Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 24 post(s) |
Dregol
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 11:32:00 -
[1] - Quote
From: http://community.eveonline.com/news/newsFromEve.asp?newsTitle=regarding-afk-complex-farming-1
What exactly is the problem here CCP? A pilot has to /actively/ probe down a complex, the speed at which he or she wants to complete the process shouldn't be measured. You also seem to blatantly ignore the fact that other people can probe these down and complete them while you're AFK boating around.
Is there some mechanic where NPCs are respawning in complexes after a certain amount of time? If they are, I can understand where the problem is. Anything with respawning NPCs and AFKing is bad mmkay, and there's a simple solution: stop **** from respawning in complexes.
I do find it hilarious, though, that you want to go after complex runners. I'd like to see the numbers of how much isk is generated from plexing, but taking what I presume to be a fairly safe guess, I'd be astonished if it represents more than 1% of the total isk generated in EVE. I mean it's not like you just made it 1000% easier for other professions to do anything AFK.
I applaud your effort to remove any AFK actions from the game, but seriously, stop picking on fringe problems, and look at the real problems in EVE. |
Pisov viet
Kaesong Kosmonauts Test Alliance Please Ignore
89
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 11:39:00 -
[2] - Quote
I have absolutely no idea what Sreeg is talking about. Obviously it doenst involves nullsec nor lowsec, since going to sleep with your ship uncloaked would get you killed there. Obviously it's not about deadspace complexs and anomaly in highsec, since these are limited, and you have to warp to another once it's empty. 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.
So, really, what the ****? And what the **** is the logic of creating areas of respawning, high value rats in highsec and then forbidding people from killing them? And if the problem is AFK sources of income, why the **** did they modify mining barge so you can mine for half an hour with one before having to do anything? |
CydonianKnight
vipers bastards
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 11:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
I can think of several examples.
Mainly involving complexes that are part of COSMOS (especially for caldari/amarr).
There's a few persons with Rattlesnakes/Ishtars who do exactly as Sreeg's said. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
979
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:05:00 -
[4] - 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... |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1669
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:06:00 -
[5] - Quote
Pretty sure this has more to do with hisec statics that repeatedly respawn NPCs. EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Teranicus
SYNDAX CORPORATION Yulai Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:06:00 -
[6] - Quote
Quote:It has come to our attention recently that there are pilots in New Eden engaging in mining. Specific examples of this include such activities as warping into a particular belt, activating mining lasers, 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. As such our automated systems will continue to detect and institute administrative actions for this activity. We do not find this to be acceptable gameplay.
|
Dregol
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:07:00 -
[7] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Pretty sure this has more to do with hisec statics that repeatedly respawn NPCs. Classic CCP. |
Octoven
Four Pillar Production Dragehund
7
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:07:00 -
[8] - Quote
As I stated on the general forums topic on this subject, it seems pretty inappropriate and immature on sreegs part to make a news article about this when it is hardly an automated action. I can sit there and let the sentries do the same damn thing and I will be flagged because I am at my computer or not??
Bot mining is one thing and using an automated program is as well, but your drones only kill so much and then you have to warp to the next room, you dont continue to constantly generate money. It is a fixed amount and once it has been completed you just sit there waiting for someone to gank you or you come back. |
Anslo
The Scope Gallente Federation
45
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:08:00 -
[9] - Quote
I left my last MMO when the company started dictating how players can and cannot play the god damn game they paid for. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1669
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:08:00 -
[10] - Quote
The solution of course is to implement an "raw ISK hold" similar to the ore holds on barges. Once you generate a certain amount of ISK, you have to dock up and refine that raw ISK into ISK. EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1669
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:09:00 -
[11] - Quote
Anslo wrote:I left my last MMO when the company started dictating how players can and cannot play the god damn game they paid for.
oh no how will we ever go on without being allowed to do something that is basically botting without a macro EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
coolzero
The Replicators Northern Associates.
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:10:00 -
[12] - Quote
lol wth...
shees im doing (or at least used to do) rad/mag/plex in my ishtar with sentrys, the damn thing doesnt even have a gun on it becuase sentrys will just kill everything... perfect for me cuz it allows me to at times walk off the computer(kids, dog, dont forget nagging wife)
now i understand a warning if you use a bot but just wow lol
now since you made this statement about you cant do them afk anymore, WILL THAT MEAN AFK CLOAKING IN A SYSTEM TO DISRUPT OPERATIONS WILL BE BANNABLE ALSO........ |
Pisov viet
Kaesong Kosmonauts Test Alliance Please Ignore
90
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:11:00 -
[13] - Quote
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. |
Teranicus
SYNDAX CORPORATION Yulai Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:11:00 -
[14] - Quote
Quote: WILL THAT MEAN AFK CLOAKING IN A SYSTEM TO DISRUPT OPERATIONS WILL BE BANNABLE ALSO........ especially afk cloaking in anoms so they dont respawn |
Anslo
The Scope Gallente Federation
45
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:12:00 -
[15] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Anslo wrote:I left my last MMO when the company started dictating how players can and cannot play the god damn game they paid for. oh no how will we ever go on without being allowed to do something that is basically botting without a macro
>implying I play this way.
It's the action of telling players how to play I have a bigger issue with then what they actually acted against. |
Sarik Olecar
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
102
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:13:00 -
[16] - Quote
Oh noez! My PI! My Market Orders! My Ice Mining!
Will I be banned too??? |
Alara IonStorm
2918
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:13:00 -
[17] - Quote
Octoven wrote:As I stated on the general forums topic on this subject, it seems pretty inappropriate and immature on sreegs part to make a news article about this when it is hardly an automated action. I can sit there and let the sentries do the same damn thing and I will be flagged because I am at my computer or not??
Bot mining is one thing and using an automated program is as well, but your drones only kill so much and then you have to warp to the next room, you dont continue to constantly generate money. It is a fixed amount and once it has been completed you just sit there waiting for someone to gank you or you come back. He isn't talking about missions with rooms or people going AFK.
He is directly speaking too a certain type of Cosmos Complex where players are warping their ship in with an AFK Tank dropping 5 Sentries then putting remote reps on them then leaving their computers downtime to downtime.
At least with Mining you have to empty stuff or warp back to the station. Missions you have to pick up a new mission or change rooms. This is 100% 24 hour AFK.
|
Roxwar
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
93
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:15:00 -
[18] - Quote
coolzero wrote:
WILL THAT MEAN AFK CLOAKING IN A SYSTEM TO DISRUPT OPERATIONS WILL BE BANNABLE ALSO........
