EVE Search - keeping ppl perma aggored - an intended game mechanic, as it seems!!!!

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

keeping ppl perma aggored - an intended game mechanic, as it seems!!!!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Avery Fatwallet	Posted - 2008.01.10 15:29:00 - [31] 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. thats a perfectly sensible post. therefor i expect it to be flamed to oblivion. welcome to eve-o.
WarlockX Amarr Free Trade Corp	Posted - 2008.01.10 15:34:00 - [32] Originally by: Rashmika Clavain By virtue of that statement, all miners are meta-gamers when they jet-can mine then why do you roll your eyes, that statement is infact correct all miners that use jet-can mining are infact metagaming. in the strictest rp sence any ship shouldn't be able to hold a can that is bigger then its cargo hold, not to mention an infinate supply of cans that are orders of magnitude bigger then thier hold. ----------------------------------------------- "I often quote myself. It adds spice to my conversation."
Angry Alt Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.01.10 15:41:00 - [33] Edited by: Angry Alt on 10/01/2008 15:41:48 Originally by: ApaKaka Originally by: Angry Alt EVE is a MMOG, not a MMORPG. Actually, CCP themselves call it a MMPOG - "Massively Multi-Player Online Game" MMPOG Massively Multiplayer Online Game. If ccp wants to add more letters who's to stop them. The point is, either way, there's no Role Playing involved in CCP's definition.
Shenko Minara	Posted - 2008.01.10 16:25:00 - [34] Originally by: Venkul Mul Seeing as at least in the past the act of shooting wrecks to extend aggro was deemed an exploit, It wasn't deemed an exploit until after BoB used it to kill Cyv0k's Titan. I'm pretty sure they fixed it for the wrecks, and the drones will be next I guess. -- 99% of Eve-o posters should stop posting. This probably includes me, but definitely includes you.
salakhar Gallente North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.11 05:38:00 - [35] would still like a dev reply here pls. bumbped!!!
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.01.11 07:22:00 - [36] Originally by: WarlockX Originally by: Rashmika Clavain By virtue of that statement, all miners are meta-gamers when they jet-can mine then why do you roll your eyes, that statement is infact correct all miners that use jet-can mining are infact metagaming. in the strictest rp sence any ship shouldn't be able to hold a can that is bigger then its cargo hold, not to mention an infinate supply of cans that are orders of magnitude bigger then thier hold. That is wrong: the jetcan is the equivalent of a nylon bag (or a trash bag). In the space of a normal, reusable, bag, you can keep teens and with some little work hundred of them. But when you fill 1 of them it will be larger that the whole bag you used to move them. So the jetcan (that has the resistence of a nylon bag too) if a reasonable item. Similarly I feel that should exista a group of containers that unanchored can't contain anything as they are collapsed, but when anchored they assemble in a structure larger than the hold of the ship moving them.
Estephania Independent Political Analysts	Posted - 2008.01.11 08:02:00 - [37] This "feature" has a word BUG written all over it. You engage someone in 0.0. You use everything you can to win the fight (incl drones of course), you are losing and you have to bail out, leaving drones behind. Next station is 20 jumps away, and you log off in space waiting for original aggro timer. In the meantime someone finds your drones and is starting to attack them one volley in 14 min - you are perma-aggroed. It's hard to imagine anything more stupid than that.
Ralara	Posted - 2008.01.11 08:15:00 - [38] Originally by: Estephania This "feature" has a word BUG written all over it. You engage someone in 0.0. You use everything you can to win the fight (incl drones of course), you are losing and you have to bail out, leaving drones behind. Next station is 20 jumps away, and you log off in space waiting for original aggro timer. In the meantime someone finds your drones and is starting to attack them one volley in 14 min - you are perma-aggroed. It's hard to imagine anything more stupid than that. don't log off. if you're going to die, die.
Morden Nok Cohortes Vigilum Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.11 08:30:00 - [39] Originally by: Goumindong 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. This is true, but problem is that there are also completely legitimate reason for shooting the drones. For example, if they were bugged and thus couldn't been scooped. Or if attackers just didn't have enough cargo space to take them. Or if they were t1 drones and not worth the effort to kill. Or... If the reason drones were shot were any of those, then it's not exploit thus no reimbursement either. Of course logs will pretty easily tell which one was it, if the drones were shot down in quick succession after OP warped out, then it was legitimate. If attackers killed one every 10 minutes, then exploit. Assuming CCP actually has any logs that actually show anything... Disclaimer: I, nor anyone I know are not party to this matter.
Malcanis 5 finger discounteers	Posted - 2008.01.11 08:59:00 - [40] 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? Ah, did you have one of those connection problems we hear so much about? CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.

