|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 24 post(s) |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
979
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:05:00 -
[1] - Quote
Pisov viet wrote: Obviously it's not about belts or static complexs in highsec, as both of these only contains frigates, and the income from these is ridiculous. I'd be surprised if you'd get 10m a day killing every frigates of a static complexs.
Obviously you haven't found the ones that have battleships in them.
Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
979
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
Pisov viet wrote:War Kitten wrote:Pisov viet wrote: Obviously it's not about belts or static complexs in highsec, as both of these only contains frigates, and the income from these is ridiculous. I'd be surprised if you'd get 10m a day killing every frigates of a static complexs.
Obviously you haven't found the ones that have battleships in them. Then MAYBE the problem is CCP placing NPC battleships to kill in highsec. I dont really enjoy reading that CCP starts deciding which way of killing NPCs is allowed and which one isnt.
Agreed. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
979
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:19:00 -
[3] - Quote
Fozzy Dorsai wrote:We really need to get some clarification on this from CCP. Perhaps this is some special case situation, but since I do not do complexes the differentiation isn't obvious to me. It just seems to me that sitting my Rattlesnake in a mission, letting the little sentries clean up a room, and going to the kitchen to get a bite to eat is now a banned activity as I am generating income without being at the game. And as has been pointed out, if you can tank the rats, then you can just find a large roid, point you laser at it, hit a button and do AFK mining and then starting a load of laundry is again generating income without being at the game. While I doubt either of these activities are on the ban list, I'd really like to see a blue post saying so.
You're doing a particular mission AFK - that's been pretty normal for Rattlesnakes/Domis/Ishtars for sometime now.
The difference is that your mission will end, not continually respawn and make isk for hours on end. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
986
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:11:00 -
[4] - Quote
Pak Narhoo wrote:Reading skill are not at 5 for a lot of posters here.
/me sad....
On the other hand, thick-skull 5 and idiot 6 seems to be common enough.
People see the letters AFK and go all apeshit thinking it applies to every possible way to be AFK.
Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
986
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:13:00 -
[5] - Quote
Damion Rayne wrote:Lucas Quaan wrote:Damion Rayne wrote:I run plexes in 0.0 when I was in Test and Dark Rising and you are now effectively telling me that running those plexs with a drone boat, and going afk, is against the rules? It's not and you are an idiot for thinking so. You're an idiot for thinking it's wrong, I've got a child to take care of. You're telling me I'm not allowed to put out sentry drones, run a single plex afk, move to the next plex and do it again? What kinda fascist control crap is this? Well since i can't be at the key's 100% of my play time now, and Sreegs will ban me or something, If I walk away for 10 minuets, suppose I just stop logging in unless I can be at the keyboard for 6 hours straight. I'm sure my wife and 2 month old will enjoy my lack of being able to walk away from the computer. Ya know, because Id' rather net have "administrative action" taken against my account for walkign away for an hour.
I would just like to have one thing clarified...
Is this the character with which you go AFK on to do your plexing?
Inquiring locator agents want to know... Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
987
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:17:00 -
[6] - Quote
Fatbear wrote: That aside, this is a monstrous example of poor developer posting and mismanagement of information. Created a s**t-storm over a limited bug/exploit, rattling the cages of plenty of innocent/uninvolved players. Far better option would've been to just fix the sodding problem and not panic every drone using high-seccer into a meltdown.
I have to disagree.
For one, CCP Sreegs isn't a developer.
Secondly, if innocent drone users are having meltdowns because they mis-read a news item, perhaps they should spend some of their AFK drone time learning how to read. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
987
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:30:00 -
[7] - Quote
Damion Rayne wrote: I don't do afk plexing anymore, the last time I did was almost a year and a half ago when Dark was in TEST. Or however long ago it was, if you feel froggy, come to Vale. I've got plenty of guns and ammo with your name on it if you wanna be an internet badass and think I care.
I see.
So this whole news item didn't apply to you in the slightest, yet you felt the irresistible urge to fly off the handle for several posts just for funsies?
umadbro!
Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
988
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:44:00 -
[8] - Quote
Bubanni wrote: You could simply make it so sentry drones got abandond or disconnected after 1 hour or so... that would fix the problem completly (and if people found a way around that, then they were cheating)
Disconnecting drones after an hour would suck for POS shooting or assigning fighters long-term and would probably cause a real uproar instead of this parade of hotheads.
I'm pretty sure I read that CCP were looking at ways to fix the problem too, and that this was the warning not to do it.
But then, one would have to read the entire news item to catch that part. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
989
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:53:00 -
[9] - Quote
CARB0N FIBER wrote: I call bullshit! Yes those guys are asshats. But so are you, once again your banning people for playing the game. You're like the fat kid that changes the rules every time the game doesn't go your way. The Cartman of MMO's. Are you going to warn people when they enter plexes if they stay to long they'll be banned?
I don't think setting up your drone boat to make money all day while you go away and do something else is "playing the game".
You're like the angry kid that thinks rules are for other people and every rule ever written is out to get you.
...and yes, he is warning people like you said... go read the news item. It's a warning!
Derp
Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
989
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:00:00 -
[10] - Quote
CARB0N FIBER wrote:If we're not altering the game, we're not doing anything wrong.
CCP designed drones. CCP designed plexes. We pay to use them. CCP bans us for using them!
I just don't get how you can keep banning people for playing the game. This isn't the first and it wont be the last time time you pull somethingf like this.
Quick! Get back on the handle!
You keep flying off of it, and I don't think you know where you're going!
Here's your sign... |
|
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
994
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:18:00 -
[11] - Quote
Naomi Shana wrote:
Every single person who has ever walked away from their computer while running the game, for any length of time or reason, read your news article and said, "What?!"
Not so!
I go afk quite a lot - and I read the announcement and thought, "This should be good - there are lots of people who can't read beyond a 4th grade level and will make wild assumptions about this one."
*popcorn*
Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
996
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:27:00 -
[12] - Quote
SmashTech wrote:So instead of fixing the problem, which is infinitely spawning rats in highsec complexes, you wrote an algorithm to ban people who take advantage (in the same way that OTEC takes advantage, for example) of your lousy game design for their own profit.
This is such a great way to fix the problem.
Instead of fixing the complexes, you have now opened the door to any kind AFK moneymaking being labeled illegal and AFK profits being wrong (after you redesigned mining ships to function much better AFK).
Your brilliance shines like the light of a thousand suns.
LOL
The algorithm already existed to catch botters.
It revealed these people too and banned them.
They complained that they weren't botting.
CCP thought, "Oh hey, this should probably be fixed and specifically outlawed too since its like botting without a bot. Let's warn people and erase the bad mark on their permanent record."
CCP puts steps in motion to fix problem, makes announcement that this is now a Bad ThingGäó
Insert eleventy-hundred forum idiots who can't read but are good at shiptoasting.
There, now everyone should be caught up with the tl;dr version of events. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
997
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:41:00 -
[13] - Quote
Claire Voyant wrote:So Sreegs has stated that there exists an automated system that bans players if they are AFK and making a lot of money. Should I be worried?
No.
Given your name, I should think you'd see it coming first. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
998
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:06:00 -
[14] - Quote
Antal Jozsef wrote:I'm very disappointed CCP. Just wait a little bit and the forums will be filled up with requests(whines) to make other things you can do while being afk, to be made a bannable offense. AFK cloaking, AFK mining to name a few. Others have said it, but here it is again; instead of fixing, you choose banning, which is always a stupid and lazy solution, and it's not even going to work. People will find a way around it in a short time. You should be ashamed CCP...
edit: ... And this thing is around for ages, and you knew about it, and is this the best you could come up with?
You have failed to read the news item, failed to read the thread, and failed to even read CCP Sreegs' responses by clicking on the blue dev tags.
You should feel very bad about yourself and go sit in a corner for the next 15 minutes.
Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1000
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:15:00 -
[15] - Quote
Naomi Shana wrote:That boner, plus the plain old :CCP: knee-jerk heavy-handedness of "let's punish players for using what we've given them instead of addressing the code issue", has everyone concerned.
Except for the part where they said they're working on a way to fix the plexs that cause this issue, right?