You dont make isk by sitting AFK cloaked all day, so i'd say no.
|
Fozzy Dorsai
The Kissaki Syndicate Eternal Evocations
22
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:15:00 -
[19] - Quote
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. |
coolzero
The Replicators Northern Associates.
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:15:00 -
[20] - Quote
Teranicus wrote:Quote: WILL THAT MEAN AFK CLOAKING IN A SYSTEM TO DISRUPT OPERATIONS WILL BE BANNABLE ALSO........ especially afk cloaking in anoms so they dont respawn
this has been changed....afk cloaking in a site will still despawn it afaik from a few patch(notes) ago |
|
Anslo
The Scope Gallente Federation
45
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:15:00 -
[21] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Octoven wrote:As I stated on the general forums topic on this subject, it seems pretty inappropriate and immature on sreegs part to make a news article about this when it is hardly an automated action. I can sit there and let the sentries do the same damn thing and I will be flagged because I am at my computer or not??
Bot mining is one thing and using an automated program is as well, but your drones only kill so much and then you have to warp to the next room, you dont continue to constantly generate money. It is a fixed amount and once it has been completed you just sit there waiting for someone to gank you or you come back. He isn't talking about missions with rooms or people going AFK. He is directly speaking too a certain type of Cosmos Complex where players are warping their ship in with an AFK Tank dropping 5 Sentries then putting remote reps on them then leaving their computers downtime to downtime. At least with Mining you have to empty stuff or warp back to the station. Missions you have to pick up a new mission or change rooms. This is 100% 24 hour AFK.
CCP designed it that way. Working as intended. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
979
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:16:00 -
[22] - 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... |
Subrahmaya Chandrasekhar
The Three Musketeers
13
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:18:00 -
[23] - Quote
Now I haven't done this, and likely never will, but I don't like your tone of voice when you talk to us. You're being a smartass. Be more respectful, or someone (Sub looks around at some of the other pilots in the room) may just decide to fly over to Jovian space and smash your face. Do I have to ask permission to use the bathroom now, when I'm taking down a ship in a mission? Are my drones allowed to fire if I'm looking in the refrigerator and not at the screen?
You're on a slippery slope, little man. Independent thinking is not encouraged in a professional Army. It is a form of mutiny. Obedience is the supreme virtueBritish Prime Minister Lloyd George, in his 'War Memoirs'-á |
Alara IonStorm
2918
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:18:00 -
[24] - Quote
Anslo wrote: CCP designed it that way. Working as intended.
There is letter in the OP by CCP that said it was a mistake. That is literally the opposite of working as intended. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1669
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:18:00 -
[25] - Quote
Anslo wrote:It's the action of telling players how to play I have a bigger issue with then what they actually acted against.
"playing the game" is apparently leaving a ship in a complex to automatically kill NPCs while you're not playing the game EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
coolzero
The Replicators Northern Associates.
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:18:00 -
[26] - Quote
Roxwar wrote:coolzero wrote:
WILL THAT MEAN AFK CLOAKING IN A SYSTEM TO DISRUPT OPERATIONS WILL BE BANNABLE ALSO........
You dont make isk by sitting AFK cloaked all day, so i'd say no.
then again then they shouldnt have included this line Quote: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
again ccp is doing things the stupid way...
they made the eve cliant into a bot themself....sentrys will switch target automaticly(as programmed)
simple fix....turn automatic switching target off with drones.....
can i have a plex now for this simple tip as reward shees |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
979
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:19:00 -
[27] - 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... |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1669
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:20:00 -
[28] - Quote
coolzero wrote:again ccp is doing things the stupid way...
they made the eve cliant into a bot themself....sentrys will switch target automaticly(as programmed)
simple fix....turn automatic switching target off with drones.....
can i have a plex now for this simple tip as reward shees
"drones work this way" doesn't mean "sure you can go AFK for 23 hours while having the game do all the work for you" EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Jake Shepherd
Causality Crew LTD Angel Causalities Demolition Crew
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:20:00 -
[29] - Quote
Personally I do not think this is wrong or is not something ccp should be flagging your account over it. And I do not see the logic of giving miners a 45 min ice ship then punishing PVE people for doing the same thing |
Emperor Salazar
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
630
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:21:00 -
[30] - Quote
Anslo wrote: It's the action of telling players how to play I have a bigger issue with then what they actually acted against.
Are you stupid or something?
There have been rules for "how to play the game" from the beginning and they have been changes constantly.
Its their game. They dictate the rules. Thats how this works. Even in a sandbox, there are still game mechanics and rules we play by. |
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1669
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:23:00 -
[31] - Quote
Jake Shepherd wrote:Personally I do not think this is wrong or is not something ccp should be flagging your account over it. And I do not see the logic of giving miners a 45 min ice ship then punishing PVE people for doing the same thing
the difference is that the game doesn't have a mechanic that automatically puts mined ore into an orca with a magic bottomless ore hold EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Dregol
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:23:00 -
[32] - Quote
Pisov viet wrote: Then MAYBE the problem is CCP placing NPC battleships to kill in highsec. .
Pretty much just this. It'd be great if while "fixing" these complexes if they "accidentally" moved all level 3/4 agents to low/null sec. |
coolzero
The Replicators Northern Associates.
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:25:00 -
[33] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:coolzero wrote:again ccp is doing things the stupid way...
they made the eve cliant into a bot themself....sentrys will switch target automaticly(as programmed)
simple fix....turn automatic switching target off with drones.....
can i have a plex now for this simple tip as reward shees "drones work this way" doesn't mean "sure you can go AFK for 23 hours while having the game do all the work for you"
because you cant....... once the site has been done you will have to move to the next...you can only do that if a you use a bot(not allowed) or b are alive but just also doing some stuff in the house.
that drones do things this way is then CCP fault...i dont see my guns/missles switch target on their own.
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1669
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:27:00 -
[34] - Quote
coolzero wrote:because you cant....... once the site has been done you will have to move to the next...you can only do that if a you use a bot(not allowed) or b are alive but just also doing some stuff in the house.
that drones do things this way is then CCP fault...i dont see my guns/missles switch target on their own.
The difference is that that is not how this particular complex works. It continuously spawns NPCs. It's a static, it doesn't despawn. EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
coolzero
The Replicators Northern Associates.
