Originally by: Khrillian

---

In FOUR EASY STEPS!

1) get a disposable alt via a second account or a demo account in a second machine.
2) fly him to your mining ship
3) have him shoot your mining ship
4) Concord spawns and will now stick around as your personal mining op suicide ganking defense fleet. This certainly beats CONCORD's regular response time.
(5) (Optional) After your alt's timer goes away, repeat as needed.

Just a little suggestion. Maybe this will cut down on the number of whine threads?

---

Originally by: Cuis1nart

---

Originally by: Khrillian

---

In FOUR EASY STEPS!

1) get a disposable alt via a second account or a demo account in a second machine.
2) fly him to your mining ship
3) have him shoot your mining ship
4) Concord spawns and will now stick around as your personal mining op suicide ganking defense fleet. This certainly beats CONCORD's regular response time.
(5) (Optional) After your alt's timer goes away, repeat as needed.

Just a little suggestion. Maybe this will cut down on the number of whine threads?

---

What do you do when the alt's security status goes below -2?

---

Quote:

---

3) have him shoot your mining ship

---

Originally by: Mister Cuddles

---

I can swear i've seen at least four threads using this "idea" today. CCP classifies it as an exploit, because CONCORD stays in the belt for far longer than needed.

---

Originally by: Torfi

---

There's alot. That can be done. With.. corpses

---

Originally by: Oveur

---

---

Originally by: Cuis1nart

---

Originally by: Khrillian

---

In FOUR EASY STEPS!

1) get a disposable alt via a second account or a demo account in a second machine.
2) fly him to your mining ship
3) have him shoot your mining ship
4) Concord spawns and will now stick around as your personal mining op suicide ganking defense fleet. This certainly beats CONCORD's regular response time.
(5) (Optional) After your alt's timer goes away, repeat as needed.

Just a little suggestion. Maybe this will cut down on the number of whine threads?

---

What do you do when the alt's security status goes below -2?

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Using a displosable alt to bypass the standing penalties is classed as an exploit. If you do this, then delete the alt when it hits -2 and create another, you're avoidning the consequences of your actions, and as such it's an exploit.

---

Originally by: Viqtoria

---

An old concord spawn will instantly gank anyone getting a GCC timer infront of them. And yes, it works.

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Using a displosable alt to bypass the standing penalties is classed as an exploit. If you do this, then delete the alt when it hits -2 and create another, you're avoidning the consequences of your actions, and as such it's an exploit.

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Using a displosable alt to bypass the standing penalties is classed as an exploit. If you do this, then delete the alt when it hits -2 and create another, you're avoidning the consequences of your actions, and as such it's an exploit.

---

Originally by: syphurous

---

Way to create lag, hope you get petitioned.

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Using a displosable alt to bypass the standing penalties is classed as an exploit. If you do this, then delete the alt when it hits -2 and create another, you're avoidning the consequences of your actions, and as such it's an exploit.

---

Originally by: Khrillian

---

In FOUR EASY STEPS!

1) get a disposable alt via a second account or a demo account in a second machine.
2) fly him to your mining ship
3) have him shoot your mining ship
4) Concord spawns and will now stick around as your personal mining op suicide ganking defense fleet. This certainly beats CONCORD's regular response time.
(5) (Optional) After your alt's timer goes away, repeat as needed.

Just a little suggestion. Maybe this will cut down on the number of whine threads?

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Using a displosable alt to bypass the standing penalties is classed as an exploit. If you do this, then delete the alt when it hits -2 and create another, you're avoidning the consequences of your actions, and as such it's an exploit.

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Using a displosable alt to bypass the standing penalties is classed as an exploit. If you do this, then delete the alt when it hits -2 and create another, you're avoidning the consequences of your actions, and as such it's an exploit.

---

Quote:

---

Please note that we only consider deleting characters as an exploit when the following two factors are met: 1) The character was created for suicide ganking only. 2) The player did the trick for repeated times after being confirmed in his account logs.

