Originally by: Trinity Dusk

---

While the software might give you small leverage it's the local channel that's the underlying problem.
I don't really like having to scroll the local channel all the time either.

---

Originally by: Jade Constantine

---

I don't like the idea of the BACON program really - it strikes me as being too "macro-y" ie making basic precautions and spacial awareness automatic. If it was my choice I'd warn people off this. However, it will probably be rendered obsolete when local chat is removed/restricted in some way. But its fair to say I'm "anti-Bacon" - since its dumbing down an aspect of the game and making it even easier to avoid non-consensual pvp in 0.0 and lowsec (+ concord wars).

---

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Edited by: Eronysis on 20/04/2008 05:36:32
Edited by: Eronysis on 20/04/2008 05:34:54
Macro
It is safe to assume you all misunderstand the word.


Regards,

Eronysis

---

Originally by: CCP Wrangler

---

Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

---

Originally by: motomysz

---

I agree. Anti-BACON candidate gets my vote.

---

Originally by: Cecil Montague

---

They should change that warning on entering low sec to:

"Go read Crime and Punishment for a few days then come back."

---

Originally by: Tortun Nahme

---

actually there is a VERY big differnce, it doesnt modify content at ALL therefore it does not breach the eula

---

Originally by: Cecil Montague

---

They should change that warning on entering low sec to:

"Go read Crime and Punishment for a few days then come back."

---

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Originally by: motomysz

---

I agree. Anti-BACON candidate gets my vote.

---

Ironic

---

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Edited by: Eronysis on 20/04/2008 07:33:04

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Originally by: motomysz

---

I agree. Anti-BACON candidate gets my vote.

---

Ironic

---

If case you have as much trouble following links as reading a description or actually using a product before judging it.
I give you another preexisting tool...
Beetracker

What is being passed off here is large alliances keeping the advantage of having such tools private and quasi secret. BACON brings them to the masses, in an OPEN SOURCE format. Tools of this nature are being used against thousands of players BY people posting BAN BACON messages in this very thread and in others. Period.

---

Originally by: CCP Mitnal

---

It's great being a puppetmaster

---

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Edited by: Eronysis on 20/04/2008 07:33:04

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Originally by: motomysz

---

I agree. Anti-BACON candidate gets my vote.

---

Ironic

---

If case you have as much trouble following links as reading a description or actually using a product before judging it.
I give you another preexisting tool...
Beetracker

What is being passed off here is large alliances keeping the advantage of having such tools private and quasi secret. BACON brings them to the masses, in an OPEN SOURCE format. Tools of this nature are being used against thousands of players BY people posting BAN BACON messages in this very thread and in others. Period.

---

Originally by: MotherMoon

---

maybe bacon ill be the reason CP finally removed local once and for all.

and then bacon will only tell you when a war target has spoken in local thus showing up.

which fun mind games will then be played.

but yeah anti Bacon gets my vote.

I hate local allready now this.
so thank you BACON guys for giving us more reason to kill local dead.

---

Originally by: Serenity Steele

---

CONCORD has locked the original thread so I can't see what BACON is/was, however the Beetracker program looks like 2 things to me:
1) An attempt by players to add to the UI where it is lacking
2) Unbalanced that a specific group of players only should have access to the tool.

On the point of balance .. does everyone remember when Portraits were being replaced with +ve/-ve images in the client cache? This was a high-demand feature not present in the client. So now, it's implemented in the client for everyone.

IMO, it should be implemented for all, or not implemented at all. Whether "implemented for all" is a good case, is up for debate

---

Originally by: techzer0

---

How long before every single ISK farming Raven has this installed? War targets? Forget ever getting within range unless you happen to jump through the same gate they're warping to.

---

Originally by: KISOGOKU

---

Why should macroers will use BACON? I saw alot of times macroers are cloaking/logging off someone enter local already, what will bacon do for them their macros cant do?

Originally by: techzer0

---

How long before every single ISK farming Raven has this installed? War targets? Forget ever getting within range unless you happen to jump through the same gate they're warping to.

---

---

Originally by: CCP Mitnal

---

It's great being a puppetmaster

---

Originally by: Shakuul

---

Edited by: Shakuul on 20/04/2008 08:23:19

Originally by: MotherMoon

---

maybe bacon ill be the reason CP finally removed local once and for all.

and then bacon will only tell you when a war target has spoken in local thus showing up.

which fun mind games will then be played.

but yeah anti Bacon gets my vote.

I hate local allready now this.
so thank you BACON guys for giving us more reason to kill local dead.

---

This. Bacon is just highlighting an existing problem (the unreasonable/excessive amount of information local provides) by giving everyone easy access to this information (through sound). Don't petition to remove bacon, petition to remove local.

---

Originally by: Dark Shikari

---

The problem with killing Jesus is he always just respawns 3 days later anyways.

Originally by: KISOGOKU

---

Why should macroers will use BACON? I saw alot of times macroers are cloaking/logging off someone enter local already, what will bacon do for them their macros cant do?

---

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Beetracker

What is being passed off here is large alliances keeping the advantage of having such tools private and quasi secret. BACON brings them to the masses, in an OPEN SOURCE format. Tools of this nature are being used against thousands of players BY people posting BAN BACON messages in this very thread and in others. Period.