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:27:00 -
[35] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Jake Shepherd wrote:Personally I do not think this is wrong or is not something ccp should be flagging your account over it. And I do not see the logic of giving miners a 45 min ice ship then punishing PVE people for doing the same thing the difference is that the game doesn't have a mechanic that automatically puts mined ore into an orca with a magic bottomless ore hold
it does now at list in a limited way..... mack have 31000m3 ore hold.....this will still take some time to fill while you can go afk while ice mining.
|
Zwo Zateki
Zwo Zateki Corporation
11
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:28:00 -
[36] - Quote
WTF seriously?
Drones were designed to switch targets automatically. I reckon the difference between AFK farming and legitimate plexing is whether you are staring at nebulae or not.
Bullshit. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1669
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:28:00 -
[37] - Quote
coolzero wrote:it does now at list in a limited way..... mack have 31000m3 ore hold.....this will still take some time to fill while you can go afk while ice mining.
And that requires you to return to your client and move ore to an Orca or a station hangar. That is hardly a problem compared to the mechanics enabling you to farm ISK totally AFK until downtime. EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Jame Jarl Retief
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
218
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:29:00 -
[38] - Quote
So let me get this straight:
1. CCP designed the plexes, their systems and mechanics. 2. CCP designed sentry drones, passive tanks, and other game mechanics. 3. Players make use of these mechanics, and get punitive action taken against them if they do it too well?
What kind of sense does that make?
When you (CCP) were designing plexes, did it not occur to you that this might happen? When you (CCP) were designing drones, did it not occur to you that with their automatic AI this might happen? When you (CCP) designed the passive tank, did it not occur to you that this might happen also?
And both plexes and drones have been in the game for how long?
My gut reaction to this is that it is complete bullc**p. I mean no offense, but as long as the player isn't using macros, bots or third party programs, they are making use of game mechanics and nothing else. If game mechanics are the problem, it is YOUR (CCP) problem, not the player's. If anyone should be punished, it should be the individual(s) responsible for designing these systems.
EDIT: And speaking of plexes. How about the recently added FW plexes that people solo in a Vigil, without even fitting any guns? It's not like you weren't warned this was going to happen. But you did it anyway. I suppose that's players' fault too? Are we going to be punished for doing it soon as well? Really CCP? Really?! Very disappointed in you. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1669
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:29:00 -
[39] - Quote
Zwo Zateki wrote:WTF seriously?
Drones were designed to switch targets automatically. I reckon the difference between AFK farming and legitimate plexing is whether you are staring at nebulae or not.
Bullshit.
I'm fairly sure that the game designers didn't intend for these two particular things (complexes that continuously spawn rats in a given room + aggressive drones) to work together in such a way that it allows completely and utterly AFK ISK farming. EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Jake Shepherd
Causality Crew LTD Angel Causalities Demolition Crew
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:29:00 -
[40] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Jake Shepherd wrote:Personally I do not think this is wrong or is not something ccp should be flagging your account over it. And I do not see the logic of giving miners a 45 min ice ship then punishing PVE people for doing the same thing the difference is that the game doesn't have a mechanic that automatically puts mined ore into an orca with a magic bottomless ore hold
I have never do it myself other than letting my drone clear a room on a mission while i went to the other of a few bit.
that's true it not end less but that a game mechanic problem and they should just re-program the new spawns to go for the ships with small mass and is not something that the player them self should be flagged for |
|
coolzero
The Replicators Northern Associates.
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:30:00 -
[41] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:coolzero wrote:because you cant....... once the site has been done you will have to move to the next...you can only do that if a you use a bot(not allowed) or b are alive but just also doing some stuff in the house.
that drones do things this way is then CCP fault...i dont see my guns/missles switch target on their own.
The difference is that that is not how this particular complex works. It continuously spawns NPCs. It's a static, it doesn't despawn.
is this since this patch or something...anyway this should be a mistake made by ccp doing this complex that way... change the machanic not making it flag your account for afk doing it....to many things in this game you can do afk |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1669
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:31:00 -
[42] - Quote
Jame Jarl Retief wrote:So let me get this straight:
1. CCP designed the plexes, their systems and mechanics. 2. CCP designed sentry drones, passive tanks, and other game mechanics. 3. Players make use of these mechanics, and get punitive action taken against them if they do it too well?
What kind of sense does that make?
When you (CCP) were designing plexes, did it not occur to you that this might happen? When you (CCP) were designing drones, did it not occur to you that with their automatic AI this might happen? When you (CCP) designed the passive tank, did it not occur to you that this might happen also?
And both plexes and drones have been in the game for how long?
My gut reaction to this is that it is complete bullc**p. I mean no offense, but as long as the player isn't using macros, bots or third party programs, they are making use of game mechanics and nothing else. If game mechanics are the problem, it is YOUR (CCP) problem, not the player's. If anyone should be punished, it should be the individual(s) responsible for designing these systems.
Mistakes happen in development. Developers have to correct them. Sometimes, the mistakes are abused and players should be policed as to not abuse those mistakes as they are not intended to be there in the first place. EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Octoven
Four Pillar Production Dragehund
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:31:00 -
[43] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Octoven wrote:As I stated on the general forums topic on this subject, it seems pretty inappropriate and immature on sreegs part to make a news article about this when it is hardly an automated action. I can sit there and let the sentries do the same damn thing and I will be flagged because I am at my computer or not??
Bot mining is one thing and using an automated program is as well, but your drones only kill so much and then you have to warp to the next room, you dont continue to constantly generate money. It is a fixed amount and once it has been completed you just sit there waiting for someone to gank you or you come back. He isn't talking about missions with rooms or people going AFK. He is directly speaking too a certain type of Cosmos Complex where players are warping their ship in with an AFK Tank dropping 5 Sentries then putting remote reps on them then leaving their computers downtime to downtime. At least with Mining you have to empty stuff or warp back to the station. Missions you have to pick up a new mission or change rooms. This is 100% 24 hour AFK.