---

Originally by: Mister Cuddles

---

I can swear i've seen at least four threads using this "idea" today. CCP classifies it as an exploit, because CONCORD stays in the belt for far longer than needed.

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Using a displosable alt to bypass the standing penalties is classed as an exploit. If you do this, then delete the alt when it hits -2 and create another, you're avoidning the consequences of your actions, and as such it's an exploit.

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

stuff

How about getting some players to help you mine in safety?

---

Originally by: Alexios Komnenos

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Using a displosable alt to bypass the standing penalties is classed as an exploit. If you do this, then delete the alt when it hits -2 and create another, you're avoidning the consequences of your actions, and as such it's an exploit.

---

If that's the case, then why isn't using "disposable" ships then recovering the cost via insurance payouts by design when losing the ship ON PURPOSE to CONCORD not an equal exploit?

Sorry, not buying what you are selling.

---

Originally by: Alexios Komnenos

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Using a displosable alt to bypass the standing penalties is classed as an exploit. If you do this, then delete the alt when it hits -2 and create another, you're avoidning the consequences of your actions, and as such it's an exploit.

---

If that's the case, then why isn't using "disposable" ships then recovering the cost via insurance payouts by design when losing the ship ON PURPOSE to CONCORD not an equal exploit?

Sorry, not buying what you are selling.

---

Originally by: Kagura Nikon

---

Originally by: Alexios Komnenos

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Using a displosable alt to bypass the standing penalties is classed as an exploit. If you do this, then delete the alt when it hits -2 and create another, you're avoidning the consequences of your actions, and as such it's an exploit.

---

If that's the case, then why isn't using "disposable" ships then recovering the cost via insurance payouts by design when losing the ship ON PURPOSE to CONCORD not an equal exploit?

Sorry, not buying what you are selling.

---

How about.. what you buy or not does not matter. CCp defines what they accept or not in their game. If they say that running 3 times counterclockwise around a veldspar roid then 2 times clockwise around a jet can is an explit. Then it is. If you buy the logic or not, does not matter.

---

Originally by: Alexios Komnenos

---

If that's the case, then why isn't using "disposable" ships then recovering the cost via insurance payouts by design when losing the ship ON PURPOSE to CONCORD not an equal exploit?

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Alexios Komnenos

---

If that's the case, then why isn't using "disposable" ships then recovering the cost via insurance payouts by design when losing the ship ON PURPOSE to CONCORD not an equal exploit?

---

Because those are not disposable û you already know this since you put the word in quotation marks.

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Because they still get the security penalty.

However @ ccp, telling to get players to protect your mining op in high sec is a joke, right? What are they supposed to do vs suicide gankers? Only thing that would work is having a logistics ship in same belt as you are mining all the time. Then it would be handier to mine in low sec, then at least you can kill attackers before they destroyed the mining ship.

---

Originally by: Sergeant Spot

---

Edited by: Sergeant Spot on 10/07/2008 12:52:01

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Because they still get the security penalty.

However @ ccp, telling to get players to protect your mining op in high sec is a joke, right? What are they supposed to do vs suicide gankers? Only thing that would work is having a logistics ship in same belt as you are mining all the time. Then it would be handier to mine in low sec, then at least you can kill attackers before they destroyed the mining ship.

---

Wrong

A logistics ship will rarely help.

Friendly PvPer wont help either.

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

The reasoning is that you're deliberately using free ships (noob frigates) and alts to bypass the risk and penalties incurred by angering CONCORD. The incurred penalties are ignored since there's no financial loss, and no meaningful security loss, since you would delete the character afterwards.

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

How does my reply differ from that you quoted?

The reasoning is that you're deliberately using free ships (noob frigates) and alts to bypass the risk and penalties incurred by angering CONCORD. The incurred penalties are ignored since there's no financial loss, and no meaningful security loss, since you would delete the character afterwards.

Of course, if you're willing to live with these penalties, and don't delete the offending character, then there's no problem, since it is working as intended (you lose your ship, become criminally flagged, and incur a security hit). Although no one will really like you since you're spawning CONCORD to cover your own money making schemes

How about getting some players to help you mine in safety?