salakhar Gallente North Face Force	Posted - 2008.01.11 11:37:00 - [41] i was actually scanning at the same time with my alt! noticing that my main's ship was still on scan after more than 15 mins had passed, i logged back in. started warping from safe to safe for another 15 mins or so. logged out once more and kept scanning with my alt - after a short time my main's ship was no more on scanner and i was happy with myself. after few hours entering logging screen i noticed i was no more in hostile space - didnt take more than a few milisecs to realize what had happened. (at least i had a fresh new pod and no more implants - lol) what bothers me is that there is this case, where nothing i can do can keep me from loosing my ship and ruining my kill:death ratio, isk offcourse, prestige, extra hustle for new ship blah blah. u c, i believe that there should b a way that if followed would 100% ensure my safety! thats the reason of the post. in this case, it was all done by the book and according to, at least my own logic, this shouldnt ever have happened. (the lost time in warping from ss to ss also bothers a lot) my fun time > isk!!! i dont bloody need a sig really!
Jowen Datloran Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.01.11 11:38:00 - [42] Originally by: Angry Alt Edited by: Angry Alt on 10/01/2008 15:41:48 Originally by: ApaKaka Originally by: Angry Alt EVE is a MMOG, not a MMORPG. Actually, CCP themselves call it a MMPOG - "Massively Multi-Player Online Game" MMPOG Massively Multiplayer Online Game. If ccp wants to add more letters who's to stop them. The point is, either way, there's no Role Playing involved in CCP's definition. Maybe you should read line two of the EULA: Originally by: EULA EVEÖ is a multiplayer role playing game... ---------------- Mr. Science & Trade Institute
Jannet Montard	Posted - 2008.01.11 12:40:00 - [43] It seem that for a lot of "uber" PvPer it is inacceptable that someone can survive and avoid them after they have seen him in local. To repeat it again: the problem is that after waping away from a combat, running from safespot to safespot for more than 15 minutes to lose aggro, the enemies can keep the aggro active whoting the drones forever (they don't even need to destroy the drones, a single shot froma small gun denting the shield every 14 minues is sufficent) in 0.0 the targed didn't even get the aggro notification.
Rooker Lysian Enterprises	Posted - 2008.01.11 19:33:00 - [44] Someone may have mentiond this already. I quit reading cos of all the off-topic jetcan crap. Shooting somebody's can/wreck to keep them aggroed was said to be an exploit. Shooting a drone every 14 minutes for the same purpose doesn't sound any different. -- Let Us Avoid Systems Via Autopilot
Angry Alt Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.01.11 19:48:00 - [45] Originally by: Jowen Datloran Maybe you should read line two of the EULA: And maybe you should read this or this or this, perhaps this or even this. EVE is and always has been called a MMOG (or as CCP says MMPOG) by CCP.
Khanid Kutie I R Teh Poasting Alt Corp	Posted - 2008.01.11 20:19:00 - [46] Originally by: Zephyr Rengate I think engaging a wreck also resets the timer giving you 15 more mins of fun. this was fixed like...last year. read patch notes much? or too busy killing newbies to read them?
Serious Rikk Species 5618 Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2008.01.11 20:21:00 - [47] Originally by: Rooker Someone may have mentiond this already. I quit reading cos of all the off-topic jetcan crap. Shooting somebody's can/wreck to keep them aggroed was said to be an exploit. Shooting a drone every 14 minutes for the same purpose doesn't sound any different. To me it does. a drone is used by the player to kill stuff, is owned by the player, and doesn't fade after a couple of hours being abandoned. It can be picked up by the player at any point and used again. A wreck is an npc ship the player blew up. More to the point. A wrech is left behind EVERY time a player blows up a ship. A drone is not left behind every time a player warps off, only when said player forgets to pull them in (ie. makes a mistake) Why not allow the hunter to use the players mistake to their advantage? -- Noble Scumbag
Turin Caldari Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2008.01.11 20:37:00 - [48] Originally by: PhantomVyper 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?! So its okay that a Kestrel or Interceptor can knock my carrier or dread around like its made from paper? Please. Use your head. _________________________________
Pwett Minmatar QUANT Corp. QUANT Hegemony	Posted - 2008.01.11 20:59:00 - [49] Of course there are reason to attack drones left behind, whether they can't be scooped or what not. But there is no way to justify using a gating pulse cannon on a reaper to take one shot every 14 minutes to 'chain' aggro. _______________ Pwett CEO, Founder, & Executor <Q> QUANT Hegemony
Montague Zooma Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.11 21:06:00 - [50] Originally by: Angry Alt Originally by: Jowen Datloran Maybe you should read line two of the EULA: And maybe you should read this or this or this, perhaps this or even this. EVE is and always has been called a MMOG (or as CCP says MMPOG) by CCP. A. I'd say a legal or quasi-legal document like the EULA trumps PR releases. B. MMORPG is a subset of MMOG. All MMORPGs are MMOGs, but not all MMOGs are MMORPGs. So the fact that CCP has used both terms to describe Eve tells me the game is a MMOG and, more specifically, a MMORPG. C. Why the hell is this worth arguing about, anyway?