---

Originally by: Louis DelaBlanche

---

Dont like the principles behind this new app, or what itl potentially mean for PvP in EVE (another step to PvP being only between "PvPers" like in most MMOs). That said, if its not breaking any rules then nothing can really be done, especially if its now gone open source meaning unless CCP specifically ban its application & anyone using it (how to prove that?) theres no way for it to be gotten rid of.

---

Originally by: Evelgrivion

---

Anyone who supports BACON is someone who does not understand why it is fundamentally bad for this game, tbqfh.

---

Originally by: Serenity Steele

---

CONCORD has locked the original thread so I can't see what BACON is/was, however the Beetracker program looks like 2 things to me:
1) An attempt by players to add to the UI where it is lacking
2) Unbalanced that a specific group of players only should have access to the tool.

On the point of balance .. does everyone remember when Portraits were being replaced with +ve/-ve images in the client cache? This was a high-demand feature not present in the client. So now, it's implemented in the client for everyone.

IMO, it should be implemented for all, or not implemented at all. Whether "implemented for all" is a good case, is up for debate

---

Originally by: Des Garcons

---

Who cares what csm candidates think they are all scammers just using this to try to get ppl to trust them so they can scam them.

---

Quote:

---

"Are these people prisoners?" Arkhan asked.

"Not at all," Melak replied. "They're free to run and get shot any time they like."

---

Originally by: Cailais

---

As far as I can see BACON is simply an audio version of local. The problems are inherent with Local and the need for players to find others / conceal themselves.

---

Originally by: Shaun Klaroh

---

There is no such thing as Civil war, especially when Caldari are involved.

---

Quote:

---

"Are these people prisoners?" Arkhan asked.

"Not at all," Melak replied. "They're free to run and get shot any time they like."

---

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Edited by: Eronysis on 20/04/2008 05:36:32
Edited by: Eronysis on 20/04/2008 05:34:54
Macro
It is safe to assume you all misunderstand the word.


Regards,

Eronysis

---

Originally by: Serenity Steele

---

1) An attempt by players to add to the UI where it is lacking

---

Originally by: Thorradin

---

Originally by: Serenity Steele

---

1) An attempt by players to add to the UI where it is lacking

---

Wait what? Add to UI where it's lacking? It's an automated system-warning for people who refuse to keep local open and make use of the excessive intel gathering CCP already gives them (and wants to nerf).

Looks more like it takes an existing problem that CCP isn't a fan of, and makes it much worse.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

I do by no means think bacon is cool.

It's a very big workaround, but it would do the same task as reading directly from the memory, which is bad.

So i hope that CCP will change their EULA/TOS accordingly.

---

Originally by: Shaun Klaroh

---

Originally by: MongWen

---

Without downloading and looking at what this program does, I can say pure and simple that I am 100% against any programs that does ôhackö memory locations to give an unfair advantage. And I hope that CCP and the other CSM Candidates are against this also.

---

Of which this program does neither, so the point's kinda... lost.

---

Originally by: Avon

---

I'm not a candidate, but I'm not sure I could support one who is in any way in favour of this.

Logging should only be available on test builds of the client.

---

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Beetracker

---

Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah

---

CSM candidate here.

I'm against any 3rd party program that gives a significant advantage to its users compared to those that do not use the program. It basically forces people to use the program if they want to participate in the top levels of the game.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

I am quite surprised that most people in large alliances haven't heard about using this information.

---

Originally by: Avon

---

Edited by: Avon on 20/04/2008 16:13:49

Originally by: Goumindong

---

I am quite surprised that most people in large alliances haven't heard about using this information.

---

They have, the difference is that they see a line and try not to cross it.

There is a big difference between tools that automate aspects of the game and directly aid gameplay, and other tools.

Voice comms automate nothing. People need to talk.
(Also, CCP's offering is free, so I don't see how you think the alternatives are cheaper).

EFT does aid the fitting ships, but it does not directly effect gameplay.

It is easy to judge applications by those critera, however, it is not easy to detect them all (portrait hacks, for example).

And no, Bacon and the concept is not new.
I certainly know of one widespread implementation of something similar, which was brought to an early end because it was felt to be a cheat, even though technically it was within the rules in the same way that Bacon is.

If client logs are going to be used in an undetectable way to gain an ingame advantage, they need to be removed or encrypted (although encryption is not ideal). It must always be assumed that the client is hostile, and provide only vital information to it.

Logging needs to be in place on test builds only.
If there is a bug there is no real reason why logs from test builds (even of the current client) could not be used to trap it, rather than risking insecure clients machines giving an in-game advantage.

If you can not see the difference between fair and unfair Goumindong, I hope you do not get a seat on the CSM.

---

Originally by: Avon

---

There is a big difference between tools that automate aspects of the game and directly aid gameplay, and other tools.

---

Quote:

---

EFT does aid the fitting ships, but it does not directly effect gameplay.

---

Quote:

---

If there is a bug there is no real reason why logs from test builds (even of the current client) could not be used to trap it, rather than risking insecure clients machines giving an in-game advantage.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Like the ingame advantage conferred by voice coms, out of game chat coms, EFT, Eve-mon, full API export for assets et all?