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

How does my reply differ from that you quoted?

The reasoning is that you're deliberately using free ships (noob frigates) and alts to bypass the risk and penalties incurred by angering CONCORD. The incurred penalties are ignored since there's no financial loss, and no meaningful security loss, since you would delete the character afterwards.

Of course, if you're willing to live with these penalties, and don't delete the offending character, then there's no problem, since it is working as intended (you lose your ship, become criminally flagged, and incur a security hit). Although no one will really like you since you're spawning CONCORD to cover your own money making schemes

How about getting some players to help you mine in safety?

---

Originally by: Khrillian

---

In FOUR EASY STEPS!

1) get a disposable alt via a second account or a demo account in a second machine.
2) fly him to your mining ship
3) have him shoot your mining ship
4) Concord spawns and will now stick around as your personal mining op suicide ganking defense fleet. This certainly beats CONCORD's regular response time.
(5) (Optional) After your alt's timer goes away, repeat as needed.

Just a little suggestion. Maybe this will cut down on the number of whine threads?

---

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Using a displosable alt to bypass the standing penalties is classed as an exploit. If you do this, then delete the alt when it hits -2 and create another, you're avoidning the consequences of your actions, and as such it's an exploit.

---

Please explain this reply then:

Quote:

---

Please note that we only consider deleting characters as an exploit when the following two factors are met: 1) The character was created for suicide ganking only. 2) The player did the trick for repeated times after being confirmed in his account logs.

---

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

How does my reply differ from that you quoted?

The reasoning is that you're deliberately using free ships (noob frigates) and alts to bypass the risk and penalties incurred by angering CONCORD. The incurred penalties are ignored since there's no financial loss, and no meaningful security loss, since you would delete the character afterwards.

Of course, if you're willing to live with these penalties, and don't delete the offending character, then there's no problem, since it is working as intended (you lose your ship, become criminally flagged, and incur a security hit). Although no one will really like you since you're spawning CONCORD to cover your own money making schemes

How about getting some players to help you mine in safety?

---

Originally by: Alexios Komnenos

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Using a displosable alt to bypass the standing penalties is classed as an exploit. If you do this, then delete the alt when it hits -2 and create another, you're avoidning the consequences of your actions, and as such it's an exploit.

---

If that's the case, then why isn't using "disposable" ships then recovering the cost via insurance payouts by design when losing the ship ON PURPOSE to CONCORD not an equal exploit?

Sorry, not buying what you are selling.

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

How does my reply differ from that you quoted?

The reasoning is that you're deliberately using free ships (noob frigates) and alts to bypass the risk and penalties incurred by angering CONCORD. The incurred penalties are ignored since there's no financial loss, and no meaningful security loss, since you would delete the character afterwards.

Of course, if you're willing to live with these penalties, and don't delete the offending character, then there's no problem, since it is working as intended (you lose your ship, become criminally flagged, and incur a security hit). Although no one will really like you since you're spawning CONCORD to cover your own money making schemes

How about getting some players to help you mine in safety?

---

Originally by: GM Grimmi

---

Edited by: GM Grimmi on 10/07/2008 17:21:46
Edited by: GM Grimmi on 10/07/2008 17:18:08
Hi everybody,

Our stance towards recycling "disposable alts" for purposes such as suicide ganking or summoning CONCORD for bodyguard duty is that it is an exploit, clear and simple. Using "disposable ships" is not seen as an exploit since all ships ARE disposable, when properly insured.

Exploits are the abuse of game mechanics in ways that were not intended or foreseen in order to gain unfair advantages over others. CCP has to date made arrangements to fix such issues as fast as possible. This, however, takes time and resources to sort out and the proper and perfectly logical solution is to prohibit whatever abuse of game mechanics in question until said issue is fixed.

While some unintended uses of game mechanics may not be classed as exploits they may still be subject to re-design or tuning and we assure you that CCP is working hard on fixing problems with game mechanics as deemed appropriate.

