| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
salakhar
Gallente
North Face Force
   |
Posted - 2008.01.10 09:54:00 -
[1]
did u know u could do that?
all u need to do is keep some1's left drones aggroed. one volley every 14 mins should do the trick and u can go on probing them until u or them get bored! now if they think their 15 minute aggro timer is over u can get a free kill!
lost a ship that way and after a petition that i am simply refusing to let go and many efforts a dev finally asked me if that might have been the case.
kudos to CCP for an amazing and intended game mechanic, as they say!
cheers for reading.
PS. any chance a dev can reply here?
|
ApaKaka
Lone Starr Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 10:01:00 -
[2]
Yes, webbing and firing on drones is a valid tactic to keep agression.
|
Haks'he Lirky
Dominion Imperium
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 10:19:00 -
[3]
it doesnt work to abandon a drone that is aggroed?
Havent tested my self, only been on the other end (maintaining aggro by messing with drones).
If you want to run away by docking/jumping then you shouldnt engage with your drones.
|
Zephyr Rengate
Racketeers
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 10:26:00 -
[4]
I think engaging a wreck also resets the timer giving you 15 more mins of fun.
|
Ursula LeGuinn
Versus Gloria Omnis
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 10:30:00 -
[5]
There are a quite a few metagame tactics in common use right now ù "bumping," using drones to reset aggro timers, logoffski warping, login traps, can-flipping and related nonsense, etc. ù that are permitted by CCP.
Hopefully, these issues will be addressed sometime in the not-too-distant future (I'm not holding my breath, but it would be nice).
|
PhantomVyper
Darkness Inc.
Blood Blind
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 10:46:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: Ursula LeGuinn
There are a quite a few metagame tactics in common use right now ù "bumping," using drones to reset aggro timers, logoffski warping, login traps, can-flipping and related nonsense, etc. ù that are permitted by CCP.
Hopefully, these issues will be addressed sometime in the not-too-distant future (I'm not holding my breath, but it would be nice).
How on Earth do you think that can flipping and bumping is metagaming?!
|
Ursula LeGuinn
Versus Gloria Omnis
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 11:10:00 -
[7]
Originally by: PhantomVyper
How on Earth do you think that can flipping and bumping is metagaming?!
Because when looking at these situations from the characters' perspectives (from a loose role playing point of view, if you will), the whole process is a bit illogical and nonsensical. The developers did not actually intend for either of those game mechanics to be used in that way ù in fact, I believe jetcans used to be white upon jettisoning, way back in the day. But people started using them to mine (unintended), the devs decided to label snatching such mining cans as stealing eventually, and here we are today, with pirates using can-flipping to try to force PvP (metagaming, IMO).
It's metagaming because half the time, the pirate isn't even there to actually steal the ore. He's in fact there to annoy the miners and force PvP, if they will take the bait.
As for bumping... well. The reason people take no collision damage in EVE is fairly obvious. But logging into an alt and smacking someone over and over (causing the pinballing / flubber-ship effect) to prevent them from aligning for warp is pure metagaming. I'm quite sure it was never really intended, and while the person who discovered bumping to begin with was clever, it doesn't make sense from a logical standpoint.
|
Dristra
Amarr
Shadows of the Dead
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 11:28:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Ursula LeGuinn
Originally by: PhantomVyper
How on Earth do you think that can flipping and bumping is metagaming?!
Because when looking at these situations from the characters' perspectives (from a loose role playing point of view, if you will), the whole process is a bit illogical and nonsensical. The developers did not actually intend for either of those game mechanics to be used in that way ù in fact, I believe jetcans used to be white upon jettisoning, way back in the day. But people started using them to mine (unintended), the devs decided to label snatching such mining cans as stealing eventually, and here we are today, with pirates using can-flipping to try to force PvP (metagaming, IMO).
It's metagaming because half the time, the pirate isn't even there to actually steal the ore. He's in fact there to annoy the miners and force PvP, if they will take the bait.
As for bumping... well. The reason people take no collision damage in EVE is fairly obvious. But logging into an alt and smacking someone over and over (causing the pinballing / flubber-ship effect) to prevent them from aligning for warp is pure metagaming. I'm quite sure it was never really intended, and while the person who discovered bumping to begin with was clever, it doesn't make sense from a logical standpoint.
Eve is so hardcore that roleplaying is just silly, sorry to say it, no offence.