---

Originally by: Dark Shikari

---

The problem with killing Jesus is he always just respawns 3 days later anyways.

Originally by: Patch86

---

There are voice coms integrated in to the EVE client- as strong a CCP endorsement as there can be. Out of game chat coms are impossible to limit, and so a non-issue. EVE-mon is simply an offline organiser- nothing that couldn't be achieved without a pen and paper, and does not infer any major advantages to the user other than personal convenience. Monitor size, help databases and simulation software are all just conveniences.

BACON provides a fundamental shift in risk/reward within the game, by providing people with an in-game function that simply wasn't there before, and allowing people to essentially AFK play without risk. It also provides an easy way for any large groups to set up large, fool-proof intel networks, essentially removing most of the element of surprise out of most big-fleet combat.

They are very very different, if only in the scale of their effects. Reducing it to an "they're all 3rd party apps, lol" argument is pointless. Any fundamental change in the way the game is played should be debated for what it is. Period.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

This doesn't automate aspects of the game, it simply takes a visual aid and moves it to an auditory aid.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Quote:

---

EFT does aid the fitting ships, but it does not directly effect gameplay.

---

Really? Are you saying that tighter fits with better balances between speed, tank, and DPS, and less time spent testing fits with more time spent flying them doesn't directly effect gameplay? That the ability to then easily transfer fits and figure out how they will exactly perform for you and your gang does not directly effect gameplay? That is like saying a searchable database of chess openings does not change the gameplay of the people sitting across from each other.

---

Originally by: sov68n

---

EFT does not give you readouts on your actual performance in combat, especially in regards to dps, since it fails to take into account the aspects of the target: things like transversal, resists, etc.

---

Quote:

---

On the other hand, if EFT was able to deliver an active combat simulator, in which you were able to customize the fittings of the other ship, and then play out a real-time simulation of your ship vs his ship (taking into account everything that EVE does during combat) all on this program, yes, it would affect gameplay. But the fact of the matter is, EFT does NOT.

---

Originally by: Viper ****zIe

---

With a few simple edits the tool can be used to automate client closure, provide detailed information about fleet movements instantly, and quite a few other possible outcomes that would fundamentally withdraw any form of risk or any human interaction with the game itself without any attention being paid to the monitor whatsoever.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Actually EFT now includes all of that jazz[its always included resists and means to figure incoming DPS from different sources]. And anything that can't be achieved from that can be easily achieved from sticking the data into naughtyboys spreadsheet.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

You just said it stops you from wasting money. So does that mean that money is not an aspect of Eve? I would strongly disagree with that.

The ability to quickly and easily optimize setups is a very strong ability especially when you can normalize various attributes.

---

Originally by: sov68n

---

So you basically just said that your argument was against this spreadsheet, and not EFT.

But no, EFT doesn't account for ship movement. The amount of tanked DPS does not go up if your velocity is higher. You CANNOT, and I can't emphasize this enough, accurately predict how your ship will perform in combat since there are too many factors that EFT cannot account for, mainly the fashion in which your enemy pilots his ship, since we aren't talking about fighting NPCs here.

---

Originally by: Avon

---

Edited by: Avon on 20/04/2008 16:13:49

Originally by: Goumindong

---

I am quite surprised that most people in large alliances haven't heard about using this information.

---

They have, the difference is that they see a line and try not to cross it.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Only if you are unable to make reasonable assumptions as to what he ought to be doing and you ought to be doing.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

And yes, it accounts for a significant amount of time that is saved and a significant increase in the quality and ability of fitted ships for different aspects of the game.

---

Originally by: sov68n

---

This is not a valid point for your argument, seeing as how you just admitted that EFT cannot account for a variety of factors. Factors that are much more important in combat than data from EFT could ever be to you.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Without the information that EFT provides you would be unable to reliably test speedily. Its a significant advantage which has provided a lot of insight into the game which we would have missed otherwise[relative advantages of the various plated gank battleships, the relative advantages of repping versus plating, etc. All information that makes the players that have it better than the players that don't]. The only difference is that its more widely used.

---

Originally by: HydroSan

---

Why are you arguing with Goumindong? His logic makes sense to himself and nobody else.

---

Originally by: AKULA UrQuan

---

The files generated by the logserver where never intended for this kind of use. Logserver useage is for bug reporting and in the fileing of petitions when the need calls for it. It's not a burgler alarm.

Nevermind the fact it's open source opens up a massive can of worms. It's not a huge leap in logic to see more malishis uses for it such as phishing and god knows what else. ETF has had problems with this in the past.

I'm completely shocked we're even haveing this debate....

---

Originally by: sov68n

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Without the information that EFT provides you would be unable to reliably test speedily. Its a significant advantage which has provided a lot of insight into the game which we would have missed otherwise[relative advantages of the various plated gank battleships, the relative advantages of repping versus plating, etc. All information that makes the players that have it better than the players that don't]. The only difference is that its more widely used.

---

The fact that the information EFT provides isn't your exact combat performance seems to be flying right over your head. Like I keep saying, there are too many factors in EVE pvp that EFT cannot account for, making its information a generalization at best.

The only way to REALLY test your ships is to fly them in combat against hostiles. Other than that, you will never truly know how your ship performs.