That is really the only straight answer we are able to give you guys on the contents of this thread at this time. There are so many possible scenarios and cases must be evaluated and handled on an individual basis and we simply have to deal with problems as they crop up. The petition system is the way to go about reporting possible issues that may require GM/dev attention so please be sure to file a petition if you think there is a problem. We will then investigate the issue and take the appropriate action.


GM Grimmi
Lead Game Master

---

Quote:

---

Our stance towards recycling "disposable alts" for purposes such as suicide ganking or summoning CONCORD for bodyguard duty is that it is an exploit, clear and simple.

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

How does my reply differ from that you quoted?

The reasoning is that you're deliberately using free ships (noob frigates) and alts to bypass the risk and penalties incurred by angering CONCORD. The incurred penalties are ignored since there's no financial loss, and no meaningful security loss, since you would delete the character afterwards.

Of course, if you're willing to live with these penalties, and don't delete the offending character, then there's no problem, since it is working as intended (you lose your ship, become criminally flagged, and incur a security hit). Although no one will really like you since you're spawning CONCORD to cover your own money making schemes

How about getting some players to help you mine in safety?

---

Originally by: Alexios Komnenos

---

Edited by: Alexios Komnenos on 10/07/2008 12:47:46

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Alexios Komnenos

---

If that's the case, then why isn't using "disposable" ships then recovering the cost via insurance payouts by design when losing the ship ON PURPOSE to CONCORD not an equal exploit?

---

Because those are not disposable û you already know this since you put the word in quotation marks.

---

You can in many cases insure a caracal (the most commonly used suicide ship because of their cheap price and high volley) for more than it costs to replace (including fittings) because of how cheaply they can be bought or made.

So, effectively suiciding with them in the way that it's done is really no different than doing the same thing in an ibis. It's the misuse of a game mechanic.

Insurance payouts for low end ships in general are way too high. I'm sure they are that way for a reason, ie, to allow new players to make mistakes and still be able to get back into their ship. Why CCP doesn't do the obvious and take away insurance payments for actions involving CONCORD, which would balance the situation instead of papering over it I'll never know.

---

Originally by: Phintaiss

---

After reading CCP's posts in this, It's obvious that killing a hauler or miner before concord can kill them is an exploit of the game mechanics. Why have concord at all, it's become so easy.

I see nothing wrong with fighting one exploit with another exploit.

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Using a displosable alt to bypass the standing penalties is classed as an exploit. If you do this, then delete the alt when it hits -2 and create another, you're avoidning the consequences of your actions, and as such it's an exploit.

---

Originally by: mishkof

---

This is a pretty good thread. Very interesting perspective from both sides.

CCP your stance on this is peculiar, but your company as a whole is so not unexpected.

Good read.

---

Originally by: Phintaiss

---

I have a better answer, remove the ganking in empire altogether, there's plenty of room for this nonsense in 0.0 or low sec. That would cure all the problem for both CCP and the players.

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

How does my reply differ from that you quoted?

The reasoning is that you're deliberately using free ships (noob frigates) and alts to bypass the risk and penalties incurred by angering CONCORD. The incurred penalties are ignored since there's no financial loss, and no meaningful security loss, since you would delete the character afterwards.

Of course, if you're willing to live with these penalties, and don't delete the offending character, then there's no problem, since it is working as intended (you lose your ship, become criminally flagged, and incur a security hit). Although no one will really like you since you're spawning CONCORD to cover your own money making schemes

How about getting some players to help you mine in safety?

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Ah I see the misunderstanding; I was attempting to state that if you use an alt for committing illegal acts (illegal in the sense that CONCORD kicks your ass for it) and then recycle them as a method to avoid the repercussions, you are committing an exploit. It's the avoidance of these penalties that is the problem.

I hope this clarifies my earlier statement somewhat.

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

How about getting some players to help you mine in safety?

---

Originally by: Volarius

---

What I would like to know is at which point in time CCP considers the deleting an exploit.

