EVE Search - Is logging before decloaking after jumping into new system an exploit?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Is logging before decloaking after jumping into new system an exploit?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Solyaris DEAD POET 's	Posted - 2008.04.04 11:58:00 - [1] Is logging before decloaking after jumping into new system an exploit? This technique combined with logging - relogging - logging - relogging = Getting out of trouble + new safespot. Freighter pilots seems to love this technique. I understand that the client might crash if you jump into a new system and you shouldn't lose your ship because of the client crashing, but when players starts to use this "feature" of the how Eve works if the client crash/is closed down I think the spirit of the feauture is being misused. Is CCP aware of this exploit and what are their stand to it? I propose that players logging their client while cloaked because of a jumpin should have a longer timer than the 30 secs to make it able to scan them out at least. Or maybe other solutions to this "exploit" could be deviced - Any bright ideas out there? NB - Yes, I am a pirate and have lost many freighter-kills because of this exploit.
Erotic Irony 0bsession	Posted - 2008.04.04 11:59:00 - [2] Originally by: Solyaris Is logging before decloaking after jumping into new system an exploit? This technique combined with logging - relogging - logging - relogging = Getting out of trouble + new safespot. Freighter pilots seems to love this technique. I understand that the client might crash if you jump into a new system and you shouldn't lose your ship because of the client crashing, but when players starts to use this "feature" of the how Eve works if the client crash/is closed down I think the spirit of the feauture is being misused. Is CCP aware of this exploit and what are their stand to it? I propose that players logging their client while cloaked because of a jumpin should have a longer timer than the 30 secs to make it able to scan them out at least. Or maybe other solutions to this "exploit" could be deviced - Any bright ideas out there? NB - Yes, I am a pirate and have lost many freighter-kills because of this exploit. you use the word exploit so much it has lost all meaning ___ Eve Players are not very smart. Support Killmail Overhaul
flashfreaking LFC Insurgency	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:00:00 - [3] it's not an exploit, live with it Disallowed sig graphic. Send an e-mail to [email protected] when it meets the forum signature guidelines. ~Saint
Karl Helvede State War Academy	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:01:00 - [4] ok - but what do you think about this obvious exploit? ;)
Karl Helvede State War Academy	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:03:00 - [5] Originally by: flashfreaking it's not an exploit, live with it Are you by any chance a freighter pilot?
Jenny Spitfire LoneStar Industries Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:03:00 - [6] Noe esploit. I alwiz does cuz my konection is bad. It also do not work alles the tiem and I habe noe prolbem with it. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Recruitment -KB-
tuppance abhag Mercantile Club Research	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:03:00 - [7] wow ur complaining cos u can't kill a freightor have you tried mining
Tzar'rim Nazcan Technologies	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:04:00 - [8] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Noe esploit. I alwiz does cuz my konection is bad. It also do not work alles the tiem and I habe noe prolbem with it. Stop being an attention w***e with your spelling.
Solyaris DEAD POET 's	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:05:00 - [9] Edited by: Solyaris on 04/04/2008 12:07:42 Originally by: tuppance abhag wow ur complaining cos u can't kill a freightor have you tried mining Any ship can do this. My point is simply that I find it hard to believe that the intention of this feauture of eve to protect pilots from loosing their ship if the client crashes, was to give every single pilot in game a fail safe option if they jump into trouble.
Lemptie Glass House	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:06:00 - [10] No it isn`t,same as 24/7 cloaked in a system and play wow . Same as going 17k in a vaga.What you can petion is when they say not nice words in local.
Jenny Spitfire LoneStar Industries Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:09:00 - [11] Originally by: Tzar'rim Stop being an attention w**e with your spelling. I am disleixc. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria!* Recruitment -KB-
Gaven Blands interimo	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:10:00 - [12] Edited by: Gaven Blands on 04/04/2008 12:09:58 It would be an exploit if CCP could enforce it, but they can't, so it's not. Sadly one of the Crash To Desktop hotposts is session change, so it's a double edged sword if you come down hard on people that do it. And some Corporations and Alliances are well known for having really poor connections and unreliable PCs... -- and with this Post, I scent this thread. Biased moderators are on the way.
Solyaris DEAD POET 's	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:13:00 - [13] Yup I agree, which is why I think a longer timeout before the ship dissapear from scanner might be a solution to at least make probing the ship out possible.
Rod Blaine Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:15:00 - [14] Edited by: Rod Blaine on 04/04/2008 12:16:06 It's horrendously easy to solve, but ccp don't want to. that's the only explanation i can still think of after five years. edit: horrensoudsly easy ? Yes ! simply extend the invulnicloak in case of jumpin by disconnect by 8 more minutes. plenty of time to get back online and fight your way out....oh wait. [center] Old blog
flashfreaking LFC Insurgency	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:16:00 - [15] Originally by: Solyaris Yup I agree, which is why I think a longer timeout before the ship dissapear from scanner might be a solution to at least make probing the ship out possible. True that, I think it's 30 secs when unagressed and 2 minutes when agressed, right? And no, I am by far a freighter pilot. The idea alone... Yuk Disallowed sig graphic. Send an e-mail to [email protected] when it meets the forum signature guidelines. ~Saint
Solyaris DEAD POET 's	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:16:00 - [16] Originally by: Rod Blaine It's horrendously easy to solve, but ccp don't want to. that's the only explanation i can still think of after five years. How could you solve it? - please elaborate
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:18:00 - [17] see edit [center] Old blog
Solyaris	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:18:00 - [18] Originally by: flashfreaking True that, I think it's 30 secs when unagressed and 2 minutes when agressed, right? And no, I am by far a freighter pilot. The idea alone... Yuk the problem is that you cannot agress a pilot if he is cloaked/decloaks after the client is shut down. I you could agress the pilot after the client is shut down there would be no problem here at all.