I rest my case.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Generalizations are useful. They are much more useful than not having the information. If you don't think its useful, then go ahead and do it by hand for the next few months. See what it changes about how what you know and what you can figure out.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Generalizations are useful. They are much more useful than not having the information.

---

Originally by: sov68n

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Generalizations are useful. They are much more useful than not having the information. If you don't think its useful, then go ahead and do it by hand for the next few months. See what it changes about how what you know and what you can figure out.

---

I'm going to say this one last time for you:
There is a BIG difference between useful and/or convenient and having a negative effect on gameplay. You continue to imply that the convenience of EFT is game-breaking. It is not, and your arguments keep drifting more and more towards suggesting that EFT is in fact, just a useful tool, and nothing more. Here's an example:

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Generalizations are useful. They are much more useful than not having the information.

---

Again, suggesting that EFT's data is in fact, not game-breaking.

You lose.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

All these programs confer significant advantage on those who use them over those that do not.

---

Originally by: sov68n

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

All these programs confer significant advantage on those who use them over those that do not.

---

This is simply not an issue, since the people who do not use the programs do so by their own choice, or by ignorance of their existence. And therefore are denying themselves the advantage, meaning they are the issue in this matter, and not the programs themselves.

---

Originally by: Evelgrivion

---

The argument that EFT is no worse than BACON is an absurd argument, at best. Eve Fitting Tool is nothing more than a spreadsheet and calculator. It does not provide "I win" setups without trial and error, and neither is it an instant recipe for success in PvP (or even PvE) activities.

---

Originally by: Evelgrivion

---

The argument that EFT is no worse than BACON is an absurd argument, at best. Eve Fitting Tool is nothing more than a spreadsheet and calculator. It does not provide "I win" setups without trial and error, and neither is it an instant recipe for success in PvP (or even PvE) activities.

---

Originally by: Avon

---

Edited by: Avon on 20/04/2008 16:13:49

Originally by: Goumindong

---

I am quite surprised that most people in large alliances haven't heard about using this information.

---

They have, the difference is that they see a line and try not to cross it.

There is a big difference between tools that automate aspects of the game and directly aid gameplay, and other tools.

Voice comms automate nothing. People need to talk.
(Also, CCP's offering is free, so I don't see how you think the alternatives are cheaper).

EFT does aid the fitting ships, but it does not directly effect gameplay.

It is easy to judge applications by those critera, however, it is not easy to detect them all (portrait hacks, for example).

And no, Bacon and the concept is not new.
I certainly know of one widespread implementation of something similar, which was brought to an early end because it was felt to be a cheat, even though technically it was within the rules in the same way that Bacon is.

If client logs are going to be used in an undetectable way to gain an ingame advantage, they need to be removed or encrypted (although encryption is not ideal). It must always be assumed that the client is hostile, and provide only vital information to it.

Logging needs to be in place on test builds only.
If there is a bug there is no real reason why logs from test builds (even of the current client) could not be used to trap it, rather than risking insecure clients machines giving an in-game advantage.

If you can not see the difference between fair and unfair Goumindong, I hope you do not get a seat on the CSM.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

So by BACON being public then the people not using it are doing it by their own choice or by ignorance of their existence, and therefore are denying themselves the advantage, meaning they are the issue in this matter, and not the programs themselves?

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

The key difference is the automation.

---

Originally by: sov68n

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

So by BACON being public then the people not using it are doing it by their own choice or by ignorance of their existence, and therefore are denying themselves the advantage, meaning they are the issue in this matter, and not the programs themselves?

---

My statement was in reference to EFT, my apologies for not clarifying that.

But imo, BACON does break gank pvp, since even people who stupidly afk in unsecure areas are now safe, and that is not how EVE should play out, under any circumstances.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

If they are AFK how do they get back to their computer to safe and cloak?

No, the issue has always been with the log out timers from rat and mining aggression, and the inability of cloaking ships to be proved down.

---

Originally by: Avon

---

Does it require the player to be actively playing Eve, or does it sound a warning even if they are ingame but asleep/forum whoring/afk?

---

Quote:

---

As you say, if people make it do other stuff it may become a macro, and theus a EULA infringment .. but you have also commented on it being undetectable.

---

Quote:

---

So what exactly is your position? Cheating is wrong, or cheating is wrong if you can get caught?

---

Quote:

---

BACON highlights why client logging on TQ needs to be stopped or be encryted. I am sure that as a responsible member of the community, in favour of fair play, you would agree?

---

Originally by: sov68n

---

Your logic makes me cry. All of your arguments are invalid or stupid, just shut up.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

It would always sound a warning. Does that make running eve in a window, applying the always on top property to it and then making sure i can see the local count in a window when i am forum whoring a "cheat"?

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Then i am sure you can tell me why my arguments are invalid or stupid[which really makes me wonder how one would be stupid and valid or invalid and not stupid].

I would love to hear it.

---

Quote:

---

EULA says its not cheating. Oh, and when did you stop beating your wife?

---

Quote:

---

The answer to that is "not much", and all the problems that might be exacerbated by such a change are all easily fixed by changes that need to be implemented anyway[Specifically, log out timers for rat aggression, and the ability to scan down cloaked ships]

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Nor does BACON warp you out of a belt and cloak you. It simply makes it easier to do so. While EFT makes it easier to develop strong PvP/PvE builds. Do you see the similarities?