Your point is valid; however, if they enforce that penalty on AFKing a complex then they must do the same with any other form of AFK actions which is just too much ******* monitoring IMHO they need to focus more on third party programs and fixing their own mechanics instead of saying, "we call party foul, we cant change ti yet but you arent allowed to use it till we do." |
Alara IonStorm
2918
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:33:00 -
[44] - Quote
coolzero wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Jake Shepherd wrote:Personally I do not think this is wrong or is not something ccp should be flagging your account over it. And I do not see the logic of giving miners a 45 min ice ship then punishing PVE people for doing the same thing the difference is that the game doesn't have a mechanic that automatically puts mined ore into an orca with a magic bottomless ore hold it does now at list in a limited way..... mack have 31000m3 ore hold.....this will still take some time to fill while you can go afk while ice mining. CCP sanctioned AFKness with a CCP set maximum time limit. This is 24 hours, CCP doesn't want 24 hours nor in this way so they are saying you can't do it until they find a solution.
This particular form of AFK play has been declared an exploit. If you have feeling on other CCP sanctioned AFK activities it has nothing to do with this declared exploit.
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1669
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:33:00 -
[45] - Quote
Octoven wrote:Your point is valid; however, if they enforce that penalty on AFKing a complex then they must do the same with any other form of AFK actions
Says who? You're talking about two totally different things here. EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:41:00 -
[46] - Quote
Anslo wrote:I left my last MMO when the company started dictating how players can and cannot play the god damn game they paid for.
They aren't stopping you from playing the game, it's stopping you from NOT playing the game but getting the benefits associated with playing the game. |
Jame Jarl Retief
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
220
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:41:00 -
[47] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Mistakes happen in development. Developers have to correct them. Sometimes, the mistakes are abused and players should be policed as to not abuse those mistakes as they are not intended to be there in the first place.
They should have reverted the change, or disabled plexes until it was fixed. NOT punished players for THEIR OWN mistake.
I'm sorry, but if they make a mistake, that is not a player's fault. If a player is a drone boat user, playing the game the way you designed it (arguably another mistake, it's just so old that it became the norm), the player should not be threatened or punished for it. Fix it, disable it, but don't treat a player as a criminal for playing the game you designed.
Especially when some of these mechanics (drones and AFKing in missions) has been going on for YEARS and you did nothing to deal with it, despite these same drone users (myself included) begging you for YEARS to look at drones. |
Mattadore
Higher Than Everest BricK sQuAD.
7
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:44:00 -
[48] - Quote
Why doesn't CCP just change the ******* mission then instead of threatening players? What the **** you assholes (CCP). |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1669
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:49:00 -
[49] - Quote
Jame Jarl Retief wrote:They should have reverted the change, or disabled plexes until it was fixed. NOT punished players for THEIR OWN mistake.
I'm sorry, but if they make a mistake, that is not a player's fault. If a player is a drone boat user, playing the game the way you designed it (arguably another mistake, it's just so old that it became the norm), the player should not be threatened or punished for it. Fix it, disable it, but don't treat a player as a criminal for playing the game you designed.
Especially when some of these mechanics (drones and AFKing in missions) has been going on for YEARS and you did nothing to deal with it, despite these same drone users (myself included) begging you for YEARS to look at drones.
they punished the faction five for a mistake on CCP's own part
why should people who are essentially botting without a macro be any different? EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Sarik Olecar
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
104
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:53:00 -
[50] - Quote
For once I agree with Richard. I used to run these complexes out near Dodixie when I thought 10M ISK was a fortune. If someone is literally just sitting there all day erry day popping rats with sentries then yeah, CCP should put the kibosh to it.
Its like staying in one belt and having your drones pop the rats, except their are almost 50mil worth continuously spawning every hour...
|
|
Dregol
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 12:57:00 -
[51] - Quote
Sarik Olecar wrote:For once I agree with Richard. I used to run these complexes out near Dodixie when I thought 10M ISK was a fortune. If someone is literally just sitting there all day erry day popping rats with sentries then yeah, CCP should put the kibosh to it.
Its like staying in one belt and having your drones pop the rats, except their are almost 50mil worth continuously spawning every hour...
Why battleships spawn in highsec in the first place is beyond me. |
Anslo
The Scope Gallente Federation
47
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:04:00 -
[52] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Octoven wrote:Your point is valid; however, if they enforce that penalty on AFKing a complex then they must do the same with any other form of AFK actions Says who? You're talking about two totally different things here.
No, you're wrong. AFK mining, AFK plexing, AFK missioning, AFK god damn ******* industry then should be policed as it makes isk while afk. Even if tending to the ship to empty ore or change drones or get new ones that popped, it's still an afk action while making isk. So no, you're wrong. Goon. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1671
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:09:00 -
[53] - Quote
Anslo wrote:No, you're wrong. AFK mining, AFK plexing, AFK missioning, AFK god damn ******* industry then should be policed as it makes isk while afk. Even if tending to the ship to empty ore or change drones or get new ones that popped, it's still an afk action while making isk. So no, you're wrong. Goon.
there is a huge difference between AFKing crap that you have to attend to more than "literally once a day" and AFKing crap that you have to attend to literally once a day
fly away strawman EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Alara IonStorm
2919
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:10:00 -
[54] - Quote
Anslo wrote: No, you're wrong. AFK mining, AFK plexing, AFK missioning, AFK god damn ******* industry then should be policed as it makes isk while afk. Even if tending to the ship to empty ore or change drones or get new ones that popped, it's still an afk action while making isk. So no, you're wrong. Goon.
No it should not.
Those activities are CCP sanctioned AFK play with a CCP set maximum time limit. This type of AFK activity is not sactioned and therefor an exploit.
This particular form of AFK play has been declared an exploit. If you have feeling on other CCP sanctioned AFK activities it has nothing to do with this particular declared exploit. |
Anslo
The Scope Gallente Federation
48
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:11:00 -
[55] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Anslo wrote:No, you're wrong. AFK mining, AFK plexing, AFK missioning, AFK god damn ******* industry then should be policed as it makes isk while afk. Even if tending to the ship to empty ore or change drones or get new ones that popped, it's still an afk action while making isk. So no, you're wrong. Goon. there is a huge difference between AFKing crap that you have to attend to more than "literally once a day" and AFKing crap that you have to attend to literally once a day fly away strawman
In the end, it's still AFKing. Doesn't matter. |
Dregol
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:12:00 -
[56] - Quote
Anslo wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Octoven wrote:Your point is valid; however, if they enforce that penalty on AFKing a complex then they must do the same with any other form of AFK actions Says who? You're talking about two totally different things here. No, you're wrong. AFK mining, AFK plexing, AFK missioning, AFK god damn ******* industry then should be policed as it makes isk while afk. Even if tending to the ship to empty ore or change drones or get new ones that popped, it's still an afk action while making isk. So no, you're wrong. Goon.
