorphis But until CCP calls it such, it is not an exploit. CCP has already called it an exploit (not exactly an exploit, but "cheating that can get you banned", so same thing actually) Darn. I should have read every freaking page! /sigh I guess that is why most professional companys dont do their offcial announcements in some backwater thread on a forum that not every subsciber of their product visits. although i do agree with this, some offical word thing on the login screen would be nice for the non/casual/cant-read-at-work forum readers Originally by: InigoMontoya - re: iMune alliance situation I would sue Concord for breach of contract, you paid the fees, where is your pew pew?
Hamfast Gallente	Posted - 2008.01.02 22:38:00 - [205] Just an idea... Corp "A" War Decs Corp "B"... they pay the funds... Just like it is now... Corp "B" Joins Alliance "Z" - Corp "A" has now got Alliance "Z" War Deced - Just like it is now... Alliance "Z" is now made up of Corps "B", "C", and "D"... Corp "B" is flagged in the Database... If Corp "C" leaves Alliance "Z", they are still war deced for 24 hours... Just like it is now... If Corp "B" leaves, as they are flagged, then Corp "B" Keeps the War Dec flag(s)... After the first week, Corp "A" is then able to renew both/either the War Dec's on Alliance "Z" or Corp "B"... at the going cost of what ever the corresponding war dec cost would be. There is already a Mechanism in the Database to identify when two corps are at war, when an alliance is at war, and with whom... it seems that data could be used to determine who the war's follow... and who they donÆtà Corp ôAö would not be offered the ability to renew the war on Corp ôCöà While this would allow someone to War Dec an alliance for a week at the cost of a Corp, it should end this "Cheat" as the GM so named it. --------*****-------- It takes 43 muscles to frown and 17 to smile, but it doesn't take any to just sit there with a dumb look on your face.
Paulo Damarr	Posted - 2008.01.02 22:52:00 - [206] Originally by: Le Skunk Edited by: Le Skunk on 02/01/2008 19:39:26 Originally by: Paulo Damarr The thing is now will we see iMune and their alts crying and whining all over the forums for the next 20 years about how they where "nerfed" like the privateers are doing. I hope so .. CCP need reminding how utterly incompetent they are SKUNK Dont get me wrong I think the whole privateer thing sounds cool and I wish I was around for it its just the complaining is a little...undignified. ----------------------------------------------- My new years resolution is to give up nonconstructive posting
Issler Dainze Minmatar Tadakastu-Obata Corporation	Posted - 2008.01.02 23:58:00 - [207] To me this is a perfect example of one part of CCP having no idea what another part if saying (or thinks about how Eve should be). There needs to be some sort of overall "Philosophy of Life in Eve". Two GMs clearly differ on how to interpret this issue. (make me wonder what other random rulings folks have been subject to) and no clear reason has been given. Issler
Marrano Cardosa	Posted - 2008.01.02 23:58:00 - [208] Originally by: Ashley Sky Edited by: Ashley Sky on 02/01/2008 04:13:11 It looks like this was the official statement, since it was posted last. :) Originally by: GM Nova What the hell??? I too wonder what this means. What exactly are the rules for what is prohibited by allowed by game mechanics? I am in an alliance, that has in the past brought in corps who had wardecs, some of those corps have since left the alliance, did they break the rules? Is it breaking the rules for a corp to join an alliance if the corp is at war? How long does a corp have to stay in an alliance if it joins under those conditions? How is that effected if the declaring corp withdraws the wardec? This statement by the GM is very vague (and contradicts other ccp information if the iMune people are correct). I think more of a response and certainly more detail and less vagueness is called for. But seriously, I'm not ignoring what the GM said. I just think they should post clarification of what exactly is cheating, so I can avoid it. For example, the statement above... Quote: they then joined imune empire aliance, then imediately left, 24 hours later we are left not being able to shoot them without redecking them again. i consider this cheating, and using a loophole that ccp should address. What does that mean exactly? Does it mean they have to remain in our alliance for 1 day, or 1 week? Where are the lines drawn between what you tell us we can do and what the game mechanics allow? Please tell us so we don't break any of your magical rules.