It is worrying to see such a broad "illegal in the sense that CONCORD kicks your ass for it" and deleting the char afterwards is an exploit. Because what if you do use an alt (intentionally or not) to commit such crimes and a while later delete the char because you need the slot.

How long would you have to wait with the deletion of such a char before it is no longer considered an exploit?

Or are you stuck with the occupied char slot forever?

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

I pod people because there's money to be made in selling tears.

---

Originally by: Volarius

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

Ah I see the misunderstanding; I was attempting to state that if you use an alt for committing illegal acts (illegal in the sense that CONCORD kicks your ass for it) and then recycle them as a method to avoid the repercussions, you are committing an exploit. It's the avoidance of these penalties that is the problem.

I hope this clarifies my earlier statement somewhat.

---

What I would like to know is at which point in time CCP considers the deleting an exploit.

It is worrying to see such a broad "illegal in the sense that CONCORD kicks your ass for it" and deleting the char afterwards is an exploit. Because what if you do use an alt (intentionally or not) to commit such crimes and a while later delete the char because you need the slot.

How long would you have to wait with the deletion of such a char before it is no longer considered an exploit?

Or are you stuck with the occupied char slot forever?

---

Originally by: Catherine Bennet

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

How about getting some players to help you mine in safety?

---

What sort of laws does Iceland have about hallucinogenics, and does CCP really endorse using them during working hours?

In other words, what the hell are you smoking?

Do you seriously believe even for a second that there is a player in this game that will sit for hours in a belt to protect from a suicide gank that probably won't happen, and which he really can't prevent, anyway?

Sheesh.

Here's my suggestion to how to stop suicide ganking: Stop mining. It's what the suiciders want, it's what CCP apparently wants.
Just stop. Apparently the galaxy doesn't need Tritanium. Arrange a month of no mining, then listen to butch yarr PvPers come crying to the forums when ship prices suddenly double while supplies drop to a quarter of normal, or disappear altogether.

---

Originally by: Guillight BLue

---

But you know. If they start suicide ganking miners. We can always start mining in our Battleships again and fill them up with T2 drones! Let them try gank us then :P

---

Originally by: Farrqua

---

Originally by: Guillight BLue

---

But you know. If they start suicide ganking miners. We can always start mining in our Battleships again and fill them up with T2 drones! Let them try gank us then :P

---

Your kidding right? I mean seriuosly you are trying to make a joke....right?

---

Originally by: Drenan

---

Atropos

Atropos was the oldest of the Three Fates, and was known as the "inflexible" or "inevitable." It was Atropos who chose the mechanism of death and ended the life of each mortal by cutting their thread with her "abhorred shears."

She worked along with her sisters Clotho, who spun the thread, and Lachesis, who measured the length. Her origin, along with the other two fates, is uncertain, although some called them the daughters of the night.

It is clear, however, that at a certain period they ceased to be only concerned with death and also became those powers who decided what may happen to individuals.

Although Zeus was the chief Greek god and their father, he was still subject to the decisions of the Fates, and thus the executor of destiny rather than its source. According to Hesiod's Theogony, Atropos and her sisters (Clotho and Lachesis) were the daughters of Nyx (Night).

---

Originally by: GM Grimmi

---

...summoning CONCORD for bodyguard duty is that it is an exploit, clear and simple. .

The petition system is the way to go...

GM Grimmi
Lead Game Master

---

Originally by: Dav Varan

---

So a defenceless nubster finds a way of actually getting Concord to do there job of preventing crime in high sec and ccp call it an exploit , lulz.

You are making me a sad panda today ccp.

Something I have noticed recently when I log in.
The amount of active players on server doesnt seem to be increasing at the rate it once was.
What is happening to all the new players ?
Are they getting suicided in "high sec" and then not bothering to renew there subs ?

---

Originally by: Phintaiss

---

After reading CCP's posts in this, It's obvious that killing a hauler or miner before concord can kill them is an exploit of the game mechanics. Why have concord at all, it's become so easy.

I see nothing wrong with fighting one exploit with another exploit.