---

Originally by: Tommy TenKreds

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Nor does BACON warp you out of a belt and cloak you. It simply makes it easier to do so. While EFT makes it easier to develop strong PvP/PvE builds. Do you see the similarities?

---

Smokescreen detected.

The difference is theory and practice, and you aint foolin no-one.

---

Originally by: sov68n

---

Why it is stupid is pretty self explanatory.

---

Quote:

---

BACON has a large effect on gameplay, read any of the posts (besides your own) in this thread and you will realize that.

---

Quote:

---

No, because you are actively looking at the local window while you are forum whoring. With BACON, you don't even have to have EVE on top, and that's quite a difference.

---

Originally by: Corwain

---

I can't even believe the anti-logic you're spouting Goumindong, but I'm glad it came up. I was completely ready to vote for you because I agree with your position in the nano thread, but now...

BACON is cheating, I'm not gonna rehash the arguments as to why that have been posted all thread, but if you can't see it you're broken.

---

Originally by: Corwain

---

Well I've gotta agree with you that the root of the problem is that local makes it too easy to run at the first sign of trouble. As someone why prefers to fly Force Recons and Covops cause of the stealth factor I've gotta admit--there's REALLY no such thing as stealth in EVE. Just inattention, which is why I hate the idea of this program. The one person I can actually catch before they SS and cloak because they're watching TV or surfing the net while they're ratting will now have a little voice come on saying "Hey, someone's here, SS and cloak".

But I still don't think that makes the program any less cheating.

---

Originally by: Lord WarATron

---

Edited by: Lord WarATron on 20/04/2008 20:50:32
FFS, with programs like BACON and BEETRACKER, the game is moving down a direction that is plain absurd. Do people even want to play this game for pvp anymore or just isk farm?

CCP, if you guys are reading this, now this is the most lazy way to fix this stuff.

1. Now is the time to make every rat of all sizes in every belt scramble with at least 2 pts per rat. (New isk farmer generation fits 1 wcs minimum)

2. Auto-agression just for being in a bubble. Stops CTRL-Qing people who jump in the gate

3. NPC giving a small agression timer of around 200 seconds, thus preventing CTRL-Qers, and not really effectig those who genuinly crash.

Then programs like BACON/BEETRACKER and Logoffski macros wont matter at all.

If you want the isk from a spawn, you got to take risk. You got to defend your space to stop raiders getting in, rather than just using CTRL-Q as a get out of jail free card.

---

Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists

---

how about i put some alts in the systems around pr-, the system bob stages out from, now everytime more then 5 bob leave pr- my little programm tells me through which system they left and how big that gang is, calculating where they might go isnt rocketscience so you either form a gang to counter them 5 minutes after they left their homesystem, or you warn your industrial that in 30minutes a hostile gang will be around.

---

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Edited by: Eronysis on 20/04/2008 07:33:04

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Originally by: motomysz

---

I agree. Anti-BACON candidate gets my vote.

---

Ironic

---

If case you have as much trouble following links as reading a description or actually using a product before judging it.
I give you another preexisting tool...
Beetracker

What is being passed off here is large alliances keeping the advantage of having such tools private and quasi secret. BACON brings them to the masses, in an OPEN SOURCE format. Tools of this nature are being used against thousands of players BY people posting BAN BACON messages in this very thread and in others. Period.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Corwain

---

Well I've gotta agree with you that the root of the problem is that local makes it too easy to run at the first sign of trouble. As someone why prefers to fly Force Recons and Covops cause of the stealth factor I've gotta admit--there's REALLY no such thing as stealth in EVE. Just inattention, which is why I hate the idea of this program. The one person I can actually catch before they SS and cloak because they're watching TV or surfing the net while they're ratting will now have a little voice come on saying "Hey, someone's here, SS and cloak".

But I still don't think that makes the program any less cheating.

---

The root of the problem is not local. The root of the problem is that once "hey, someones there" the "log off" or "safe and cloak" is too easy and offers no pvp recourse.

---

Originally by: Speed Devil

---

Originally by: ReePeR McAllem

---

Everytime you fit anything other than a laser on our ships, babies die.

---

and when ya fit lasers on your ships nothing dies

---

Originally by: Cailais

---

Its a double edged argument actually.

The attacker strives to remain hidden in order to catch his prey.

The defender strives to see the attacker in order to escape.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Tommy TenKreds

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Nor does BACON warp you out of a belt and cloak you. It simply makes it easier to do so. While EFT makes it easier to develop strong PvP/PvE builds. Do you see the similarities?

---

Smokescreen detected.

The difference is theory and practice, and you aint foolin no-one.

---

Are you saying that when you get a good fit in EFT you scrap it for the fit that you haven't put into EFT to check its relative performance?

---

Originally by: Tommy TenKreds

---

I am saying that EFT only provides me with theoretical information about optimum ship fittings. It does not advise me about practical situations (quite literally) on the fly.

The difference is quite obvious and you are obviously derailing this thread with your nonsense.

Respect -10.

---

Originally by: Cailais

---

Its a double edged argument actually.