The Hooch Minmatar Privateers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.03 00:02:00 - [209] Nerfbat's hurt IMune founders, nice try...as I said in your first post. Take your beating like a man, like we did and figure something else out. Thank you CCP at least you see both sides of the issue. Hooch Concord punishes people, it does not protect them
goodby4u Logistic Technologies Incorporated	Posted - 2008.01.03 00:21:00 - [210] Its funny how this thread is 8 pages long even though a top GM clarified it is an exploit,whether or not theres a frontpage post about it being an exploit,a warning is a warning. Signature removed. Contains no Eve content. Navigator ([email protected])
dakari	Posted - 2008.01.03 00:21:00 - [211] Originally by: Hannobaal Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Hannobaal Privateers used the war system the way it was intended. It's just that the system itself was broken. But what they did wasn't an exploit. This thing is completely different. You should definitely petition them. Try to find the difference between this two phrases: Imune used the war system the way it was intended. It's just that the system itself was broken. But what they did wasn't an exploit. The war system has several hole, privateers found one and it was plugged, Imune has found another and it will be plugged. Both action were within the rules boundaries when they were done (and Imune still is), what Privateers did was never sanctioned as an exploit, the system was changed as it was a broken mechanic. My bet is that the result of the Imune tactic will be exactly the same. Petitioning can accelerate the change, but it will not be declared an exploit. If what these people are doing is not an exploit then nothing is an exploit. I think any person with an ounce of common sense can see that this can not possibly be intended game mechanics. The Privateers on the other hand simply declared war on people. There is nothing about that could be an exploit. The problem was that being able to declare war so easily on so many people so easily was a very bad thing for the game. Saying that what the Privateers did was an exploit would be like saying that people who fit tons of inertial stabilizers on their Typhoons back in spring were exploiting. BY privateer's do you mean the people who formed temporary corps to wardec noobcorps or mining/industrial corps and then when paid off disbanded the corp they were in and made another corp so they themselves would not be able to be attacked by pirate hunters and merc corps?
Xaroth Brook Minmatar BIG Ka-Tet	Posted - 2008.01.03 00:43:00 - [212] I still fail to see the point in discussing stuff about this when Nova 'answered' the entire ordeal 5 pages ago... I mean... shouldn't you be pewpewing again? It was like a baby, it landed on my lap and was helpless and totally defenseless. Then I shot it and bragged about it on a killboard.
Sniggerdly Hater	Posted - 2008.01.03 01:28:00 - [213] Originally by: goodby4u Its funny how this thread is 8 pages long even though a top GM clarified it is an exploit,whether or not theres a frontpage post about it being an exploit,a warning is a warning. And what are they going to say? Joining an alliance so you pass to them the war and then leave the alliance without the war is not allowed? Woops, now everyone knows what not to do. Except that everyone now can join and leave an alliance as they please and argue uh... whatever the farmers argue when they dissolve "a ffxho" and reform in "a cchid". I've read that that's legal. Of course CCP will use "judgement" calls, people petitioning other corps because "they joined the alliance when we decced them so obviously they have to be cheating", and will result in getting varying degrees of responses from the same GM depending on whether he got laid lately. All hail the rule of man. What they should do is fix the whole empire war thing.
Marrano Cardosa	Posted - 2008.01.03 01:29:00 - [214] Originally by: Xaroth Brook I still fail to see the point in discussing stuff about this when Nova 'answered' the entire ordeal 5 pages ago... I mean... shouldn't you be pewpewing again? That's the whole problem, GM Nova provided no real answer.
Kransthow AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.01.03 01:37:00 - [215] Originally by: Marrano Cardosa That's the whole problem, GM Nova provided no real answer. Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. Looks like a pretty good answer to imunes exploitery
goodby4u Logistic Technologies Incorporated	Posted - 2008.01.03 01:45:00 - [216] Originally by: S****dly Hater Originally by: goodby4u Its funny how this thread is 8 pages long even though a top GM clarified it is an exploit,whether or not theres a frontpage post about it being an exploit,a warning is a warning. And what are they going to say? Joining an alliance so you pass to them the war and then leave the alliance without the war is not allowed? Woops, now everyone knows what not to do. Except that everyone now can join and leave an alliance as they please and argue uh... whatever the farmers argue when they dissolve "a ffxho" and reform in "a cchid". I've read that that's legal. Of course CCP will use "judgement" calls, people petitioning other corps because "they joined the alliance when we decced them so obviously they have to be cheating", and will result in getting varying degrees of responses from the same GM depending on whether he got laid lately. All hail the rule of man. What they should do is fix the whole empire war thing. If somebody joins an allience purely with the intent to relieve themselves of a war is wrong,its also quite easy to find the people who do...If they join with a war going then leave again within a weak then its obvious. Oh and they should anounce how to do it publicly,along with a list of ways they are going to fix the problem and if anybody uses this exploit they will be banned,but thats totally another subject as all i was saying is nova told the leaders of imune this is an exploit so there shouldnt even be an arguement,regardless of what some crazy bughunter says. Signature removed. Contains no Eve content. Navigator ([email protected])
Drykor Minmatar Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.01.03 02:14:00 - [217] Didn't read 8 pages, but I consider this an exploit as well.