Or is it more fun to pretend you didn't read that part so you can complain louder and look sillier? Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1000
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:23:00 -
[16] - Quote
Vera Algaert wrote:Ghost Frog wrote:You can't read. They are working on fixing it. UNTIL THEY'RE DONE FIXING IT, IT'S A BANNABLE OFFENSE.
they had about half a year (from the point where their false positives started to get discussed in GD) to fix it already, so what makes you think that they will actually take the hard route (digging through old & nasty code) instead of trying to keep the bandaid around for as long as possible?
I'd say the fact that they haven't implemented any of the quick and dirty half-baked suggestions that keep cropping up in this thread points to CCP digging through the old nasty code and looking for a way to genuinely improve it rather than slap a bandaid fix into the code.
Also - this probably isn't the highest priority in the world as far as programming time goes.
If CCP tells you "don't put your hand in the oven too long, you'll get burned", a reasonable human being ought to be able to understand and heed this warning until child-proof locks can be put on the oven door.
Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1001
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:38:00 -
[17] - Quote
Naomi Shana wrote:War Kitten wrote:Naomi Shana wrote:That boner, plus the plain old :CCP: knee-jerk heavy-handedness of "let's punish players for using what we've given them instead of addressing the code issue", has everyone concerned. Except for the part where they said they're working on a way to fix the plexs that cause this issue, right? Or is it more fun to pretend you didn't read that part so you can complain louder and look sillier? Damage control detected. CCP alt?
CCP Common Sense** - You caught me!
** - not really, afaik, there is no one in CCP with Common Sense ++
++ - with Common Sense as their nickname that is!
:)
Honestly, I'm not a CCP alt, never worked for CCP, and am totally not impersonating anyone in any shape or form. When I think they deserve a good bashing, I'll bash 'em. When I think CCP is doing it right and people on the forums are being idiots, I'll speak up then too.
This would be another one of the "then too" moments. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1003
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:45:00 -
[18] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:War Kitten wrote:Naomi Shana wrote:That boner, plus the plain old :CCP: knee-jerk heavy-handedness of "let's punish players for using what we've given them instead of addressing the code issue", has everyone concerned. Except for the part where they said they're working on a way to fix the plexs that cause this issue, right? Or is it more fun to pretend you didn't read that part so you can complain louder and look sillier? Most of what you've been claiming in this thread is completely disproven by the actual sequence of events at issue.
A challenge!
Accepted - where's your reference to the "actual sequence of events"? I'll take a look at your sources and gladly reconsider my standpoint. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1003
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:32:00 -
[19] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:War Kitten wrote: A challenge!
Accepted - where's your reference to the "actual sequence of events"? I'll take a look at your sources and gladly reconsider my standpoint.
I found out from one of the people who got the false positive. The sequence of events was they received an automatic botting infraction. They petitioned, describing precisely what they'd done and how no bots or macros were involved and explained this was a clear false positive. They were told (by team security) this was not a false positive: as they were making money afk they were enough like botting that it was the same as botting. Needless to say they felt this was...not correct, and continued to argue the position (and spread the word, so other people would go "what the **** is going on here"). Then, and only then, is where anyone not from Team Security got involved in order to bless the fait accompli that Team Security was now exercising control not over bots, but over things that Team Security decided were exploits. At no point before this is there any indication that GMs or game design was involved. To be honest there's not even any real indication they will be involved in the future: the false positive will simply now be declared to be enforcing the "no afking in a complex" rule as well that Team Security declared and enacted.
Regarding your bolded information above: If they petitioned, then GMs were involved.
This is still the order of events as I understand it too.
The rule, as you dubbed it, is misleading. They didn't declare "no afking in a complex". Go reread the news item.
I don't give a damn whether those particular few were deemed false-positives or not, but that seems to be your main point. Either way, false positives would appear to be low no matter which side you count these couple of people on. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1004
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:48:00 -
[20] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:[quote=War Kitten] And there was no GM intervention because GMs do not respond to petitions regarding botting bans: those are directly shunted to Security.
Ahh, I see this point then.
Do you feel that removing the ban and the strike against these detected players is unfair then? Were their pleas ignored? It doesn't seem so.