It's great being Amarr isn't it.
Support the introduction of Blaze M crystals for Amarr!
|
PhantomVyper
Darkness Inc.
Blood Blind
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 11:34:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Ursula LeGuinn
Originally by: PhantomVyper
How on Earth do you think that can flipping and bumping is metagaming?!
Because when looking at these situations from the characters' perspectives (from a loose role playing point of view, if you will), the whole process is a bit illogical and nonsensical. The developers did not actually intend for either of those game mechanics to be used in that way ù in fact, I believe jetcans used to be white upon jettisoning, way back in the day. But people started using them to mine (unintended), the devs decided to label snatching such mining cans as stealing eventually, and here we are today, with pirates using can-flipping to try to force PvP (metagaming, IMO).
It's metagaming because half the time, the pirate isn't even there to actually steal the ore. He's in fact there to annoy the miners and force PvP, if they will take the bait.
As for bumping... well. The reason people take no collision damage in EVE is fairly obvious. But logging into an alt and smacking someone over and over (causing the pinballing / flubber-ship effect) to prevent them from aligning for warp is pure metagaming. I'm quite sure it was never really intended, and while the person who discovered bumping to begin with was clever, it doesn't make sense from a logical standpoint.
You have to adapt your RP to the game, not the other way around. If you put your mind to it you can find perfectly reasonable RP explanations to those situations.
And since they happen within game and use perfectly valid game mechanics, they can't be called metagaming just because they don't fit your personal notion of what EVEs RP should be...
|
Pew Pewk
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 11:39:00 -
[10]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metagaming
It's definately metagaming.
From a computer game point:
any tactic in a computer or video game that uses one or more features of that game that lie outside the intended gameplay use, or exploit errors in programming structures.
From a roleplaying perspective:
is a term often used to describe players' use of assumed characteristics of the game. In particular, metagaming often refers to having a character act on knowledge that only the player has access to (such as tricking a medusa to stare at a mirror when the character has never even heard of medusas and should not be aware of their petrifying stare)
As long as CCP consider RP a part of EVE and as long as they call this a MMORPG I see at least two reasons to call can-flipping for metagaming.
However, doesn't mean that canflipping is or should be a bannable offense. After all, cheeze tactics is part of EVE. RA and BoB wouldn't have gotten where they were without using cheezy tactics in the first place, not to mention most of the PvPers in this game. It is still metagaming tho.
|
PhantomVyper
Darkness Inc.
Blood Blind
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 11:44:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Pew Pewk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metagaming
It's definately metagaming.
From a computer game point:
any tactic in a computer or video game that uses one or more features of that game that lie outside the intended gameplay use, or exploit errors in programming structures.
From a roleplaying perspective:
is a term often used to describe players' use of assumed characteristics of the game. In particular, metagaming often refers to having a character act on knowledge that only the player has access to (such as tricking a medusa to stare at a mirror when the character has never even heard of medusas and should not be aware of their petrifying stare)
As long as CCP consider RP a part of EVE and as long as they call this a MMORPG I see at least two reasons to call can-flipping for metagaming.
However, doesn't mean that canflipping is or should be a bannable offense. After all, cheeze tactics is part of EVE. RA and BoB wouldn't have gotten where they were without using cheezy tactics in the first place, not to mention most of the PvPers in this game. It is still metagaming tho.
Find me a dev quote that states that can flipping and bumping are not intended game mechanics then...
|
Rashmika Clavain
Gallente
Revelation Space
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 11:49:00 -
[12]
By virtue of that statement, all miners are meta-gamers when they jet-can mine then 
|
Zara Xizor
The Xizor Cartel
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 11:49:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Ursula LeGuinn
There are a quite a few metagame tactics in common use right now ù "bumping," using drones to reset aggro timers, logoffski warping, login traps, can-flipping and related nonsense, etc. ù that are permitted by CCP.
Hopefully, these issues will be addressed sometime in the not-too-distant future (I'm not holding my breath, but it would be nice).
I see nothing wrong with can flipping. The 'victim' and any of his corp mates can shoot a thiev if they flip a can. If they use jetcans without a combat ship protecting them, then that is their own fault. There are far too many ways to avoid being the victim of a can flip tbh.