Wrong.
If you'd take the time to read this thread, you'd realize that there was a broken complex whereby people could AFK and have drones kill respawns 23/7. This is /not/ working as intended. AFKing through something that isn't respawning (regular complexes) is fine. What CCP is addressing is a mechanic whereby you can do nothing for hours on end and continue to make isk.
My point from earlier still stands: isk should not be as easy to make as it is in high sec. I'm glad CCP is actively fixing bugs/broken mechanics, but there are mechanics far more broken than this. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2014
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:23:00 -
[57] - Quote
Dregol wrote:Anslo wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Octoven wrote:Your point is valid; however, if they enforce that penalty on AFKing a complex then they must do the same with any other form of AFK actions Says who? You're talking about two totally different things here. No, you're wrong. AFK mining, AFK plexing, AFK missioning, AFK god damn ******* industry then should be policed as it makes isk while afk. Even if tending to the ship to empty ore or change drones or get new ones that popped, it's still an afk action while making isk. So no, you're wrong. Goon. Wrong. If you'd take the time to read this thread, you'd realize that there was a broken complex whereby people could AFK and have drones kill respawns 23/7. This is /not/ working as intended. AFKing through something that isn't respawning (regular complexes) is fine. What CCP is addressing is a mechanic whereby you can do nothing for hours on end and continue to make isk. My point from earlier still stands: isk should not be as easy to make as it is in high sec. I'm glad CCP is actively fixing bugs/broken mechanics, but there are mechanics far more broken than this.
I'm merely going to quote this. It's not going to please everyone and certainly not going to please those who were making isk while going about their lives doing things other than playing EVE actively but at the end of the day we're only referring to situations in THIS PARTICULAR CASE where you could in theory generate isk 24 hours a day without ever touching your computer. This does not apply to every situation you might perhaps maybe possibly use sentry drones in and nobody's going to ban your accounts because you went to get a cup of coffee.
There were however cases where this was being abused and so we're stating publically that abusing it is wrong and from this point forward the automated systems will handle it.
Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
mkint
841
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:28:00 -
[58] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Dregol wrote:Anslo wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Octoven wrote:Your point is valid; however, if they enforce that penalty on AFKing a complex then they must do the same with any other form of AFK actions Says who? You're talking about two totally different things here. No, you're wrong. AFK mining, AFK plexing, AFK missioning, AFK god damn ******* industry then should be policed as it makes isk while afk. Even if tending to the ship to empty ore or change drones or get new ones that popped, it's still an afk action while making isk. So no, you're wrong. Goon. Wrong. If you'd take the time to read this thread, you'd realize that there was a broken complex whereby people could AFK and have drones kill respawns 23/7. This is /not/ working as intended. AFKing through something that isn't respawning (regular complexes) is fine. What CCP is addressing is a mechanic whereby you can do nothing for hours on end and continue to make isk. My point from earlier still stands: isk should not be as easy to make as it is in high sec. I'm glad CCP is actively fixing bugs/broken mechanics, but there are mechanics far more broken than this. I'm merely going to quote this. It's not going to please everyone and certainly not going to please those who were making isk while going about their lives doing things other than playing EVE actively but at the end of the day we're only referring to situations in THIS PARTICULAR CASE where you could in theory generate isk 24 hours a day without ever touching your computer. This does not apply to every situation you might perhaps maybe possibly use sentry drones in and nobody's going to ban your accounts because you went to get a cup of coffee. There were however cases where this was being abused and so we're stating publically that abusing it is wrong and from this point forward the automated systems will handle it. Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong Probably should have mentioned that there's a bugged complex in the news post. I was all like "I wonder if afk missioning is on the chopping block next, or rookies mining in industrials, or etc." It sounds like I'm not the only one who was confused by it. |
Darth Skorpius
Legion of Darkwind Order of the Void
68
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:29:00 -
[59] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:There were however cases where this was being abused and so we're stating publically that abusing it is wrong and from this point forward the automated systems will handle it.
Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong
What about afk mining in an industrial (hauler)? Is that still going to be allowed? Follow my Adventures in New Eden! http://www.skorpiuschronicles.com/
Baa Means Baa! |
Zwo Zateki
Zwo Zateki Corporation
12
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:30:00 -
[60] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Zwo Zateki wrote:WTF seriously?
Drones were designed to switch targets automatically. I reckon the difference between AFK farming and legitimate plexing is whether you are staring at nebulae or not.
Bullshit. I'm fairly sure that the game designers didn't intend for these two particular things (complexes that continuously spawn rats in a given room + aggressive drones) to work together in such a way that it allows completely and utterly AFK ISK farming. Then FIX it. Set time limit for drone aggressive mode. But do not threaten players. This is the SANDBOX ffs. |
|
Dregol
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:33:00 -
[61] - Quote
mkint wrote: Probably should have mentioned that there's a bugged complex in the news post. I was all like "I wonder if afk missioning is on the chopping block next, or rookies mining in industrials, or etc." It sounds like I'm not the only one who was confused by it.
Pretty much this. I was confused/angry as **** when I read the initial post.
Sreegs it'd probably be a good idea to update your post and say "there was a bugged complex, we're fixing it; any time you stay logged in for 23/7 and continue to make isk without being at your computer will be considered botting and will be bannable."
It doesn't mention what complex it was, or where it was, but people that have no idea wtf the bug was will have some explaination and you won't ge the reaction from those who are uninformed. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1673
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:36:00 -
[62] - Quote
Zwo Zateki wrote:Then FIX it. Set time limit for drone aggressive mode. But do not threaten players. This is the SANDBOX ffs.
please stop misinterpreting "sandbox" as "I can use my drones to do literally the same thing a bot does just without a macro because Sandbox" EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2016
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:40:00 -
[63] - Quote
Dregol wrote:mkint wrote: Probably should have mentioned that there's a bugged complex in the news post. I was all like "I wonder if afk missioning is on the chopping block next, or rookies mining in industrials, or etc." It sounds like I'm not the only one who was confused by it.
Pretty much this. I was confused/angry as **** when I read the initial post. Sreegs it'd probably be a good idea to update your post and say "there was a bugged complex, we're fixing it; any time you stay logged in for 23/7 and continue to make isk without being at your computer will be considered botting and will be bannable." It doesn't mention what complex it was, or where it was, but people that have no idea wtf the bug was will have some explaination and you won't ge the reaction from those who are uninformed.