Galsia Yovinda Gallente Dec Me Please	Posted - 2008.01.03 02:19:00 - [218] Originally by: goodby4u Originally by: S****dly Hater Originally by: goodby4u Its funny how this thread is 8 pages long even though a top GM clarified it is an exploit,whether or not theres a frontpage post about it being an exploit,a warning is a warning. And what are they going to say? Joining an alliance so you pass to them the war and then leave the alliance without the war is not allowed? Woops, now everyone knows what not to do. Except that everyone now can join and leave an alliance as they please and argue uh... whatever the farmers argue when they dissolve "a ffxho" and reform in "a cchid". I've read that that's legal. Of course CCP will use "judgement" calls, people petitioning other corps because "they joined the alliance when we decced them so obviously they have to be cheating", and will result in getting varying degrees of responses from the same GM depending on whether he got laid lately. All hail the rule of man. What they should do is fix the whole empire war thing. If somebody joins an allience purely with the intent to relieve themselves of a war is wrong,its also quite easy to find the people who do...If they join with a war going then leave again within a weak then its obvious. Oh and they should anounce how to do it publicly,along with a list of ways they are going to fix the problem and if anybody uses this exploit they will be banned,but thats totally another subject as all i was saying is nova told the leaders of imune this is an exploit so there shouldnt even be an arguement,regardless of what some crazy bughunter says. Things are not always that simple. corp A joins to get more help with the wardec, alliance leadership finds issues with some of corp A's pilots behaving against alliance rules. Corp A leadership shrugs, alliance boots them. Many other issues like that can arrise, including a corp joining and then targeting other alliance ships just to get booted.
Casino Alkasar Caldari	Posted - 2008.01.03 05:06:00 - [219] Thing is.. what about the thousands of players who do not browse the forums, they¦ll find this loophole too. I believe iMune found out about this loophole and did frown upon it, by making it this public they forced CCP to make a move.And theyre doing good on giving it more pressure. Cause all they want and we want is a change to wardecs so they work better in the spirit of the game. A statement of a GM on the forums wont prevent players ingame to do so again..we need a change in the mechanics...either way _________________ itze mine
Wynona Mesopotamia iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.03 05:57:00 - [220] iMune backstory; When we discovered this game mechanic, it was being used on us. We weren't too happy about it, but we didn't throw a forum tantrum like most of you here. We petitioned it like the rules say to do when you find a possible exploit. For you tantrum dancers; petitions and bug reports are 2 completely different things, we did both. The results were, get over it, it's supposed to be this way. Then a light bulb went off, if you can't beat 'em, join em. iMune was born. We expected a huge uproar and boy were we right. The forum whiners gave me more belly laughs in the last 2 weeks than all the smacky victims I've tortured all put together. Thank you for being the malfunctioning smoke alarms you are. As for how this is being addressed by CCP, it needs some lovin'. Tossing out the cheat card, censorship and locking threads is dirt under the carpet damage control. There's healthier ways to implement a solution without disturbing the player base. This item contains a hint. Link to a pic of me in real life iMune Empire FAQ's
Kindra Flies Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2008.01.03 07:01:00 - [221] This is a wierd situation. Simply because if a corp leaves, for example, Privateers, wouldn't they be committing the same situation by exiting current wars? No offense there Hooch, I think you rock lol. But the situation brings itself to bare? A corp no longer wants to fight the long list of wars and exits, hereby dropping a war it was engaged in. In either case, you have someone dropping war decs? There are 2 sides to the coin here and it looks as though CCP are behind griefer groups more than they are others. Maybe, a correction could be that if a corp wants to join an alliance when war decced, the war becomes mutual (since the original deal for CONCORD to look the other way has been renigged and the corp is looking for "protection"). Corps joining an alliance should have to pay more to join an alliance when decced than the normal fee (If corps continue to join alliances to get clear of decs, it'll cost them instead of the original deccing organization). Then if the corp leaves the alliance, the corp was the one decced so they should still be decced and the alliance loses the war after the 24 hour period.
Jojo Redana	Posted - 2008.01.03 08:52:00 - [222] My mom said it's not cheating to prevent war. People should make love not war! So who to believe, my mom or some random GM answer in random topic? Is the forum right place to make statements about what's cheating and what is not? How many empire CEO's know about this thread and read what the GM said? Do they know that joining the iMune is cheating? I wonder. Why CCP can't make this issue clear and say it OUT LOUD in the news so everyone can read about it!? Way to go, again. 2 isk to CCP. -- I'm lost in space
Considered Caldari The Lost Prophets Euro Knights Of the Southerncross	Posted - 2008.01.03 09:02:00 - [223] Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support Because they join an alliance?
fasfhadtrv	Posted - 2008.01.03 09:12:00 - [224] Originally by: Lil'Red Ridin'Hood Actually, I find it rather funny that there's a game mechanic available for noob corps to stave off wars from corps that are more powerful... If some noob corp CEO came in here to complain about a strong corp arbitrarily declaring war on them, he'd be covered in forum molotov*****tails within 10 minutes. Funnily enough this happens all the time
Dianeces Minmatar Repo Industries	Posted - 2008.01.03 10:20:00 - [225] Originally by: Kindra Flies CCP are behind griefer groups more than they are others. Originally by: Kindra Flies griefer groups Originally by: Kindra Flies griefer Get a grip. Not every corp who declares war does so on so-called "innocent industrial corps." By trying to portray everyone who uses war as griefers, you reveal a pretty nasty bias. I'm not saying you aren't looking out for the best interests of Eve, but it does call into question your motives. It would probably serve you better in the future to refrain from using such flagrantly inflammatory generalizations.