GMs may or may not have been involved up to this point, its hard to say. But I feel relatively safe in assuming that CCP Sreegs didn't just unilaterally decide what happened here. It's not a big secret, obviously, and someone else in CCP has to be aware of the ruling on this "form of play".
At some point there has to be a decision made as to what is allowable gameplay and what isn't. Arguing that the mechanics allowed for it, so it should be ok is the oldest and weakest argument there is. It wasn't intended, and it's been declared wrong and bad by the people that make the rules. The end.
Here's your sign... |
|
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1004
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:53:00 -
[21] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Suqq Madiq wrote:Since it's WAY easier for me to quote CCP to tell you where you're wrong, here you go: CCP Sreegs wrote:The activity itself falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within. CCP Sreegs wrote:Nothing has changed about our philosophy as regards what we are or aren't looking for behavior-wise. If you look like a bot and you act like a bot, chances are you'll be identified as a bot. It's really not that difficult a concept to wrap one's head around. Wrong. CCP admits that it is not a bot there. They admit they misidentified a non-botter as a botter: they then refuse to correct that mistake. It is the last part that is at issue here. Nobody, besides you and the algorithm, believes this player was an actual botter.
They did correct the mistake. They've erased the ban on these people.
The mistake wasn't identifying them - it was banning them before letting everyone know this is also a bad thing to do. They've now unbanned them, and let everyone know this is a bad thing to do.
Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1005
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:57:00 -
[22] - Quote
Kiyarii Oskold wrote:So I feel the need to risk a generous fellow player and repost his details here, as the backstory to this is a brilliant piece of true Eve emergent gameplay that will otherwise be covered over by CCP rather than championed. Quote:It's me
I broke EvE
Here's the deal:
*snipped a brilliant bit of emergent gameplay and creativity*
TL;DR:
I got rich and forced CCP to change their bad game design
Fantastic :)
...and now you know, the REST of the story.
(With apologies to Paul Harvey)
Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1005
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 20:05:00 -
[23] - Quote
Psyise wrote: Ultimately the point is why are they wasting time implementing ways of automatically finding people that may be AFK farming these complexes instead of fixing them?
It's a small distinction, but the fact that you're missing it is important.
They aren't implementing ways of automatically finding people that may be AFK farming complexes.
They *have already* implemented ways of detecting people playing in bot-like patterns. It just so happens that this detection also detects people AFK farming complexes for long periods of time of inactivity. And now they have to deal with the situation.
...and they *are* intending to fix the complexes where this happens.
All better?
Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1013
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 11:43:00 -
[24] - Quote
Real Poison wrote:i still wonder. What kind of NPCs do respawn at the same place for this to have worked? Can't be anything a normal player would find worth the while to shoot. How much money was made doing that?
This post in this thread explained what was going. 29 billion isk / month was the income. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1013
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 13:25:00 -
[25] - Quote
Damion Rayne wrote:So any word from our resident Team Security guy? All the backlash to this very very poorly handled situation and we've got nothing from anyone other than Sreegs, who has been just as hostile to us as we have been in response to how badly his team is handling this situation. Come on CCP, you are better than this...I know, because I've worked with you guys..
What is there to respond to?
You ninnies got all butthurt about CCP declaring something very specific as off-limits and saying they're going to fix it.
People made slippery slope analogies, read things wrong, or just plain didn't read, and then started posting.
I give credit to CCP Sreegs for bothering to try and answer all you trolls over and over.
tl;dr: CCP makes the rules - its their game. Rules change. Play by them or go find another game.
Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1013
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 15:10:00 -
[26] - Quote
For all you "Sreegs is a lone wolf dictator" fans, let me re-quote one of his replies:
CCP Sreegs wrote:The system is doing precisely what it's supposed to do. The GMs are aware and were a part of this decision. Human people have reviewed each of the instances where this has already occurred. This instance fit within those rules because... IT ISN'T SUPPOSED TO BE HAPPENING IT IS NOT NORMAL AND IT IS EVEN SPELLED OUT IN THE EULA AS NOT ACCEPTABLE.