The Xizor Cartel - Recruiting Hard Ass PVP'ers |
Drasked
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 11:50:00 -
[14]
Originally by: salakhar
did u know u could do that?
all u need to do is keep some1's left drones aggroed. one volley every 14 mins should do the trick and u can go on probing them until u or them get bored! now if they think their 15 minute aggro timer is over u can get a free kill!
lost a ship that way and after a petition that i am simply refusing to let go and many efforts a dev finally asked me if that might have been the case.
kudos to CCP for an amazing and intended game mechanic, as they say!
cheers for reading.
PS. any chance a dev can reply here?
With this mechanic you can simply keep someone aggro'd from downtime till downtime, so kids, dont forget your drones.
|
Pew Pewk
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 11:54:00 -
[15]
Originally by: PhantomVyper
Find me a dev quote that states that can flipping and bumping are not intended game mechanics then...
Reading comprehension? :) Read further up in the thread. Remember how cans used to work? Considered the RP aspect as well (it has to be considered as long as CCP consider that a feature of EVE.. RP forums, mmoRPG, etc)?
Anything that is either a non-intended feature or considered from a RP perspective, is metagaming. Doesn't necessary have to be both.
|
Ursula LeGuinn
Versus Gloria Omnis
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 11:57:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Rashmika Clavain
By virtue of that statement, all miners are meta-gamers when they jet-can mine then
Fair enough, but then where do we draw the line between metagaming and "regular" gaming?
Do you have to log out of the game for a tactic to be considered metagaming (i.e., logoffski and login traps)? If so, is "metagaming" really an appropriate term to describe those two things?
You don't have to log off to shoot someone's drones and keep them aggroed, and so far it's a permitted tactic, but would you call it metagaming?
|
PhantomVyper
Darkness Inc.
Blood Blind
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 12:10:00 -
[17]
Metagaming is by its own definition, using something that is not part of the game (or part of playing the game), to achieve in-game objectives. Examples of this are: forum spys, log-in traps, hacking a player's account, logoffskies, etc.
You cannot call something "metagame", just because it doesn't fit YOUR definition of RP. Like I said, you can find any number of RP reasons why bumping and can flipping work the way that they do!
|
PhantomVyper
Darkness Inc.
Blood Blind
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 12:14:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Ursula LeGuinn
You don't have to log off to shoot someone's drones and keep them aggroed, and so far it's a permitted tactic, but would you call it metagaming?
No, I would not call it metagaming.
From an RP prespective you could say that the link between the ship and its drones prevents the ship from lowering its treat level (or whatever you consider the aggro timer to be in a RP term).
To turn this on its head on the RPers, how do you RP the act of logging off to save your ship and its disapearance from space when you do?! 
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 12:17:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Rashmika Clavain
By virtue of that statement, all miners are meta-gamers when they jet-can mine then
Technically: yes. They have even been ofthen called exploiters for that.
Naturally in a logic world would be possible to erect temporary structures to house the minerals (i.e. secure or not so secure cans) with really huge size and not the risible 3.900 m3 availables today.
|
facepalm johnson
a sackful of sacrificial sacrifices
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 12:22:00 -
[20]
Metagaming! LOL.
Metagaming is just dumb net kiddie terminology used by people who want others to think they have some kind of fantastic insight and/or knowledge.
Stop poasting on the forums, it's just metagaming. 
|
Tia Ra
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 12:23:00 -
[21]
I have only one thing to say:
Congratulations CCP!
|
Chi'an Peimei
Caldari
Draconian Toymaker Corp
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 12:24:00 -
[22]
Hmm... Bumping only work though due to a 30 sec cool down... (I never understood the reason for that, but what ever) Those 30 second cool downs are a core game mechanic that must have been initially added in on purpose.... {on second thought, this might be only valid for docking bumping, but still} So some of these mechanics have to be intentional. The only way I would consider any of this metagaming is if it prevents logoff warping. (And even then its more sploiting than metagame.)
Tobias Creed did tell you all that I am more offensive than he is... Now go do the dishes like your mom is screaming so you can come back to your basement and play more EVE online |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 12:26:00 -
[23]
Originally by: PhantomVyper
Originally by: Ursula LeGuinn
You don't have to log off to shoot someone's drones and keep them aggroed, and so far it's a permitted tactic, but would you call it metagaming?
No, I would not call it metagaming.
From an RP prespective you could say that the link between the ship and its drones prevents the ship from lowering its treat level (or whatever you consider the aggro timer to be in a RP term).