Sofia Roseburn Caldari Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.03 13:52:00 - [226] Originally by: Dianeces Originally by: Kindra Flies CCP are behind griefer groups more than they are others. Originally by: Kindra Flies griefer groups Originally by: Kindra Flies griefer Get a grip. Not every corp who declares war does so on so-called "innocent industrial corps." By trying to portray everyone who uses war as griefers, you reveal a pretty nasty bias. I'm not saying you aren't looking out for the best interests of Eve, but it does call into question your motives. It would probably serve you better in the future to refrain from using such flagrantly inflammatory generalizations. Ah yes, but we know that 90% of the forum population don't have their heads screwed on properly. Also, hi again ¼_¼ -----
dakari	Posted - 2008.01.03 14:32:00 - [227] Originally by: goodby4u Originally by: S****dly Hater Originally by: goodby4u Its funny how this thread is 8 pages long even though a top GM clarified it is an exploit,whether or not theres a frontpage post about it being an exploit,a warning is a warning. And what are they going to say? Joining an alliance so you pass to them the war and then leave the alliance without the war is not allowed? Woops, now everyone knows what not to do. Except that everyone now can join and leave an alliance as they please and argue uh... whatever the farmers argue when they dissolve "a ffxho" and reform in "a cchid". I've read that that's legal. Of course CCP will use "judgement" calls, people petitioning other corps because "they joined the alliance when we decced them so obviously they have to be cheating", and will result in getting varying degrees of responses from the same GM depending on whether he got laid lately. All hail the rule of man. What they should do is fix the whole empire war thing. If somebody joins an allience purely with the intent to relieve themselves of a war is wrong,its also quite easy to find the people who do...If they join with a war going then leave again within a weak then its obvious. Oh and they should anounce how to do it publicly,along with a list of ways they are going to fix the problem and if anybody uses this exploit they will be banned,but thats totally another subject as all i was saying is nova told the leaders of imune this is an exploit so there shouldnt even be an arguement,regardless of what some crazy bughunter says. I actually don't see this as wrong. Someone who can and is willing to fight is willingly taking over other corps wardecs. The only people who should really be complaining about this are the ones with legitimate complaints about the corp trying to offload their wardec. I.E. corp A talks smack to corp B so much and all the time that corpB declares war, corpA being the ****ers that they are offload their wardec onto a bigger and more powerful corp/alliance and corpB is now on the short end of the stick. If you're just some slimebag exhtortionist and you are complaining about this take it like a man and just change corps like you have always done.
Riho Northen Breeze	Posted - 2008.01.03 14:39:00 - [228] Originally by: Considered Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support Because they join an alliance? no... because they join it... and then leave it to loose the dec. anyone who joins and then stays... no probs what so ever just the muppets who join it for 20 sec to get dec removed will be warned ---------------------------------- Seems that there's a new game that seems to be very popular whit whiners these days. Its called EFT Online. dont listen those people.. as they dont have a clue
Mitchell Schwitzer	Posted - 2008.01.03 14:50:00 - [229] Originally by: techzer0 Looks like you didn't win the iMune(ity) challenge eh? Got voted off the island? QFlulz
sneakybustard	Posted - 2008.01.03 16:26:00 - [230] Originally by: Wyliee we war decked a corp to do this we took a vote, 24hours wait then we decked them, 24 hours wait ok then good to go. they then joined imune empire aliance, then imediately left, 24 hours later we are left not being able to shoot them without redecking them again. i consider this cheating, and using a loophole that ccp should address. http://www.seomoz.org/images/upload/simpsons_nelson_haha2.jpg
Xilimyth Derlin The Funkalistic SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.03 16:47:00 - [231] Originally by: Wynona iMune backstory; When we discovered this game mechanic, it was being used on us. We weren't too happy about it, but we didn't throw a forum tantrum like most of you here. We petitioned it like the rules say to do when you find a possible exploit. For you tantrum dancers; petitions and bug reports are 2 completely different things, we did both. The results were, get over it, it's supposed to be this way. Then a light bulb went off, if you can't beat 'em, join em. iMune was born. We expected a huge uproar and boy were we right. The forum whiners gave me more belly laughs in the last 2 weeks than all the smacky victims I've tortured all put together. Thank you for being the malfunctioning smoke alarms you are. As for how this is being addressed by CCP, it needs some lovin'. Tossing out the cheat card, censorship and locking threads is dirt under the carpet damage control. There's healthier ways to implement a solution without disturbing the player base. This item contains a hint. Link to a pic of me in real life This may be part of the problem actually. One or two corps doing it to evade a war is limited to one or two corporations. But once it becomes public knowledge and everyone's doing it, you start having a system-wide breakdown of the game mechanic. Escalation in action. Don't get me wrong. When one of my old corps was war decced, I wish we could've used your service, because as one of three combat pilots in the corp, fighting almost 4 to 1 odds to protect the industrialist was a bit extreme. (Lost a lot of ravens on that char). The point being, by advertising it as a service ("Get out of war free card") and explaining how its done probably shook the hornet's nest on what-ifs. Again, a few corps slipping through the *****s is FAR less game breaking then it becoming a well known tactic. I'm no fan of wars in Empire space myself, but doing this removes the distinction of staying in a newbie corp versus forming a corp of your own and also makes the war system unfair to those paying for the war. (If it's their first war, no big deal.... if they're paying for a 5th or 6th war to get rid of an industrial alt corp supplying an enemy... that's a LOT of money being swindled from another player).