One person communicating the rules and warnings to you is not one person making the decision.
Get a clue people. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1014
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 16:16:00 -
[27] - Quote
Andski wrote: "Sandbox" didn't mean that the Faction Five were allowed to keep the trillions of ISK worth in LP that they created. "Sandbox" didn't mean that AHARM went unpunished for using tracking disruptors in a way they were never meant to be used. "Sandbox" didn't mean that using 3 FN webs on a jump freighter to effectively paralyze it, making it unable to dock or enter warp, went unpunished. "Sandbox" doesn't mean that you should be allowed to abuse a poorly designed complex in a way that allows you to AFK farm ISK 23/7 with absolutely no action beyond launching sentries, repping them and going to work.
So yes, CCP has always policed the game.
Not empty quoting for justice! Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1014
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 16:25:00 -
[28] - Quote
Zapson wrote: Unfair advantage? I don't see it. They make money with nearly no effort, but active players can make much more, with less time invested. Bug? This is not a bug, so there is nothing to report or prohibited to talk about.
Run the numbers. Just because someone made 29B/Month with god knows how many accounts it does not mean it's a lot of money. The money gained per character versus time of the character online seems pretty pretty bad to me.
And again, this discussion is not primarily about this being a exploit or not, it's about HOW stuff gets treated by CCP.
9 accounts.
So 3.2 billion isk/month or roughly 100M a day for the effort it takes to login every morning and set one character up in 5 minutes.
What active player profession can regularly start out with a battleship and 5 sentry drones in starting assets and make 100M/day with 5 minutes of effort?
A real life job of only $25k per year sounds like utter crap - but if it only takes you 5 minutes a day to earn that 25k, would you do it in addition to your regular job?
Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1018
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 19:17:00 -
[29] - Quote
Ensign X wrote:Nizou wrote:Ensign X wrote:Nizou wrote:Why doesn't CCP just fix the broken mechanics, instead of threatening their players.
Because people who bot or knowingly exploit game mechanics deserve to be threatened or banned. Why do you have a problem with CCP threatening or banning botters or exploiters? Why don't they just fix their broken mechanics? You read the thread, right? As they've mentioned many times previously in this thread, they intend to. In the meantime, until a fix is implemented engaging in this behavior will be considered an exploit and a bannable offense.
But reading is hard. It takes time. And then you have to think about what you read.
Thinking is hard.
It's faster to just get upset and type things, amirite?! Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1020
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 19:57:00 -
[30] - Quote
Gawain Edmond wrote:i don't know if it's been brought up yet but Quote:You may feel free to feed yourself while playing EVE Online without threat of punishment. just made me laugh
Humor is not appreciated in this thread. You're supposed to pick on CCP for their writing style, not appreciate the humor.
AFK gaming is serious business when it involves spaceships! Here's your sign... |
|
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1020
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 23:05:00 -
[31] - Quote
Perkar wrote:um....CCP..... so all of a sudden you care about afk mission running?
No, read it again.
Quote: so, afk mining and botting is cool?
Yes, mining is ok. No botting is not. Go read some more.
Quote: i know you say something vague about it in EULA but, stop by any ice belt anywhere in highsec...........
Oh I see, reading isn't your forte...
Lots of miner kills from January. Nice. Keep up the good work. But just because CCP hadn't banned every single bot back in January doesn't mean they allow botting.
Don't try to leap so far from one logical point to another. The gaps you're trying to clear are quite distant. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1024
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 13:11:00 -
[32] - Quote
Xython wrote:Chainsaw Plankton wrote:except AFK icemining will stop once your ore bay fills up so for it to fall under normal play you will have to check your ship every so often. (and if they have a bot set up well then they are botting and that is something different than afk play) although I'm pretty sure someone already went over this in much greater detail already. And I'm sure the AFK Dominix "exploit" required you check it every so often, if only to set it up after downtime. That's really no different than having to jetcan your ice every so often. How often does a fully yield fit ice mining setup require you jetcan ice out?
Since you asked....
3 harvesters x 1,000 m^3 = 3,000 m^3 yield per cycle on a hulk.