Boildo	Posted - 2008.01.11 21:15:00 - [51] to op: "The exploit of shooting wrecks or drones owned by other players to reset their aggression timer was fixed some months ago - This is no longer possible." I had the same deal one day, they shot the drones they couldn't scoop and reset my timer to probe me. Gm said that it was fixed awhile ago but obviously Eve and it's PVP timer has always been bugged. With a great deal of GM talking they basically said that its untraceable from game mechanics to check if it resets your timer or not.
Boildo	Posted - 2008.01.11 21:19:00 - [52] Also, When the drone is out in space. CCP will have a very hard time recording who shot the drone and who was on your kill mail. It can be ANY ONE in Eve shooting your drones. People who shot your drone may not even be on your kill mail. Hence why CCP dosn't care to do the investigation about this type of loss. Because its too much work.
Hamfast Gallente	Posted - 2008.01.11 22:01:00 - [53] As a Drone user, I see one problem with the "Shooting Drones to keep Aggro"... and it's not that someone ran away from a fight, got probed, popped and podded, you play with the big boys in scary space, you pay the price... it has to do with consistency... I warp in to a mission, launch Drones, get into trouble and run away leaving my drones behind... repair, and return... my drones are still there, waiting for me... But I have no control over those drones until I scoop and launch them... If the Drones are considered abandoned for control reasons, then they should be abandoned for all reasons and shooting them should have no affect... as they are owned, stealing them should flag you like a thief, but shooting them should not. If they are not abandoned, then shooting them should keep aggro, but if the owner returns and gets within Range, Control should also be reestablished (no need to scoop and launch) --------*****-------- 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.
Bish Ounen Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.01.11 22:03:00 - [54] Edited by: Bish Ounen on 11/01/2008 22:04:48 The stupid thing is, there is an "easy" fix for this. (easy gameplay-wise, not necessarily easy programming-wise) Once you abandon your drones by either the "Abandon Drones" function, or by flying off, the drones have a 15 minute timer, and then self-destruct. Yes, players will still be able to aggro you for a BIT longer, but not MUCH longer and certainly not from downtime to downtime, as it is now. This also seriously cuts down on space-junk (and thus less lag) which is always a plus. EDIT: I also like Hamfast's idea. Being able to regain control of abandoned but still owned drones is a good idea.
Deanna Nuchi	Posted - 2008.01.11 22:37:00 - [55] It is just another drone nerf, left in to discourage people from using them, eventually there will be no drones and alot of people with alot of useless SPs
Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles Zzz	Posted - 2008.01.11 23:20:00 - [56] Originally by: Zephyr Rengate I think engaging a wreck also resets the timer giving you 15 more mins of fun. This is counted as an exploit and you can be banned if someone (correctly) reports you using it. My research services Spreadsheets: Top speed calculation - Halo Implant stats
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.01.12 01:26:00 - [57] Originally by: Bish Ounen Edited by: Bish Ounen on 11/01/2008 22:04:48 The stupid thing is, there is an "easy" fix for this. (easy gameplay-wise, not necessarily easy programming-wise) Once you abandon your drones by either the "Abandon Drones" function, or by flying off, the drones have a 15 minute timer, and then self-destruct. Yes, players will still be able to aggro you for a BIT longer, but not MUCH longer and certainly not from downtime to downtime, as it is now. This also seriously cuts down on space-junk (and thus less lag) which is always a plus. EDIT: I also like Hamfast's idea. Being able to regain control of abandoned but still owned drones is a good idea. Regain control if you get in range, or abandon them if you are outside the range of control.
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.01.12 02:14:00 - [58] CCP MAKE A JUDGEMENT AND POST FFS SKUNK
Gar'vak Torin	Posted - 2008.01.12 02:15:00 - [59] Cry more nubkins.
Chavu Ganja Labs Pure.	Posted - 2008.01.12 02:40:00 - [60] I would petition that, salakhar. You should get your ship back, might take a few responses, though. Have you tested abandoning drones? That should work if you abandon drones then wait 15 mins then log. You could always leave system or kill your own drones but I've been deep in enemy space before and that's not always possible.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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