Ashley Sky Mesopotamia iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.03 17:32:00 - [232] Originally by: Wynona The results were, get over it, it's supposed to be this way. Then a light bulb went off, if you can't beat 'em, join em. iMune was born. We expected a huge uproar and boy were we right. The forum whiners gave me more belly laughs in the last 2 weeks than all the smacky victims I've tortured all put together. Thank you for being the malfunctioning smoke alarms you are. It's a long-time established formula, tried and true, tempered by the supervillains of EVE that push the boundries. A lot of good has come from their evil deeds. Concord, wardec revamps, can flagging, etc. First we stole your ores, then we stole your wars. The community reaction was just as it always was. If you want a nerf, all you have to do is push the right buttons. We got this one in record time, for one of the oldest broken game mechanics there was. I'd say job well done, Miss Wynona. Well done. As always, I'm sad to see it go. Such gleeful torment and chaos added so much entertaining content to the game. But in the end, someone had to do it.
Pennwisedom	Posted - 2008.01.03 17:37:00 - [233] A nerf and plugging a loophole are not the same thing.
nether void Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.01.03 17:46:00 - [234] I'm not sure if someone has already said this, because I don't have time to read all 8 pages, but the true definition of an exploit is upon finding a bug in the game which allows the player to do something not intended by the development team, that player uses the bug to his or her advantage instead of reporting it and not further triggering the bug. If it's not a bug, it can't be an exploit. It's just an unrefined game mechanic. --------------------------- nethervoid - since '97 [UO\|EQ\|SB\|SWG\|PS\|EVE\|HZ\|NWN\|VG\|WoW]
Ashley Sky Mesopotamia iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.03 17:57:00 - [235] Originally by: nether void I'm not sure if someone has already said this, because I don't have time to read all 8 pages, but the true definition of an exploit is upon finding a bug in the game which allows the player to do something not intended by the development team, that player uses the bug to his or her advantage instead of reporting it and not further triggering the bug. If it's not a bug, it can't be an exploit. It's just an unrefined game mechanic. But we did report it before using it and were told that it was not an exploit. Once, twice, three times a lady. Senior GM flip-flopper changed the rules because of a time-of-the month moodswing, so now it is indeed an exploit, and our use of it has come to its conclusion.
Empyre Domestic Reform	Posted - 2008.01.03 21:01:00 - [236] Originally by: Ashley Sky But we did report it before using it and were told that it was not an exploit. Once, twice, three times a lady. Senior GM flip-flopper changed the rules because of a time-of-the month moodswing, so now it is indeed an exploit, and our use of it has come to its conclusion. i'm kind of hoping this thread is the result of another person 'knowing a gm on msn' and giving them a ring, then the gm responding with an 'off the cuff' response without actually checking the actual situation. i'm grabbing the popcorn. drama rocks when it has nothing to do with myself. I <3 empire.. usually.
Wynona Mesopotamia iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.03 21:22:00 - [237] FYI The rules of reporting exploits are clear, they are handled through the petition system only, please take a moment to read them. If reporting exploits on the forums are against the rules, then encouraging them should be too. GM Nova should of locked this thread and followed company protocol by telling the OP to file a petition like everyone else. The handling of this issue here instead of through the standard protocol petition system is what created this matter of confused policies. Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support iMune Empire FAQ's
Jonathan Calvert Minmatar The Smithzonian Institute	Posted - 2008.01.03 22:22:00 - [238] Originally by: Wynona FYI The rules of reporting exploits are clear, they are handled through the petition system only, please take a moment to read them. If reporting exploits on the forums are against the rules, then encouraging them should be too. GM Nova should of locked this thread and followed company protocol by telling the OP to file a petition like everyone else. The handling of this issue here instead of through the standard protocol petition system is what created this matter of confused policies. Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support Did a bug hunter tell you about this policy also?
Miki Fin Gallente Independant Union of Rangers	Posted - 2008.01.03 22:27:00 - [239] meh GM Nova says you only get a warning from doing it anyway. It's not as if you'll get banned.
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.03 23:43:00 - [240] Originally by: Jonathan Calvert Originally by: Wynona FYI The rules of reporting exploits are clear, they are handled through the petition system only, please take a moment to read them. If reporting exploits on the forums are against the rules, then encouraging them should be too. GM Nova should of locked this thread and followed company protocol by telling the OP to file a petition like everyone else. The handling of this issue here instead of through the standard protocol petition system is what created this matter of confused policies. Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support Did a bug hunter tell you about this policy also? QFT
Megadon Caldari Deathshead Inc.	Posted - 2008.01.04 00:02:00 - [241] Originally by: Jimer Lins Originally by: Xaen Originally by: Paper Rock is fine, nerf scissors. No, just boost paper. I think they need to introduce fire to this equation. Boost Amarr
Empyre Domestic Reform	Posted - 2008.01.04 07:42:00 - [242] Originally by: Wynona FYI The rules of reporting exploits are clear, they are handled through the petition system only, please take a moment to read them. If reporting exploits on the forums are against the rules, then encouraging them should be too. GM Nova should of locked this thread and followed company protocol by telling the OP to file a petition like everyone else. The handling of this issue here instead of through the standard protocol petition system is what created this matter of confused policies. Originally by: GM Nova This is cheating, plain and simple. CEOs exploiting this loophole will receive a warning from now on. GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support to be fair, he did just say ceos would receive warnings from now on. that's it. hope you're not allergic to warnings. they sound pretty scary to me tbh. I <3 empire.. usually.
McEivalley	Posted - 2008.01.04 12:04:00 - [243] TBH, this is an exploit. To be even more honest, I like this exploit very much. I like it because wardecing anyone everywhere for any reason is *******s. Not the ability to do that is what's bothering me nor is it the possibility of doing that. What bothering me is how it is done. Mercs are licking their fingertips while listening to that GM's rubbish. Yeah, its a loophole and should stay so until ccp abolishes the ability to gang with a player who's at war via his corp or alliance with a player who isn't a member of the other two. You want to make wars an official matter? fine, make sure they stay official. Letting a 4 members merc corp to be a front of a much larger group just so the other characters can get away from being shot at back on whenever the corp that got WDed wants to pay them back a visit is a game-mechanics-sin on a much grander proportions than the immune exploit. TBH, the idea of announcing war is so last era, that for the Eve universe it should seem like a fantasy story... come on ccp - you can do much better than that. Make the pay for WDing dependent on the sec stat of the system a skirmish takes place in (the higher it takes place in, the more isk you need to pay officials to look the other way). Make the WD activation and cancelation player customized (e.g. min time to WD should be 0 to 24 hours. Canceling should be the same). Make a skill or use an existing one to reduce the WD cost in corporation skills (should be N/A to trials ofc). Let it be dependent on the differences between corp sizes - a much larger corp should pay more to mobilize through a system just to hunt down a much smaller group. That would even the odds a bit and still keep it real. Let people who just want to do missions create sub-divisions within NPC corps that would function like a normal corp but would not be possible to WD it and put a very long buffer to join it. Some people - a.k.a. carebears - don't want to play this game in any other way other than doing missions and trying to live through the game storyline. They enjoy co-operating with each other against no-one rather than anyone and that should be respected, even by those who excel on Pointless vs Porters...
000Hunter000 Gallente Magners Marauders	Posted - 2008.01.04 14:30:00 - [244] Starting to indeed wonder if this now should be about the part where offcourse it is a loophole and not entirely the way the system is meant to be, or if it should be about a GM comming in here and just stating, 'OMG IT IS AN EXPLOIT!!!' thereby ignoring their own rules completely. By the ferocity of the GM's response i'm starting to wonder if the GM itself has any benefit in it beeing called an exploit. CCP, let us pay the online shop with Direct Debit!!! Magners is now recruiting, evemail me or Dagazbo ingame.
PhantomVyper Darkness Inc. Blood Blind	Posted - 2008.01.04 14:41:00 - [245] Originally by: McEivalley You want to make wars an official matter? fine, make sure they stay official. Letting a 4 members merc corp to be a front of a much larger group just so the other characters can get away from being shot at back on whenever the corp that got WDed wants to pay them back a visit is a game-mechanics-sin on a much grander proportions than the immune exploit. WTH does this has anything to do with this tread's discussion?! Or indeed what does this mean?!
PhantomVyper Darkness Inc. Blood Blind	Posted - 2008.01.04 14:44:00 - [246] Originally by: 000Hunter000 By the ferocity of the GM's response i'm starting to wonder if the GM itself has any benefit in it beeing called an exploit. I'm guessing that not completly destroying the gameplay of the hundreds or possible thousands of paying customers that play EVE as empire Mercs / corp warfare / whatever else depends on this game mecanic must have something to do with the speed of CCPs reply... To all you carebears on this tread, just think of this as the equivalent to CCP placing all lvl4+ missions exclusively in low-sec / 0.0!
Empyre Domestic Reform	Posted - 2008.01.04 17:30:00 - [247] Originally by: PhantomVyper I'm guessing that not completly destroying the gameplay of the hundreds or possible thousands of paying customers that play EVE as empire Mercs / corp warfare / whatever else depends on this game mecanic must have something to do with the speed of CCPs reply... To all you carebears on this tread, just think of this as the equivalent to CCP placing all lvl4+ missions exclusively in low-sec / 0.0! ccp rarely responds quickly, especially on blurry matters such as these, which is where some of the surprise and speculation comes in with GM Novas statement. you MAY have a point but you're just plain speculating along with the rest of us here. don't pretend it's anything more. I <3 empire.. usually.