To turn this on its head on the RPers, how do you RP the act of logging off to save your ship and its disapearance from space when you do?!
Seeing as at least in the past the act of shooting wrecks to extend aggro was deemed an exploit, the acat of shooting drones to extend the aggro should be a exploit the same.
On a game mechanic level, the fact that is possible to abandon drones when they are in control range but is not possible to do the same when they are outside control range is a bit strange. I would put them as automatically abandoned when they go outside control range, more so as returnint to the drone, even if not abandoned, will not bring them again under my control.
after days or wweks from the date of abandonement, not sure what firing on thow will do).
BTW: abandoning them change something, or it is only relate to the ownership?
Drones lost in space keep the ownership tags for a long time (days or weeks), from what I know firing on those drones get Concord on you, so it give aggro to the owner too?
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 12:29:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Chi'an Peimei
Hmm... Bumping only work though due to a 30 sec cool down... (I never understood the reason for that, but what ever) Those 30 second cool downs are a core game mechanic that must have been initially added in on purpose.... {on second thought, this might be only valid for docking bumping, but still} So some of these mechanics have to be intentional.
The 30 second timers on session changes is dictated by hardware and internet limitations, it is not there to help gankers.
|
Drasked
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 14:19:00 -
[25]
My corp mate sal left his drones at a gate after a fight, warped from savespot to savespot for the last hour and then logged out, only to find his ship missing the next morning.
response from the GM indicate that this might have happened because his drones that where left in space after having to bail from a fight will reset your aggro timer when shot upon.
If this is an intended game mechanic then it basically possible to keep someone aggressed from downtime till downtime.
|
stahmul
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 14:29:00 -
[26]
As if they didn't already **** up drones bad enough, this just takes the cake. WTG CCP!!! You are full of 100% win.
I'm sure once it's used to keep a BoB carrier or mothership agressed from downtime to downtime it'll be an exploit though. Quick guys! use it before someone uses it on BoB and it gets banned!
|
Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 14:36:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Ursula LeGuinn
I believe jetcans used to be white upon jettisoning, way back in the day. But people started using them to mine (unintended), the devs decided to label snatching such mining cans as stealing eventually, and here we are today, with pirates using can-flipping to try to force PvP (metagaming, IMO).
It's metagaming because half the time, the pirate isn't even there to actually steal the ore. He's in fact there to annoy the miners and force PvP, if they will take the bait.
Only half-right, i'm afraid.
Jet cans didn't used to be labeled at all, as they were considered jetissoning garbage in space, and anyone that happened upon it could freely salvage the contents of this space-trash (incidentally, just like salvage works, now).
Then, Miners starting using jetisson containment fields to temporarily store their minerals when mining, as the fields were large enough to contain a vastly increased capacity - much greater than the mining ships' cargo holds.
Eventually, some less-than-well-intentioned pod-pilots noticed this, and started claiming their salvage rights to clean up this space trash.
The pod-pilot mining consortiums raised such a fuss on the GalNet channels, that they forced CONCORD to develop a tagging mechanism with jetisson containment fields, that would tag the containment fields as "property of" the mining consortiums, and anyone found tampering with them were flagged with temporary global criminal agression rights toward the owner of the containment fields and it's corporate consortium owners.
This caused much celebration among the mining consortiums, until they realized that those less-than-well-intentioned pod-pilots generally had superior combat vessels than the defenseless mining consortiums could provide.
And there, you have the RP background on why "Jetisson containment field agression" is NOT metagaming.
--
Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes
^^ Woo hoo! Yellow Text!... wait... :( |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 14:52:00 -
[28]
Shooting an object owned by a player that is not that player in order to keep them aggressed and so not logging out is an exploit.
Petition it.
Include the logs of when you logged and when your ship was destroyed. You will likely be reimbursed.
|
Angry Alt
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 15:24:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Angry Alt on 10/01/2008 15:24:00
Originally by: Pew Pewk
As long as CCP consider RP a part of EVE and as long as they call this a MMORPG I see at least two reasons to call can-flipping for metagaming.
EVE is a MMOG, not a MMORPG.
|
ApaKaka
Lone Starr Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 15:26:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Angry Alt
EVE is a MMOG, not a MMORPG.
Actually, CCP themselves call it a MMPOG - "Massively Multi-Player Online Game"
MMPOG
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |