| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Benny Ohu
The Lazy Dragoons
True Apathy
20
   |
Posted - 2012.03.24 09:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Logging_out
"Please note that if a player logs out of the game without an aggression timer/PvP logout timer and is shot at or aggressed in other ways before his ship disappears from space, he will not be given an aggression timer (unless the player logs in again within 15 minutes), which in turn leads to his ship disappearing exactly one minute after the time which he logged out of the game. The ship will still take damage as normal however, so if you are packing enough firepower to destroy the ship before the one minute timer is over, it will be destroyed. "
So yeah, working as intended, I guess. I suggest bringing more lazorz |
Benny Ohu
The Lazy Dragoons
True Apathy
20
|
Posted - 2012.03.24 09:51:00 -
[2] - Quote
So how would you fix it so that the mechanic doesn't screw over Joe Average, who has to log his BS off now (in space) to get to work in the morning?
At least you can't log out from combat any more.
I agree this freighter being able to log off to avoid the OP is a bit dumb. I do not think he logged off before loading the system, though, just while he was under cloak. (Do these ships cloak after jumping, like subcaps?) |
Benny Ohu
The Lazy Dragoons
True Apathy
21
|
Posted - 2012.03.24 10:50:00 -
[3] - Quote
Spectre80 wrote:
you are jus full oft fail. 10 tornados suicidegank freighters in higsec...
Yeah, it turns out, like, in lowsec, right, you know, in a real fight, or on a gate, you need this thing, right, called tanking, and if you're moving around, right, like these guys, like, you need, like, not a battleship, because it's slow as arse, like. |
Benny Ohu
The Lazy Dragoons
True Apathy
22
|
Posted - 2012.03.24 12:08:00 -
[4] - Quote
Spectre80 wrote:oh. cripes im sure all of them 10+ tornados would get instapopped by lowsec gateguns in that time of 15 seconds it takes to gank that freighter (really?). or maybe they can do that allready in highsec in that same time sacrificing all the ships at same time but still getting the kill?
This wasn't a suicide gank, I get the idea it was a bit more of a roam. A target was found and a tarp set with the ships they had? (Is this right?)
Those saying the pirates were not doing it right, from what I gather it was not your standard gatecamp because the pirates had to outsmart the scout.
Regardless of that, the point is, if a freighter pilot is dumb enough to jump into a lowsec camp (or the pirates tarp him somehow), should the freighter simply be able to see them from cloak and say, "well if I just log out I have a good chance of surviving"?
This is exactly the sort of thing the 15-minute timer was implemented to stop.
|
Benny Ohu
The Lazy Dragoons
True Apathy
24
|
Posted - 2012.03.24 15:40:00 -
[5] - Quote
RougeOperator wrote:
No F that. Kill the 1 min despawn. Its 15 min or nothing.
No, this is a bit too far, even if the gatecloak/logoff is stupid |
Benny Ohu
The Lazy Dragoons
True Apathy
24
|
Posted - 2012.03.25 14:10:00 -
[6] - Quote
Kyn Kailata wrote:as someone already pointed out... why didnt you simply wait until he decloaked before you uncloaked your redeemer and pointed him? he would have gotten aggresion that way..
He shouldn't have to. That's the point here.
Logging off to save your ship is something CCP has been trying to stop. The freighter wasn't aggressed yet, no, but the fact that he logged off (assuming it wasn't a d/c here of course) shows that the pilot knew he was tarped. He didn't evade the tarp through any mechanic that was designed to let him evade it - he evaded the tarp through a mechanic designed for something else entirely, something not actually related to gameplay. Just because the logoff mechanic allows for this doesn't mean it should.
The burden should not be upon the pirates to find a workaround because someone else was abusing the game.
Bluh, but how would you prevent abuse like that, and protect people who genuinely disconnected or needed to walk the dog, at the same time? I don't know :( |
Benny Ohu
The Lazy Dragoons
True Apathy
25
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 14:26:00 -
[7] - Quote
NightmareX wrote:
Ehm, so just because it's an exploit to you, it is an exploit to CCP to even when they havent said a single word about being an exploit?
And the fact that this mechanic have been like this for ages (yes i know how most of the game mechanics works since i have been playing EVE since early 2004), it would absolutely have been decleared an exploit a long long time ago IF this had been an exploit since this kind of things about the log off mechanics was being talked about many many times earlier until CCP changed it and everyone was happy about it.
And if someone like you would take that as an exploit long time ago, then why would no one declear that as an exploit earlier when it's so obvious by you that it's an exploit now?
Do you really think that you are the only one to know how those mechanics works just out of the blue sky?
Why would no one else declear this as an exploit earlier when it's pretty easy to understand the whole mechanics behind all of this?
EDIT: And the fact that you compare the log off mechanics with the web tactic that prevents us from warping out is kinda funny. Because when someone does the web exploit, the targets can't do a damn thing to prevent them from dying, while a freighter that logs off in low sec before he gets agressed doesn't prevent you from killing it at all, for 1 minute that is.
All it prevents you from is to kill it if you have to few DPS ships available in that 1 minute moment.
So at the end of the day, bring more DPS ships so no freighters can get away.
Is that so hard?
The fact that the mechanic exists as it does does not therefore mean use of it in this way is not an exploit. It's not hard to imagine a case where something is unfair, but hasn't been brought to CCP's attention. A dev has said they will look at it, which indicates it may be an exploit.
I'll say again, CCP doesn't appear to like it when people log off to save their ships when tarped, and has included mechanics to prevent players from doing so. I believe the "JUST BRING MORE DPS NOOB" argument was used in regards to Titans logging out as well. |
Benny Ohu
The Lazy Dragoons
True Apathy
27
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 15:07:00 -
[8] - Quote
NightmareX wrote:
Kinda funny that it would gets into CCP's attention now just because of this topic?
I'm pretty sure that this would be taken up ages ago if it had been such a problem.
And if the titan logs off before he gets an aggression, then he have no aggression and SHOULD disapear after one minute. It's that simple.
Yes. This topic brought it to their attention. That was my point.
You misunderstand. Titans were able to log off under aggression and would always disappear after 15 minutes. This was abused by Titan owners to save their Titans when they were trapped and had a chance to live through those 15 minutes. So basically the same thing as this freighter/gatecloak logoffski but with supercaps. This was deemed unfair, and changed so that it is no longer possible to log off a Titan under aggression to save it. |
Benny Ohu
The Lazy Dragoons
True Apathy
27
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 15:38:00 -
[9] - Quote
NightmareX wrote:Simi Kusoni wrote:So you mean no one was smart enough to bring it up to CCP's attention before?
I mean, come on, use your brain. If this had been such a problem, this would be taken up to CCP's attention ages ago. It has been raised, countless times, in the features and ideas discussion section. Also, CCP if you haven't noticed ignore some things because they're simply tricky to fix. They tend to get round to it only after a fuss is kicked up about it. Sometimes that takes a while.
All I can say is what I have said. Just because the feature is here does not mean it is working entirely as intended. Just because it hasn't been fixed doesn't mean it shouldn't be. Similar features have been changed recently and maybe this one needs reconsideration.
Further arguments made along this line would be a bit useless, for or against the feature, I think.
Having all ships last fifteen minutes without aggro would be crazy, yeah. |
Benny Ohu
The Lazy Dragoons
True Apathy
44
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 06:37:00 -
[10] - Quote
Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:
Oh...I am sorry. I didn't realize that you had used your psychic powers to discover this information! Amazing! So we now know for a fact that he did not disconnect but deliberately logged off of his account when he realized there was a gate camp on the other side. Well now...based on your psychic intuition I think we should have CCP correct this greivous error! Get on this NOW CCP!
Swoosh. Disconnects are not the problem here, we're talking about the possibility of people logging off to unfairly save their ships from being destroyed. The specifics of the situation in the OP are unimportant.
Quote:
Risk free? Really? So in that vid they didn't almost kill the ship before it dissapeared? I must have just hallucinated that one. I guess it is also impossible for the attackers to continue to camp the gate and wait for him to log back on?
Risk free my hairy ass. Bring more DPS next time. Stop blaming CCP for your shortcomings.
Remember that in any 'normal' situation, one hurricane fitted with tackle would be able to kill a freighter. This use of the logoff changes it from a normal situation to a potential exploit where the freighter has the unfair advantage of disappearing into thin air (uh, void) after a minute. To put it differently, failing to bring enough DPS to kill a freighter in one minute is not actually a shortcoming of the pirates, it's the freighter pilot who is taking advantage of a game mechanic that was not designed to 'protect' spaceships.
As I have said before, I do not think the pirates should have to find a workaround for someone else playing unfairly. |
Benny Ohu
The Lazy Dragoons
True Apathy
44
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 02:58:00 -
[11] - Quote
CCP Goliath wrote:We have all of the opinions and information that we need at this point, so I would urge you all to focus your energies elsewhere pending a response.
Guys I'm not sure but I think we were just politely told to shut up :D |
Benny Ohu
The Lazy Dragoons
True Apathy
103
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 15:42:00 -
[12] - Quote
Who bumped this thread?
For those too stupid to understand, just the fact that the OP was clearly posting because he'd wanted the KM doesn't mean this usage of the logoff mechanic isn't unfair
CCP Goliath said they had a look at it and I assume they had a look at it
Now stop posting in this ancient thread that's already far done with for the love of God |
| |
|