flashfreaking	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:20:00 - [19] I think agressing after the log does not add time to the 'disapearance timer' correct? So if you manage to get a hold of a logged in freighter, and scramble him, thus flagging him and he then logs, you have 2 minutes to kill him, or am I not up to date with current mechanics? Disallowed sig graphic. Send an e-mail to [email protected] when it meets the forum signature guidelines. ~Saint
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:23:00 - [20] Normal timer (no aggro) is two minutes. Agro timer (aggroed when online), is 15 minutes. The thirthy seconds seem like 30 because tit's two minutes minus the one minute invulnicloak plus the emergency warp: leaving too little time to probe. [center] Old blog
Solyaris	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:25:00 - [21] Originally by: flashfreaking I think agressing after the log does not add time to the 'disapearance timer' correct? So if you manage to get a hold of a logged in freighter, and scramble him, thus flagging him and he then logs, you have 2 minutes to kill him, or am I not up to date with current mechanics? Nope you cannot flag a pilot after log.
Zorai Miraden East Khanid Trading Khanid Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:26:00 - [22] No it's not an exploit, unless ccp changed their minds. They do that sometimes. As I recall though even after someone logs off their ship remains in space for a couple of minutes. If you are fast at scanning you could probably scan them down. Freighters do have a large sig radius. But I tend to look at this from the other shoe. You're flying a ship with 1 bil plus worth of goods that has 0 defense beyond hit points. You have no escort, and find yourself getting locked. Hmmm.... I would have no hesitation to hit the logoffski button. Yes I know all the things like freighters should have escorts, blah blah blah. I don't fly freighters anyways. I have far more respect for pirates though who pod some faction fitted ship to get their iskies. Oh well. It's all about the easy money, not the challenge. Recruitment Thread EKT Website
Rawr Cristina Naqam	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:32:00 - [23] I'm a freighter pilot and yes, I do it. I went from the middle of Curse all the way to Jita in a Charon with nothing but an alt scout in a shuttle, and occasionally make trips through Low-Sec in the same way - logging off the second something appears on overview for guarenteed safety. I really, really don't think I should be able to do that. ...
Solyaris DEAD POET 's	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:32:00 - [24] Edited by: Solyaris on 04/04/2008 12:33:07 Originally by: Zorai Miraden Oh well. It's all about the easy money, not the challenge. I don't mind the challenge - the problem is that there is no challenge here at all. Even if you have a good prober ready there is not enough time to scan the ship out before it dissapears completely. A tight but possible window would be a challenge I would find interesting even if the target was a cruiser or any other not so valuable ship.
Lord WarATron Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:36:00 - [25] solution is simple. you log back into the same spot you logged out of -- Billion Isk Mission
Solyaris DEAD POET 's	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:47:00 - [26] It would only solve part of the problem.
Zaknussem The Ironbreakers	Posted - 2008.04.04 13:01:00 - [27] Next we'll be hearing that docking is an exploit because you can't be killed inside a station. In my opinion, logoffskis and log-on traps are an exploit, period. The problem is that CCP has a very hard time doing anything about it without rewriting the EvE code from scratch. Even then success is not guaranteed. You'll just have to accept that the people that log off/on to save their hides can do so, no matter how lame you think they are. But remember, those same people think that gatecampers are lame, and that this is one of the safer ways to survive a gatecamp.
Zorai Miraden East Khanid Trading Khanid Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2008.04.04 13:02:00 - [28] Originally by: Solyaris I don't mind the challenge - the problem is that there is no challenge here at all. Even if you have a good prober ready there is not enough time to scan the ship out before it dissapears completely. A tight but possible window would be a challenge I would find interesting even if the target was a cruiser or any other not so valuable ship. Try using a smart bomb on the freighter if you can. Once the ship gets a combat counter as I understand it will stay in space longer. Just curious is your buddy with the scanning ship using a recon with maybe a Sisters Scanner and has decent scanning skills? I've never tried scanning a ship after it logs but I know the whole idea of making ships stay around after a logoffski was to give pirates a chance at catching someone using that cheap get away trick. The number of complaints I've seen about Logging has dropped dramastically. So I figured that CCP's fix had worked. Could someone post some numbers regarding scanning such a ship down. I'd be curious to see just how well it really works out. Recruitment Thread EKT Website
Karl Helvede	Posted - 2008.04.04 13:08:00 - [29] Originally by: Zorai Miraden Try using a smart bomb on the freighter if you can. Once the ship gets a combat counter as I understand it will stay in space longer. This is only true if the pilot is agroed while still logged on. If he logs off while still cloaked the pilot cannot be agroed when he decloaks after the logoff. This would be ok, if only the non-agroed ship would stay in space long enough for a possible scan out and find situation.
Shinjin Malvek	Posted - 2008.04.04 13:35:00 - [30] I see where you might be annoyed but solutions your thinking of would really suck for me and others stuck in my situation... I'm still stuck on dialup, no other option where I live at the moment though the phone company says DSL is coming, they have been saying that for a couple years now.... I can't count the # of times that I've jumped through a gate and get dumped and it can take several minuits to get loged back on. If the timer was increased like your talking about I would be constantly logging back onto a poped ship for no reason other than the fact I'm stuck on this crappy connection. The only thing I can think of would be to have a bit of code that could tell if someone closed the client manually or not. Don't know if thats even possible but the time ajustment idea is too broad of a "fix" and would end up punishing those that log intentonally as well as those like me that just have bad connections. For the record I'm not a freightor pilot. :)

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.