"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."
I don't believe it's limited to a single particular complex and to be frank if I did do that and they found somewhere else that it worked I'd have to deal with 700 petitions of rules lawyering. In this case what we're specifically concerned about is the ability to make money during long periods of being AFK performing activities which are meant to be active.
:edit: I'll try to clarify in a bit in the news item. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:40:00 -
[64] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:
I'm merely going to quote this. It's not going to please everyone and certainly not going to please those who were making isk while going about their lives doing things other than playing EVE actively but at the end of the day we're only referring to situations in THIS PARTICULAR CASE where you could in theory generate isk 24 hours a day without ever touching your computer. This does not apply to every situation you might perhaps maybe possibly use sentry drones in and nobody's going to ban your accounts because you went to get a cup of coffee.
There were however cases where this was being abused and so we're stating publically that abusing it is wrong and from this point forward the automated systems will handle it.
Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong
Question based on this if I could Sreegs:
What about cases where the EVE client is running on say, a home machine, and you are using remote desktop / remote viewing tools to perform eve activities ( an example being the ever favorite mining. )
Would this fall under a similar catchment as a bannable behaviour? |
Darth Skorpius
Legion of Darkwind Order of the Void
68
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:41:00 -
[65] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:In this case what we're specifically concerned about is the ability to make money during long periods of being AFK performing activities which are meant to be active.
Well that means AFK mining is safe then! Follow my Adventures in New Eden! http://www.skorpiuschronicles.com/
Baa Means Baa! |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2016
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:42:00 -
[66] - Quote
Tyke Orlieveit wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
I'm merely going to quote this. It's not going to please everyone and certainly not going to please those who were making isk while going about their lives doing things other than playing EVE actively but at the end of the day we're only referring to situations in THIS PARTICULAR CASE where you could in theory generate isk 24 hours a day without ever touching your computer. This does not apply to every situation you might perhaps maybe possibly use sentry drones in and nobody's going to ban your accounts because you went to get a cup of coffee.
There were however cases where this was being abused and so we're stating publically that abusing it is wrong and from this point forward the automated systems will handle it.
Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong
Question based on this if I could Sreegs: What about cases where the EVE client is running on say, a home machine, and you are using remote desktop / remote viewing tools to perform eve activities ( an example being the ever favorite mining. ) Would this fall under a similar catchment as a bannable behaviour?
No, and you wouldn't be able to abuse that for the extended periods of time where it becomes ridiculous. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2016
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:43:00 -
[67] - Quote
Darth Skorpius wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:In this case what we're specifically concerned about is the ability to make money during long periods of being AFK performing activities which are meant to be active. Well that means AFK mining is safe then!
If you are aware of a way for miners to mine AFK with no third party programs 24 hours a day without being at their machines and managing cargo then I'm all ears. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1673
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:46:00 -
[68] - Quote
will the fix for this allow me to park a supertanked ship permarunning an armor rep just to laugh at people who can't run the complex because my presence is preventing rats from respawning
i hope it does because that'd be p hilarious
(what i'm saying is that i hope that isn't the solution they have in mind) EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:47:00 -
[69] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Tyke Orlieveit wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
I'm merely going to quote this. It's not going to please everyone and certainly not going to please those who were making isk while going about their lives doing things other than playing EVE actively but at the end of the day we're only referring to situations in THIS PARTICULAR CASE where you could in theory generate isk 24 hours a day without ever touching your computer. This does not apply to every situation you might perhaps maybe possibly use sentry drones in and nobody's going to ban your accounts because you went to get a cup of coffee.
There were however cases where this was being abused and so we're stating publically that abusing it is wrong and from this point forward the automated systems will handle it.
Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong
Question based on this if I could Sreegs: What about cases where the EVE client is running on say, a home machine, and you are using remote desktop / remote viewing tools to perform eve activities ( an example being the ever favorite mining. ) Would this fall under a similar catchment as a bannable behaviour? No, and you wouldn't be able to abuse that for the extended periods of time where it becomes ridiculous.
Awesome, cheers for clearing that up :)
|
Dregol
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:49:00 -
[70] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:[
"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."
I don't believe it's limited to a single particular complex and to be frank if I did do that and they found somewhere else that it worked I'd have to deal with 700 petitions of rules lawyering. In this case what we're specifically concerned about is the ability to make money during long periods of being AFK performing activities which are meant to be active.
:edit: I'll try to clarify in a bit in the news item.
The "going to do your laundry" bit implies that doing any form of ratting whilst not sitting directly at your computer is now illegal. I mean, what if I have a dominix in an anom, and I go to get a drink or make a sandwich? With your definition, it makes it sound like any and all drone activity while you're not at your computer is a bannable offence.
|
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1673
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:51:00 -
[71] - Quote
Dregol wrote:The "going to do your laundry" bit implies that doing any form of ratting whilst not sitting directly at your computer is now illegal. I mean, what if I have a dominix in an anom, and I go to get a drink or make a sandwich? With your definition, it makes it sound like any and all drone activity while you're not at your computer is a bannable offence.
it's fairly obvious that the news item is specifically related to sites that continuously spawn rats, not sites that spawn a set number of waves
not quite a ninja edit: okay yeah it wasn't that obvious EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Arian Mistacce
Krusual Research and Design
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:51:00 -
[72] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote::edit: I'll try to clarify in a bit in the news item. Probably for the best. If you're not aware of the specific complex you're talking about, it makes it sound like you're banning any type of AFK Ratting.
I've seen discussions of people saying that AFK missioning is now an exploit, because it's meant to be active ISK making, and if you're away from the computer you're making it passive.
I mean, it takes me 20 minutes to "Go and do my laundry". I don't think I'm particularly unusual in this. That's not an unreasonable amount of time for an AFK Domi to clear a room. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2019
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:52:00 -
[73] - Quote
Dregol wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:[
"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."
I don't believe it's limited to a single particular complex and to be frank if I did do that and they found somewhere else that it worked I'd have to deal with 700 petitions of rules lawyering. In this case what we're specifically concerned about is the ability to make money during long periods of being AFK performing activities which are meant to be active.