Hatch Minmatar Cloak and Daggers Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2008.01.04 17:38:00 - [248] oh lets whine some more about the mechanics of eve being abused because we can't shoot at people who don't want to be shot at... you play the game your way, and i'll play it mine. If you really want to go after a certain group of people, them joining a newb corp isn't the end of the fight. empire combat takes place even with out war decs, it's just slightly more costly. If you were true merc's nothing would get in your way of delivering on a contract.
Unreliable Timothy Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.04 18:13:00 - [249] so you suggest that we just sui-gank people, that doesnt sound right.

GM Nova	Posted - 2008.01.10 16:53:00 - [250] Hi again dear players. There has been some controversy regarding this issue on all fronts. I think it would be best to apologize for the bluntness of my initial reply to this thread. It is not my intention to label iMune Empire or any of their clients as cheaters. It has been unclear as to how the mechanics surrounding this was supposed to work exactly so it should not be assumed that they were intentionally exploiting. That being said I think we can all agree that this is an unintended game mechanic. A news item has been published regarding this issue and I urge you to read it. As is mentioned in the news item, we are putting a stop to this whole thing and anyone found abusing this loophole will be receive a warning for their trouble. This does not mean that those who have been using this loophole in the past will be punished in any way. News item GM Nova Senior Game Master EVE Online Customer Support

Haradgrim The Wild Bunch INTERDICTION	Posted - 2008.01.10 17:06:00 - [251] Originally by: GM Nova Hi again dear players. There has been some controversy regarding this issue on all fronts. I think it would be best to apologize for the bluntness of my initial reply to this thread. It is not my intention to label iMune Empire or any of their clients as cheaters. It has been unclear as to how the mechanics surrounding this was supposed to work exactly so it should not be assumed that they were intentionally exploiting. That being said I think we can all agree that this is an unintended game mechanic. A news item has been published regarding this issue and I urge you to read it. As is mentioned in the news item, we are putting a stop to this whole thing and anyone found abusing this loophole will be receive a warning for their trouble. This does not mean that those who have been using this loophole in the past will be punished in any way. News item /claps Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
Wynona Mesopotamia iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.10 17:43:00 - [252] It's a good thing we're not a bogus alliance who's sole purpose is to give corps a way out of wars, or I might feel insulted by the tone of that news item. iMune Empire is a real alliance who paid a real billion isk to create a one of a kind business model that succeeded in no time flat. One of the things we found was a one-click self-advertising perpetual way to bring hot headed action right to our doorstep, it worked flawlessly. Corps brought us free wars and donated hundreds of millions, our pvp corps/players got loads of hi-sec action, and we had tons of belly laughs watching it all unfold. I would of rather seen a new post made by GM Nova, but I appreciate the apology. This is the type of thread that should of been locked by a mod and a note to the OP telling him to file a petition. That would of made a world of difference here. (this item contains a hint) iMune Empire is still open for business, read the new rule, understand the parameters and then come join the fun. We'll take those wars off your hands, you just can't leave right away. As for the new nerf in our honor, Ashley Sky and I take a bow. Originally by: GM Nova I think it would be best to apologize for the bluntness of my initial reply to this thread. It is not my intention to label iMune Empire or any of their clients as cheaters. It has been unclear as to how the mechanics surrounding this was supposed to work exactly so it should not be assumed that they were intentionally exploiting. iMune Empire FAQ's
Wyliee Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.10 18:05:00 - [253] Edited by: Wyliee on 10/01/2008 18:08:38 Originally by: Wynona It's a good thing we're not a bogus alliance who's sole purpose is to give corps a way out of wars, or I might feel insulted by the tone of that news item. do you think it would be possible to make yourself look any more stupider? im sorry if this seems like a troll, but god! you did set up your useless alliance for the sole purpose of beating the system, you did allow a corp to use this loophole against us. you did threaten to contact all of our present and current war targets and give them the same option 'as there was nothing we could do about it'. you did FAIL very hard. you did then whine like hell in 30 different threads. you did then try to make out your orignal intentions were to high light a loophole hehe. you did then get your mates to war deck us who also failed! you are now making up some other unfeasable reason you are still here. you did fail at everything you tried to do go back to rens and stick to dropping cans outside the brutor tribe treasury byebye.
Wynona Mesopotamia iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.10 18:26:00 - [254] Edited by: Wynona on 10/01/2008 18:27:07 Originally by: Wyliee im sorry if this seems like a troll... No, you're not, it's a clear intention. You Wyliee, of all people on this thread should read and comprehend the forum and game rules, as you have clearly broken a number of them. Try to remain calm, I know you're a bit upset about all of this. iMune Empire FAQ's
Demonikan Gallente KIA Corp	Posted - 2008.01.10 18:32:00 - [255] Boo hoo Imune, crawl back under your metarock ;)
Nicho Void Hyper-Nova Tenth Legion	Posted - 2008.01.10 18:32:00 - [256] Fun fact: I'm originally from Winona. Also, this thread has served its purpose.