Cycle time 500s * .8 (hulk bonus) = 400s
400s * .91 * .91 *.91 (3 T2 ice harvester upgrades) = 301.4s
301.4s * .88 (ice harvester rig) = 265s
Hulk will hold 8500, so 2 cycles max before you have to empty it.
265 * 2 / 60 = 8.8 minutes.
Yeah, Emptying your hulk every 9 minutes is almost the same as being afk for 23 hours straight. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1024
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 14:08:00 -
[33] - Quote
Xython wrote:War Kitten wrote:Xython wrote:Chainsaw Plankton wrote:except AFK icemining will stop once your ore bay fills up so for it to fall under normal play you will have to check your ship every so often. (and if they have a bot set up well then they are botting and that is something different than afk play) although I'm pretty sure someone already went over this in much greater detail already. And I'm sure the AFK Dominix "exploit" required you check it every so often, if only to set it up after downtime. That's really no different than having to jetcan your ice every so often. How often does a fully yield fit ice mining setup require you jetcan ice out? Since you asked.... 3 harvesters x 1,000 m^3 = 3,000 m^3 yield per cycle on a hulk. Cycle time 500s * .8 (hulk bonus) = 400s 400s * .91 * .91 *.91 (3 T2 ice harvester upgrades) = 301.4s 301.4s * .88 (ice harvester rig) = 265s Hulk will hold 8500, so 2 cycles max before you have to empty it. 265 * 2 / 60 = 8.8 minutes. Yeah, Emptying your hulk every 9 minutes is almost the same as being afk for 23 hours straight. You're still generating isk while AFK while doing something the game intends you to be active during. That, according to CCP, is an exploit. It doesn't matter how many overly entitled players with an Isk addiction do it, wrong is wrong.
No, according to CCP, it isn't an exploit to be AFK while mining. They said so.
Read more better. You'll catch on. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1029
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 15:28:00 -
[34] - Quote
daddi0 wrote:CCP is completely entitled to declare certain patterns illegal, and change the game to prevent them and/or ban those performing them. Fear of being banned is okay but only if you know your behavior is illegal.
Indeed, well said.
Quote: It seems that CCP has a habit of banning first, investigating second and then announcing the newly defined illegality. It certainly seems to be what happenned this time. This is not a good way to treat your paying customers.
What habit? This is one issue, revealed because of automatic detection and banning of people engaged in an activity questionably definable as "gameplay", and more likely defined as an "exploit".
One instance is not a habit, or do you have previous ones?
Quote: Obviously CCP banned people before the pattern was declared illegal, otherwise they wouldn't have to grant the one-time amnesty for it. and THAT is the real problem.
I would argue the pattern WAS declared illegal and used to detect and ban botters. It just so happens that this bot-free but still afk, user-interaction-free, money-making pattern matches the bot pattern.
Quote:Until CCP formally announces a policy along the line of the following, they will continue to suffer from a lack of player confidence and receive forum rage every time they make these decisions. SAMPLE POLICY
- ALL behavior is legal until otherwise stated
- ANY newly discovered behavior will be announced very prominently (e.g. in a agreement pop-up similar to the EULA at new revisions). I not for spoon feeding or allowing illegal behavior, so those that feel they can ignore important announcements do so at their own risk.
- Players using this behavior are subject to being banned, etc etc
- The appeal process for will be prompt and open
- players flagged as false positives will be compensated for any lost time or fees due to the sanction
Its the high-handedness of CCP's dealings in these situations that bothers most people. Judging from the forums CCP is also weak on due process when it comes to false positives, though having not been banned, I can't speak firsthand about it, but secretive processes wrapped in a gag order do not generally instill public confidence in them. I realize this is not an American company or game, but even Europe has laws allowing those falsely accused (libeled) to sue for compensation. EVE seems to have no such safeguards. Until they do, there will be a segment of players who will not accept CCP actions without a challenge.
Dream on.
Every EULA for every software service like this is going to basically say:
1) You can use this service according to our rules 2) If you break the rules you're subject to us revoking your access to said service at any time. 3) The rules may change if we detect the need for new ones, pay attention. 4) No refunds for people that get banned.