:edit: I'll try to clarify in a bit in the news item. The "going to do your laundry" bit implies that doing any form of ratting whilst not sitting directly at your computer is now illegal. I mean, what if I have a dominix in an anom, and I go to get a drink or make a sandwich? With your definition, it makes it sound like any and all drone activity while you're not at your computer is a bannable offence.
UGH, yeah I guess. I'll edit it. This situation really only applies in rather extreme cases. It's impossible for you to be impacted by this if you're engaging in normal gameplay. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Dregol
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:54:00 -
[74] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Dregol wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:[
"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."
I don't believe it's limited to a single particular complex and to be frank if I did do that and they found somewhere else that it worked I'd have to deal with 700 petitions of rules lawyering. In this case what we're specifically concerned about is the ability to make money during long periods of being AFK performing activities which are meant to be active.
:edit: I'll try to clarify in a bit in the news item. The "going to do your laundry" bit implies that doing any form of ratting whilst not sitting directly at your computer is now illegal. I mean, what if I have a dominix in an anom, and I go to get a drink or make a sandwich? With your definition, it makes it sound like any and all drone activity while you're not at your computer is a bannable offence. UGH, yeah I guess. I'll edit it. This situation really only applies in rather extreme cases. It's impossible for you to be impacted by this if you're engaging in normal gameplay.
Yeah, from the thread I've gathered that. When you edit it, feel free to link the blog to this thread to help clarify |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2019
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:09:00 -
[75] - Quote
Dregol wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Dregol wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:[
"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."
I don't believe it's limited to a single particular complex and to be frank if I did do that and they found somewhere else that it worked I'd have to deal with 700 petitions of rules lawyering. In this case what we're specifically concerned about is the ability to make money during long periods of being AFK performing activities which are meant to be active.
:edit: I'll try to clarify in a bit in the news item. The "going to do your laundry" bit implies that doing any form of ratting whilst not sitting directly at your computer is now illegal. I mean, what if I have a dominix in an anom, and I go to get a drink or make a sandwich? With your definition, it makes it sound like any and all drone activity while you're not at your computer is a bannable offence. UGH, yeah I guess. I'll edit it. This situation really only applies in rather extreme cases. It's impossible for you to be impacted by this if you're engaging in normal gameplay. Yeah, from the thread I've gathered that. When you edit it, feel free to link the blog to this thread to help clarify
It's republished now "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Ghost Frog
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:10:00 -
[76] - Quote
At the risk of escalating this into a shitstorm, I'd like to get clarification about freighters. I have done quite a bit of AFK freighter piloting. In fact, I'm willing to bet the overwhelming majority of EVE players do freighter runs 100% AFK. Will you be ******* with us as well? Because the core of the logic being applied here would seem to fit my situation. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2019
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:12:00 -
[77] - Quote
Ghost Frog wrote:At the risk of escalating this into a shitstorm, I'd like to get clarification about freighters. I have done quite a bit of AFK freighter piloting. In fact, I'm willing to bet the overwhelming majority of EVE players do freighter runs 100% AFK. Will you be ******* with us as well? Because the core of the logic being applied here would seem to fit my situation.
No, the core of the logic that's being attributed to it would :)
The core of the logic that's actually being attributed here is that this only applies to fringe cases and anyone engaging in normal gameplay is completely unaffected.
Clearly the news item wasn't clear enough about that so I've had it edited. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Tanaka Aiko
ICE is Coming to EVE Goonswarm Federation
102
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:18:00 -
[78] - Quote
Quote:You may feel free to feed yourself while playing EVE Online without threat of punishment. you're really generous CCP |
Legiolith
Hard Knocks Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:27:00 -
[79] - Quote
F you CCP Sreegs and F you Richard Desturned and whoever else is behind this or is defending that ******** post.
It's a sandbox. You put in the mechanics and we make the most of them. If a plex is broken, fix it, don't throw bs around that you will ban people for afk'ing while playing this game as 90% of the damn game can be accomplished while beeing afk. INCLUDING SKILL TRAINING, TRADING, MINING etc...
For the record, I dont do this myself and I think it's f'ed up that you can do it. But if you play by the rules, ie. the game mechanics that are not broken, then you should not be banned for it.
So man the f up and change the plex(es?) in question so you can't do it for 23/7 and stop being a-holes and remove that ******** post about banning players for playing by the rules introduced by you. And we will pretend that his never happened and move on...
DO NOT BREAK THIS GAME! I enjoy it. And I am all that matters.
Love, Legio |
Decimat Draconia
2plus2isfive BricK sQuAD.
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:30:00 -
[80] - Quote
I agree that the COSMOS exploit needs to be fixed, lets just keep it to high sec plexes though.
If you afk plex in 0.0 you run the risk of being scanned down and podded - this is the beauty of NULL. |
|
Decimat Draconia
2plus2isfive BricK sQuAD.
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:33:00 -
[81] - Quote
Legiolith wrote:F you CCP Sreegs and F you Richard Desturned and whoever else is behind this or is defending that ******** post.
It's a sandbox. You put in the mechanics and we make the most of them. If a plex is broken, fix it, don't throw bs around that you will ban people for afk'ing while playing this game as 90% of the damn game can be accomplished while beeing afk. INCLUDING SKILL TRAINING, TRADING, MINING etc...
For the record, I dont do this myself and I think it's f'ed up that you can do it. But if you play by the rules, ie. the game mechanics that are not broken, then you should not be banned for it.
So man the f up and change the plex(es?) in question so you can't do it for 23/7 and stop being a-holes and remove that ******** post about banning players for playing by the rules introduced by you. And we will pretend that his never happened and move on...
DO NOT BREAK THIS GAME! I enjoy it. And I am all that matters.
Love, Legio
I think what Legiolith means is that a stealth change that started killing off the afk ships while they tried this exploit may have been more effective than the dev blog :) |
Velarra
Ghost Festival Naraka.
96
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:35:00 -
[82] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:The core of the logic that's actually being applied here is that this only applies to fringe cases and anyone engaging in normal gameplay is completely unaffected.
Clearly the news item wasn't clear enough about that so I've had it edited.
Within the context of this ruling, what is normal game play as regards shipping of goods?
Fill up Freighter / Industrial with goods in cargo, set AP route for 50 jumps.