---

Originally by: Phintaiss

---

Who cares about insurance payouts. It has nothing to do with loosing a 50 million isk ship and gathering 300 million in loot from the hauler you just ganked. Who gives a dam about insurance.

---

Originally by: dust queen

---

the devs have spoken (again). this issue has been hashed, re-hashed, and re-re-hashed so many times it's not even funny. the system is quite good as it stands, and has many checks and balances to make it interesting for both sides. if you sit down and look at the whole picture of gankers vs. industrialists, you'll see that the system is balanced very very well.

suicide gankers don't automatically know who is worth ganking and who isn't. they aren't perma-camping the gates in all the trade hubs 23/7. they aren't completely unavoidable (they're quite easy to avoid, actually). it takes a lot of skilled effort, teamwork, coordination, and luck to come across worthwhile targets to suicide-gank and pull it off, and there's always the risk that you won't successfully do so.

there are many, many things you can do to avoid being suicide-ganked. you take a risk when you carry any high-value items, and you present yourself as a worthwhile target every time you choose not to take measures to avoid being ganked.

i've mined high-sec many times, and i've never had to deal with so much as a can-flipper.

---

Originally by: Shanur

---

Originally by: Volarius

---

What I would like to know is at which point in time CCP considers the deleting an exploit.

It is worrying to see such a broad "illegal in the sense that CONCORD kicks your ass for it" and deleting the char afterwards is an exploit. Because what if you do use an alt (intentionally or not) to commit such crimes and a while later delete the char because you need the slot.

How long would you have to wait with the deletion of such a char before it is no longer considered an exploit?

Or are you stuck with the occupied char slot forever?

---

I don't think it is a matter of time, but one of intent. If you eventually throw away a pirating alt, especially if the character you put in its place is used for something other than suicide ganking, like FW or even a plain hauling/trading alt, that should not be a problem.

But if you toss away an alt that is no longer welcome in high sec, and use the alt you put in its place for the exact same purpose you used the first character for, you made it clear that you only recycled to reset the character's security standing. THAT is when you are exploiting.

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

How does my reply differ from that you quoted?

The reasoning is that you're deliberately using free ships (noob frigates) and alts to bypass the risk and penalties incurred by angering CONCORD. The incurred penalties are ignored since there's no financial loss, and no meaningful security loss, since you would delete the character afterwards.

Of course, if you're willing to live with these penalties, and don't delete the offending character, then there's no problem, since it is working as intended (you lose your ship, become criminally flagged, and incur a security hit). Although no one will really like you since you're spawning CONCORD to cover your own money making schemes

How about getting some players to help you mine in safety?

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

How does my reply differ from that you quoted?

The reasoning is that you're deliberately using free ships (noob frigates) and alts to bypass the risk and penalties incurred by angering CONCORD. The incurred penalties are ignored since there's no financial loss, and no meaningful security loss, since you would delete the character afterwards.

Of course, if you're willing to live with these penalties, and don't delete the offending character, then there's no problem, since it is working as intended (you lose your ship, become criminally flagged, and incur a security hit). Although no one will really like you since you're spawning CONCORD to cover your own money making schemes

How about getting some players to help you mine in safety?

---

Originally by: GM Grimmi

---

Edited by: GM Grimmi on 10/07/2008 17:21:46
Edited by: GM Grimmi on 10/07/2008 17:18:08
Hi everybody,

Our stance towards recycling "disposable alts" for purposes such as suicide ganking or summoning CONCORD for bodyguard duty is that it is an exploit, clear and simple. Using "disposable ships" is not seen as an exploit since all ships ARE disposable, when properly insured.

Exploits are the abuse of game mechanics in ways that were not intended or foreseen in order to gain unfair advantages over others. CCP has to date made arrangements to fix such issues as fast as possible. This, however, takes time and resources to sort out and the proper and perfectly logical solution is to prohibit whatever abuse of game mechanics in question until said issue is fixed.

While some unintended uses of game mechanics may not be classed as exploits they may still be subject to re-design or tuning and we assure you that CCP is working hard on fixing problems with game mechanics as deemed appropriate.