They're not going to restrict themselves too much with bylaws or constitutional rights or fancy appeals processes beyond "petition the GM team and we'll sort it out."
You can either trust these rules and CCP's judgement, agree to the EULA and play the game, or not. Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1031
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 14:34:00 -
[35] - Quote
ManiakMogg wrote:Dont you have better things to fix sreegs?
Also you should ban datacore farmers and guys using PI.
IT IS PASSIVE INCOME, HERETICS! HERETICS!
god...
It is passive income balanced and intended to be passive - very different from income intended to be actively pursued.
But thank you for contributing the same uninformed drivel we've seen in this thread for dozens of pages now.
Here's your sign... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1032
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 19:58:00 -
[36] - Quote
Eleanor of Aquitaine wrote:I can feel the hate in this thread. On all sides.
Do you see what happens when an employee interacts badly with customers?
You can please some of the people some of the time, and all of the people none of the time.
However, teasing the silly people is fun all of the time.
I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1035
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 11:10:00 -
[37] - Quote
ManiakMogg wrote:So just fix this buggy plexes, and all its done, i mean there is no need to make news that sounds like everyone using drones is guilty of bug using... Its not to people to make the difference between bug using/game mechanics but to CCP, and in this particular case it seems particularly clear that its CCP mistake to create plexs allowing this sort of use. There is no reason to blame people as its already a game mechanic to afk farm level 4 doing that. So why should it be bugusing using it in perma pop plexes? (I dont even know what plex you're talking about, but anyway...)
PS : I never done any afk farming with drones, i just felt angry when seeing this news which sounds like pointless.
They are fixing them, but you didn't read clearly, did you?
They also didn't make it sound like everyone using drones is exploiting, but you didn't read clearly did you?
You're correct though about one thing, it *is* up to CCP to make it clear what is a bug/exploit and what is not. And that is precisely what this news item was for.
PS : Feeling angry over something you can't understand is a silly reaction. Next time try to understand the issue before getting all emotionally involved.
I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1039
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 13:06:00 -
[38] - Quote
ManiakMogg wrote:Btw, what dont you understand in "sounds like"?
I understand that when you read this out loud to yourself....
The News Thingy wrote: It has come to our attention recently that there are pilots in New Eden engaging in AFK Complex farming. Specific examples of this include such activities as warping into a particular room in a complex, dropping sentry drones, then going to do your laundry or perhaps watch a 24 hour Lazytown marathon. While this activity does not necessitate the use of a 3rd party program in order to carry it out you ARE generating income in an automated fashion while sleeping which is not being present playing the game.
...that it 'sounds like' you heard...
Make Believe Land wrote: It has come to our attention that people play the game AFK. We are banning AFK activities instead of fixing them. Also, we hate AFK drone users. Quick, run to the forums now and complain because anything beyond the first two lines of text is too hard to read and comprehend, and you're probably very angry anyway and need to tell us all about it. Please try to include all possible forms of AFK activity in your bad analogies because that is exactly what we were talking about.
I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1039
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 13:42:00 -
[39] - Quote
ManiakMogg wrote:ManiakMogg wrote:Its not about the content, its about the form. ManiakMogg wrote:Just a line in a patchnote would have been enough "We fixed the plexs allowing afk farming." And yes, i should work the form too. I said what i had to say. Now im bored, see ya.
I take it you missed this quote from the news item too then, since they hid it near the end after most people gave up on the whole reading thing:
The News Item wrote: Game Design will also be looking at changing our complex systems so that this is no longer possible in the near future.
If you don't bother to read all the content, how is a different form going to fix anything?
I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1041
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 15:08:00 -
[40] - Quote
ManiakMogg wrote:War Kitten wrote:The News Item wrote: Game Design will also be looking at changing our complex systems so that this is no longer possible in the near future.
whut? My english is bad, could you explain it? and wtf would be the link?
The translation: "We are going to fix it soon."
The link: http://community.eveonline.com/news/newsFromEve.asp?newsTitle=regarding-afk-complex-farming-1
(It was hidden at the beginning of this thread - how can you be arguing effectively if you have not even read the link that you're arguing about?)
I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all. |
|
|
|
|