The attacker strives to remain hidden in order to catch his prey.

The defender strives to see the attacker in order to escape.

The solution to this circular argument must lie in how the player recieves information on the "who", "what" and "where" of other players in a system and how quickly that occurs.

This goes to the core of the 'intel' framework of local, the overview, and the scanner. What is needed is a singular UI that displays elements of this information but within limitations: i.e a set of falible senses which have their own unique limitations.

C.

---

Originally by: MongWen

---

BACON does need the logserver file in order to work, though my reserve is that the same log file contains your user name, and that can be exploited by others to gain that info (an example can be that they modify the open source and release it as a ônewö version on sites like eve-files.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

All of these programs can be compromised in order to do malicious things. Heck, you could just be downloading a virus with nothing else.

This is no different from any piece of software you download from any source.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

All of these programs can be compromised in order to do malicious things. Heck, you could just be downloading a virus with nothing else.

This is no different from any piece of software you download from any source.

---

Originally by: MongWen

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

All of these programs can be compromised in order to do malicious things. Heck, you could just be downloading a virus with nothing else.

This is no different from any piece of software you download from any source.

---

That is true, but then again I believe that is a whole different topic, since this is about BACON not any other program you might download.

---

Originally by: Masu'di

---

for example, an audio sound played when a new ship arrives on grid, would be useful and sensible, i'm sure our ships onboard computers would be capable of it, and be able to handle other sensory mediums other than light.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Tommy TenKreds

---

I am saying that EFT only provides me with theoretical information about optimum ship fittings. It does not advise me about practical situations (quite literally) on the fly.

The difference is quite obvious and you are obviously derailing this thread with your nonsense.

Respect -10.

---

It may not advise you, but it does help you in those situations.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

You should note that the program discussed does not advise you either, it simply makes an auditory cue...

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Also, then, you are against third party chat programs and team speak?

---

Originally by: Tommy TenKreds

---

That is active advice. You are wrong.

---

Quote:

---

semantics

---

Quote:

---

I did not even say that I am against BACON. You just assumed that. Simply, I despise your illogic and obvious derailment of this thread.

---

Quote:

---

If you are so convinced that BACON is a good thing for Eve, why not just come across honestly and openly; declare it for what it is, an alteration to game mechanics which you would like to see as an official feature?

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Frankly I am not sure whether or not this is some gross abuse of the system or just a clever system to more easily monitor the information they have. But unless there is some clear stance about third party programs which are clearly required for the "upper level play" its very hard to say this is any worse than anything else everyone participates in.

---

Originally by: Thorradin

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Frankly I am not sure whether or not this is some gross abuse of the system or just a clever system to more easily monitor the information they have. But unless there is some clear stance about third party programs which are clearly required for the "upper level play" its very hard to say this is any worse than anything else everyone participates in.

---

You're not sure if it's abuse? You're talking about programs which use a bug logging program to create bots that help give the player an advantage in the game. I've seen people try to compare this stuff to EVE-mon, EFT, and such, and it's pretty clear they're grasping for straws since EVE-Mon makes use of API, which CCP intended to be used for 3rd party apps that aren't game-breaking advantages. EFT's only crime is that it gave way to the EFT warriors.

The only good thing about people using BACON is that if CCP fixes it, the Pavlovian players will suddenly find themselves exploding without their alarm to warn them as they'll keep forgetting to check local like they should've been doing.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

...and its publicity will have very little impact on the game.

---

Originally by: Malaan Tabfassh

---

This is unfair as you can now process the whole incoming data in less time than a person who does not use this method of parallelism.

---

Quote:

---

But you could just ask someone doing this works for you.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Thorradin

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Frankly I am not sure whether or not this is some gross abuse of the system or just a clever system to more easily monitor the information they have. But unless there is some clear stance about third party programs which are clearly required for the "upper level play" its very hard to say this is any worse than anything else everyone participates in.

---

You're not sure if it's abuse? You're talking about programs which use a bug logging program to create bots that help give the player an advantage in the game. I've seen people try to compare this stuff to EVE-mon, EFT, and such, and it's pretty clear they're grasping for straws since EVE-Mon makes use of API, which CCP intended to be used for 3rd party apps that aren't game-breaking advantages. EFT's only crime is that it gave way to the EFT warriors.

The only good thing about people using BACON is that if CCP fixes it, the Pavlovian players will suddenly find themselves exploding without their alarm to warn them as they'll keep forgetting to check local like they should've been doing.

---

Eve-mon originally used a persons log in and password to query data directly from the server. The API was a reaction to its use to cover 3rd party apps that the players were using already.

Bacon has no bots and no automation. There is, technically, no advantage being gained since a person needs to be at their machine to take action and other options have the same level of power[like having someone simply sit in a system and announce on TS]

Its not new, and its publicity will have very little impact on the game.

---

Quote:

---

no advantage being gained since a person needs to be at their machine to take action and other options have the same level of power

---

Originally by: Siigari Kitawa

---

2) you are unable to post an argument without thinking

---

Quote:

---

Forum warfare has been around to bring about certain kinds of change. This is no different. The community has been polarized by this release and it is directly because of the publicity that this software has caused. The local issue is what is being brought up mostly and though it bothers me that one person can do such a thing the fact remains that it happened.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Its not new, and its publicity will have very little impact on the game.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Quote:

---

Forum warfare has been around to bring about certain kinds of change. This is no different. The community has been polarized by this release and it is directly because of the publicity that this software has caused. The local issue is what is being brought up mostly and though it bothers me that one person can do such a thing the fact remains that it happened.