Ashley Sky Mesopotamia iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.10 19:24:00 - [257] Originally by: GM Nova Hi again dear players. There has been some controversy regarding this issue on all fronts. I think it would be best to apologize for the bluntness of my initial reply to this thread. It is not my intention to label iMune Empire or any of their clients as cheaters. It has been unclear as to how the mechanics surrounding this was supposed to work exactly so it should not be assumed that they were intentionally exploiting. That being said I think we can all agree that this is an unintended game mechanic. A news item has been published regarding this issue and I urge you to read it. As is mentioned in the news item, we are putting a stop to this whole thing and anyone found abusing this loophole will be receive a warning for their trouble. This does not mean that those who have been using this loophole in the past will be punished in any way. News item Thanks very much for the apology and the news report. That clears up a lot of my ill feelings towards you. I hope we haven't caused you or the other GMs much unintended grief , as our major intention was to torment only the player base by use of lawful game mechanics and have a glaring, reported, and ignored trick work in our favor, until it was appropriately nerfed. Thanks for finally coming forward and doing the appropriate thing. I'm sorry the GMs feel that we are a bogus alliance, and I think that down the road you might be surprised. Our business is still going strong, we've been having a blast, we're very successful, and we continue to save corps through use of lawful game mechanics thanks to very creative and original thinking. Something that's quite rare in this game. Click for iMune Empire FAQ
Wyliee Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.01.10 19:34:00 - [258] because i started this thread, and it has been answered satifactory (i hope to all). i am happy to see it now locked.
Ki An Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum	Posted - 2008.01.10 19:46:00 - [259] Edited by: Ki An on 10/01/2008 19:49:27 Originally by: Ashley Sky Thanks very much for the apology and the news report. That clears up a lot of my ill feelings towards you. I hope we haven't caused you or the other GMs much unintended grief , as our major intention was to torment only the player base by use of lawful game mechanics and have a glaring, reported, and ignored trick work in our favor, until it was appropriately nerfed. Thanks for finally coming forward and doing the appropriate thing. I'm sorry the GMs feel that we are a bogus alliance, and I think that down the road you might be surprised. Our business is still going strong, we've been having a blast, we're very successful, and we continue to save corps through use of lawful game mechanics thanks to very creative and original thinking. Something that's quite rare in this game. First, I doubt GM Nova was apologizing to you, as she definately did not have any cause for that. Second, I've been meaning to ask you: How exactly is this a business? It's all free, right? How do you make money from that? Unless you actually fight the wars you inherit and consider potential loot as a business, in which case a better business would be to actually declare war on fat incompetent corps and take their loot. /Edit: Looking at your alliance membership, you don't really have any PvPers to fight any wars, so you're still a bogus alliance trying to save face on the forums. Good luck with that.
nether void Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.01.10 19:50:00 - [260] Hahaha! I just figured out how to fix this. Since all a pvp corp has to do is pay a CONCORD fee to start a wardec, they should add a fee industrial corps can pay CONCORD to close the wardec. Solved. --------------------------- nethervoid - since '97 [UO\|EQ\|SB\|SWG\|PS\|EVE\|HZ\|NWN\|VG\|WoW]
Ki An Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum	Posted - 2008.01.10 19:55:00 - [261] Originally by: nether void Hahaha! I just figured out how to fix this. Since all a pvp corp has to do is pay a CONCORD fee to start a wardec, they should add a fee industrial corps can pay CONCORD to close the wardec. Solved. Dumb and unoriginal.
nether void Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.01.10 20:01:00 - [262] Originally by: Ki An Originally by: nether void Hahaha! I just figured out how to fix this. Since all a pvp corp has to do is pay a CONCORD fee to start a wardec, they should add a fee industrial corps can pay CONCORD to close the wardec. Solved. Dumb and unoriginal. Since you have failed to prove 'dumb', I will take your post in a congradulatory manner. Thank you, kind sir. --------------------------- nethervoid - since '97 [UO\|EQ\|SB\|SWG\|PS\|EVE\|HZ\|NWN\|VG\|WoW]
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.10 20:01:00 - [263] goes to iMune Sov Systems Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Ki An Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum	Posted - 2008.01.10 20:10:00 - [264] Originally by: nether void Since you have failed to prove 'dumb', I will take your post in a congradulatory manner. Thank you, kind sir. I don't have to prove you're dumb. You do that excellently by yourself with your dumb posts. Try thinking and then posting to avoid being labled dumb.
Ademaro Imre Caldari	Posted - 2008.01.11 20:26:00 - [265] Could CCP just be honest with us, and tell us which dev's character is in a corp trying to make a war declaration? Privateers played by the rules until the game mechanics were changed by changing the cost. No - some dev is ***ed that a corp found a way to use game mechanics to their advantage. The aim of politics is to keep the populace alarmed and clamorous to be saved by menacing it with imaginary hobgoblins. The urge to save humanity is a false front for the urge to rule it.*

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one 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.