That is really the only straight answer we are able to give you guys on the contents of this thread at this time. There are so many possible scenarios and cases must be evaluated and handled on an individual basis and we simply have to deal with problems as they crop up. The petition system is the way to go about reporting possible issues that may require GM/dev attention so please be sure to file a petition if you think there is a problem. We will then investigate the issue and take the appropriate action.


GM Grimmi
Lead Game Master

---

Originally by: Garia666

---

Edited by: Garia666 on 18/07/2008 21:15:00

Originally by: GM Grimmi

---

Edited by: GM Grimmi on 10/07/2008 17:21:46
Edited by: GM Grimmi on 10/07/2008 17:18:08
Hi everybody,

Our stance towards recycling "disposable alts" for purposes such as suicide ganking or summoning CONCORD for bodyguard duty is that it is an exploit, clear and simple. Using "disposable ships" is not seen as an exploit since all ships ARE disposable, when properly insured.

Exploits are the abuse of game mechanics in ways that were not intended or foreseen in order to gain unfair advantages over others. CCP has to date made arrangements to fix such issues as fast as possible. This, however, takes time and resources to sort out and the proper and perfectly logical solution is to prohibit whatever abuse of game mechanics in question until said issue is fixed.

While some unintended uses of game mechanics may not be classed as exploits they may still be subject to re-design or tuning and we assure you that CCP is working hard on fixing problems with game mechanics as deemed appropriate.

That is really the only straight answer we are able to give you guys on the contents of this thread at this time. There are so many possible scenarios and cases must be evaluated and handled on an individual basis and we simply have to deal with problems as they crop up. The petition system is the way to go about reporting possible issues that may require GM/dev attention so please be sure to file a petition if you think there is a problem. We will then investigate the issue and take the appropriate action.


GM Grimmi
Lead Game Master

---

Im sorry??, its just fine you have your 6 bill ship ganked by suicide gankers. without having any chance at all to defend your self.
Or without concord defending you..

And this is called an exploit?

Why not let concord pop the can you leave behind. or flag it as ilegal goods so its a pain to get it out of high security..

Its no fun for people if they cant defend them selfs.. i think its very inventive to do such athing but hey..

---

Originally by: Garia666

---

Edited by: Garia666 on 18/07/2008 21:15:00

Originally by: GM Grimmi

---

Edited by: GM Grimmi on 10/07/2008 17:21:46
Edited by: GM Grimmi on 10/07/2008 17:18:08
Hi everybody,

Our stance towards recycling "disposable alts" for purposes such as suicide ganking or summoning CONCORD for bodyguard duty is that it is an exploit, clear and simple. Using "disposable ships" is not seen as an exploit since all ships ARE disposable, when properly insured.

Exploits are the abuse of game mechanics in ways that were not intended or foreseen in order to gain unfair advantages over others. CCP has to date made arrangements to fix such issues as fast as possible. This, however, takes time and resources to sort out and the proper and perfectly logical solution is to prohibit whatever abuse of game mechanics in question until said issue is fixed.

While some unintended uses of game mechanics may not be classed as exploits they may still be subject to re-design or tuning and we assure you that CCP is working hard on fixing problems with game mechanics as deemed appropriate.

That is really the only straight answer we are able to give you guys on the contents of this thread at this time. There are so many possible scenarios and cases must be evaluated and handled on an individual basis and we simply have to deal with problems as they crop up. The petition system is the way to go about reporting possible issues that may require GM/dev attention so please be sure to file a petition if you think there is a problem. We will then investigate the issue and take the appropriate action.


GM Grimmi
Lead Game Master

---

Im sorry??, its just fine you have your 6 bill ship ganked by suicide gankers. without having any chance at all to defend your self.
Or without concord defending you..

And this is called an exploit?

Why not let concord pop the can you leave behind. or flag it as ilegal goods so its a pain to get it out of high security..

Its no fun for people if they cant defend them selfs.. i think its very inventive to do such athing but hey..

---