---

The reaction might bring a lot of change, but the program itself will not have any profound effects on gameplay in eve.

---

Originally by: Talarn Kalarn

---

It is also against the spirit of the game to evade those out to ruin your fun... because then you are ruining their fun instead!

---

Originally by: Thorradin

---

EVE-Mon was also never in conflict with the EULA, nor did it go in the opposite direction of the intent for EVE. CCP wants to nerf local, go watch Ovuer's interview from the alliance tourny. BACON is a step in the other direction, and now that its public, instead of just being used by farmers (whose programs likely include a ctrl+q line and are more advanced) and a few alliances, everyone will be able to use it, and the problem it presents will grow until CCP kills it. Hopefully in a burtal and bloody fashion, to the enjoyment of many players.

---

Quote:

---

The reality is I could run this program, turn and play a game on my Wii, and when I hear the noise, if I'm a scout I hit my VOIP button and inform others, or I look over, see a possible threat, and move to safety. I just had my ship saved because of BACON. I have to go to my machine to take action, I did not have to be at my machine to know I had to take action. If you cannot see this simple fact, then you are lost on this problem, even more so than when you argued against the Eagle's much needed turret, and others argued that a 4 launcher Hawk would ruin EVE and make interceptors worthless.

---

Originally by: Siigari Kitawa

---

Goumindong I'm going to state this publicly so you can visualize it.

First of all I want you to know I do not want local removed.

Second, I want you to know I am not going to vote for you.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Siigari Kitawa

---

Goumindong I'm going to state this publicly so you can visualize it.

First of all I want you to know I do not want local removed.

Second, I want you to know I am not going to vote for you.

---

Why? Because I am willing to take an unpopular position when the facts support it? Because i willing to look at all sides of an issue? Because I won't back down despite public pressure?

Surely you want someone who will instead cave to pressure and not give any serious objections when developers or players are pushing for options that would damage eve?

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

But the program is public, anyone can use it.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Similarly large monitors allow you to have more of the local screen open at one time as well as organize other information better. Does this parallelism constitute and unfair advantage? Do we ban large monitors because someone else might not be able to use a smaller screen as well?

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

You can also just ask someone to yell on TS whenever anyone enters local...

---

Originally by: Siigari Kitawa

---

Actually, none of that. Mostly because you said you don't think before making an argument.

---

Originally by: Malaan Tabfassh

---

That's not the point. Macros are public too and anyone can use them.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Why? Because I am willing to take an unpopular position when the facts support it? Because i willing to look at all sides of an issue? Because I won't back down despite public pressure?

Surely you want someone who will instead cave to pressure and not give any serious objections when developers or players are pushing for options that would damage eve?

---

Originally by: TheCraftyHippo

---

Human participation is removed in favor of cloaked, undetectable, non-interactive alts just waiting to send a audio cue from anywhere in the galaxy.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Audio cues from everywhere in the galaxy would be worthless. In order to receive accurate intel you would need someone at that computer to manually activate a VOIP program or manually input text into a chat box.

---

Originally by: Malaan Tabfassh

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Audio cues from everywhere in the galaxy would be worthless. In order to receive accurate intel you would need someone at that computer to manually activate a VOIP program or manually input text into a chat box.

---

Don't worry, I'll write a program doing that work. Such a program which uses raw data BACON provides can do other nice things too, like some people in different posts also pointed out.

And don't underestimate peoples creativity, what do you think will be next? There are some great brains out there.

---

Originally by: Malaan Tabfassh

---

Getting data from BACON, processing it and let the output be handled by teamspeak or vent for example. And you don't need a player for that, Microsoft SAM does fine. The client is not affected.

---

Originally by: MotherMoon

---

maybe bacon ill be the reason CCP finally removed local once and for all.

---

Originally by: Rachel Vend

---

... with 100% reliability in most cases ...

---

Originally by: Malaan Tabfassh

---

In post [156] you basically said that this data is worthless and in post [162] you say now that players with eyes are more valuable doing that job.

I could ask you to elaborate this, but I won't, I'm not really interested in it. You have your opinion and I have mine and I think we won't come to a conclusion even if we post on the next 100 pages. At the end it's CCPs decision to decide about that matter, but I really hope they won't tolerate 3rd party programs like this one.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Why would it be any different than if you were paying attention to your channels. You are ratting away so you must be at your machine activating modules.

I can rat and monitor 2-3 chat channels, 2-3 defensive channels and local all at the same time. Is it such a huge deal that there is an auditory ping when you ought to be paying attention anyway?

---

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Edited by: Eronysis on 21/04/2008 06:22:57
Goumindong is one of the few people on this thread actually reading everything and making informed statements. I think there is some general confusion as to coherency in arguments, and ones emotional output. IE many here seem to respond much more readily to hysteria than reason.

---

Originally by: Talarn Kalarn

---

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Edited by: Eronysis on 21/04/2008 06:22:57
Goumindong is one of the few people on this thread actually reading everything and making informed statements. I think there is some general confusion as to coherency in arguments, and ones emotional output. IE many here seem to respond much more readily to hysteria than reason.

---

Despite claims to the contrary, his arguments have plenty of logic in them... I guess a lot of people only see logic as an argument they agree with.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Why? Because I am willing to take an unpopular position when the facts support it? Because i willing to look at all sides of an issue? Because I won't back down despite public pressure?

---

Originally by: MotherMoon

---

maybe bacon ill be the reason CP finally removed local once and for all.

and then bacon will only tell you when a war target has spoken in local thus showing up.

which fun mind games will then be played.

---

Originally by: Stratten

---

I can see those that denounce it in general represent the pvp/alliance warfare playstyle class and understand their rants. For that playstyle it certainly can be be a detriment. On the other hand, alot of pvp revolves around huge alliances which have stated or been linked to using such programs already, and in much larger scales. (servers storing information of entire regions realtime from various players in the alliance and the like)

---

Originally by: Cissnei

---

you cant remove local until you give real legit new players other avenues to protect themselves when they find themselves in the HIGH LIKLEYHOOD of being overmatched, and not until you fix the other r-tarded exploits people use

---

Originally by: Flaming sambuka

---

As if it isn't hard enough to find low-sec targets already let alone hunt a carebear in .0! Ban bacon NOW. FOR CHRIST SAKE CCP.

---

Originally by: Flaming sambuka

---

Ban bacon NOW.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Because I am willing to take an unpopular position when the facts support it?

---

Originally by: Cpt Branko

---

Delay saving logs by 5 minutes, so it will physically cease to work without client modifications which are illegal.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Cpt Branko

---

Delay saving logs by 5 minutes, so it will physically cease to work without client modifications which are illegal.

---

This removes all usefulness from the tool. Logservers must report information as its processed because they report information which will disappear in the case of a failure.

---

Originally by: Cissnei

---

griefers dont need anymore tools to help them. this game is already skewed in favor of the griefer due to many MANY factors. there is no way in hell local can be removed until they also remove any and all insurance payouts if concord destroys your ship.

---

Quote:

---

griefers are already controlling the majority of this game.

---

Quote:

---

local is the only tool that those with NO FIGHTING or PVP characters at all can have a reasonable chance of defending themselves, without having to put in several hundred k of skill points into scanning

---

Quote:

---

macro miners and isk farmers are an entirely different animal. theh best thing you can do is to NOT blow them up and file petitions so they can be caught in the act.

---

Quote:

---

1) war decs cost 500m a week to maintain

---

Quote:

---

2) there are no longer insurance payouts if concord pops you

---

Quote:

---

3) if you leave a corp you may not rejoin another corp (outside of being put into the npc one auto) for a real life week

---

Quote:

---

4) you may not war dec corps less than 4 months old

---

Quote:

---

you cant remove local until you give real legit new players other avenues to protect themselves when they find themselves in the HIGH LIKLEYHOOD of being overmatched, and not until you fix the other r-tarded exploits people use

---

Originally by: Avon

---

BACON is dangerous not so much because of what it does, but because of the consequences of allowing it.

---

Originally by: Segge Bolled

---

If we were to be afraid of what might happen all the time, we needn't get up in the morning and the last few thousand years of humanity were an over-extension of effort (or an constant feat of foolish bravery) to say the least.

---

Originally by: Jade Constantine

---

Well I'm campaigning for CSM election so I'm going to address your concerns and ideas below:

---

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Edited by: Eronysis on 20/04/2008 21:31:36
Regarding the above goon comment...Though it is rude to quote myself. I repeat.

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Edited by: Eronysis on 20/04/2008 07:33:04

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Originally by: motomysz

---

I agree. Anti-BACON candidate gets my vote.

---

Ironic

---

If case you have as much trouble following links as reading a description or actually using a product before judging it.
I give you another preexisting tool...
Beetracker

What is being passed off here is large alliances keeping the advantage of having such tools private and quasi secret. BACON brings them to the masses, in an OPEN SOURCE format. Tools of this nature are being used against thousands of players BY people posting BAN BACON messages in this very thread and in others. Period.

---

---

Originally by: Segge Bolled

---

I'm not trying to be condescending, but surely you're aware that humankind built large engines of destruction, called "rockets". The consequences of "allowing" them not has not only cost thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of lives, but also played a large part in plunging us into one of the most dangerous periods of human history - the Cold War - where we came rather close to snuffing ourselves out in a very messy fashion.

[...]

---

Originally by: Jager Petronovich

---

I find it interesting that What i said was possible and why it was bad was then echoed by Avon as something the devs created then scrapped.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

All in all, its not an easy choice to make regarding what should and shouldn't be allowed.

---

Originally by: Schani Kratnorr

---

*text snipped to conserve space*

---

Originally by: Schani Kratnorr

---

Originally by: Schani Kratnorr

---

*text snipped to conserve space*

---

So basically you dont have to play the game yourself any more?

---

Originally by: Erotic Irony

---

This thread just confirms how dim witted and self-absorbed the eve community is in confronting the substance of Guomindong's claims.
Stay in school.

---