How many of those jumps can be done fully AP'd? How many does a pilot have to be at the keys for? |
cheese monkey
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:36:00 -
[83] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Ghost Frog wrote:At the risk of escalating this into a shitstorm, I'd like to get clarification about freighters. I have done quite a bit of AFK freighter piloting. In fact, I'm willing to bet the overwhelming majority of EVE players do freighter runs 100% AFK. Will you be ******* with us as well? Because the core of the logic being applied here would seem to fit my situation. No, the core of the logic that's being attributed to it would :) The core of the logic that's actually being applied here is that this only applies to fringe cases and anyone engaging in normal gameplay is completely unaffected. Clearly the news item wasn't clear enough about that so I've had it edited.
Can i just say...
From a business point of view this is the worst idea CCP has ever had!
SANDBOX = SANDBOX
don't advertise SANDBOX if you are then going to start to list the ways we are not allowed to play!! |
Caellach Marellus
Aideron Technologies Sspectre
581
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:36:00 -
[84] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote: He isn't talking about missions
Pity, AFK missioners should get whacked with the same thing. Enjoy your gaming.
http://northern-goblin.blogspot.com |
Aijle Mijleroff
Infernal laboratory Infernal Octopus
19
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:36:00 -
[85] - Quote
So, CCP Sreegs you delete afk PVE I think you must delete now AFK PVP, I speak about afk covert ops ships in low security systems which threaten another players |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1812
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:37:00 -
[86] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:The solution of course is to implement an "raw ISK hold" similar to the ore holds on barges. Once you generate a certain amount of ISK, you have to dock up and refine that raw ISK into ISK.
The solution of this is to stop releasing half assed half made "AWSUM" content a la "Old CCP way".
I know of at least 1 non COSMOS site behaving like this and made quite recently. And COSMOS too was the definition of half assed half made content to begin with. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1812
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:39:00 -
[87] - 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.
There are high profit hi sec sites with no battleships too... Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Acid Kanshi
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:40:00 -
[88] - Quote
This is game design flaw not players fault !
If you want apple shaped water, you design the cup to be apple shaped, you will not design a **** shaped cup and start trying to shape the water inside it as apple shape.
What in the f**k. EVE-Cost is a manufacturing tool for EVE players. http://www.eve-cost.eu |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2019
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:40:00 -
[89] - Quote
Velarra wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:The core of the logic that's actually being applied here is that this only applies to fringe cases and anyone engaging in normal gameplay is completely unaffected.
Clearly the news item wasn't clear enough about that so I've had it edited. Within the context of this ruling, what is normal game play as regards shipping of goods? Fill up Freighter / Industrial with goods in cargo, set AP route for 50 jumps. How many of those jumps can be done fully AP'd? How many does a pilot have to be at the keys for?
Nothing in this news article even remotely hints at anything remotely related to hauling or really any other activity that isn't farming plexes while unattended. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Damion Rayne
Lorentz Technology Group
107
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:41:00 -
[90] - Quote
This is complete and utter BS Teamwork.. Maturity.. Tactics.. www.tacticalgamer.com |
|
Vrykolakasis
Trinity Operations Aurora Irae
49
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:42:00 -
[91] - Quote
CCP is making the very obtuse assumption that I require sleep. |
Damion Rayne
Lorentz Technology Group
107
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:44:00 -
[92] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Velarra wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:The core of the logic that's actually being applied here is that this only applies to fringe cases and anyone engaging in normal gameplay is completely unaffected.
Clearly the news item wasn't clear enough about that so I've had it edited. Within the context of this ruling, what is normal game play as regards shipping of goods? Fill up Freighter / Industrial with goods in cargo, set AP route for 50 jumps. How many of those jumps can be done fully AP'd? How many does a pilot have to be at the keys for? Nothing in this news article even remotely hints at anything remotely related to hauling or really any other activity that isn't farming plexes while unattended.
I honestly and whole hardheartedly believe you have NO clue what you're doing. I'm going to go out on a limb here and publicly denounce pretty much everything you say. 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? I've got NO confidence in you as a Dev Sreegs, None. Teamwork.. Maturity.. Tactics.. www.tacticalgamer.com |
Brokers Clone
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:44:00 -
[93] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:If you are aware of a way for miners to mine AFK with no third party programs 24 hours a day without being at their machines and managing cargo then I'm all ears.
Enter belt with uuber-tanked ship and some nice shiney drones Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty etc...etc...etc... |
Damion Rayne
Lorentz Technology Group
107
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:46:00 -
[94] - Quote
Brokers Clone wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:If you are aware of a way for miners to mine AFK with no third party programs 24 hours a day without being at their machines and managing cargo then I'm all ears. Enter belt with uuber-tanked ship and some nice shiney drones Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty etc...etc...etc...
This Sreegs, you obviously don't play the game anymore mate. Teamwork.. Maturity.. Tactics.. www.tacticalgamer.com |
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
36
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:47:00 -
[95] - Quote
Go Sreegs! \o/ |
FireT
Royal Advanced Industries Imperial Hull Tankers
86
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:48:00 -
[96] - Quote
So this does not apply to afk mining, right? Or will afk mining be punished eventually too? Just curious. |
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
36
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:48:00 -
[97] - Quote
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.
|
Febreeze
Pentergy
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:50:00 -
[98] - Quote
This news briefing was not well thought out, easy to misinterrpret and not overly useful. If there is some way to safely afk plex with some drones out and the drones arent being killed off and some how you are safe from PVP there is an issue that should be resolved instead of posting this confusing and aggrevating news brief.
|
Pak Narhoo
Knights of Kador
654
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:50:00 -
[99] - Quote
Reading skill are not at 5 for a lot of posters here.
/me sad.... Hi, I'm CCP Arrow, I screwed up the.. ummm... |
Freelancer117
so you want to be a Hero
34
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:50:00 -
[100] - Quote
How nice of CCP that they tell their costumers what they can do with their product.
We even got permission to play the sandbox game a little from CCP Screegs.
I would have rather see a more diplomatic text from that new Marketing guy then an ex-Goon.
And no mention about how the the new barges will be monitored with their large ore holds. Eve Radio |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1812
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:50:00 -
[101] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Dregol wrote:The "going to do your laundry" bit implies that doing any form of ratting whilst not sitting directly at your computer is now illegal. I mean, what if I have a dominix in an anom, and I go to get a drink or make a sandwich? With your definition, it makes it sound like any and all drone activity while you're not at your computer is a bannable offence.
it's fairly obvious that...
Dude don't overstimate MMO players or their inability to know the game. There's still people posting confused threads about why their Hulk started "behaving strange" since Inferno 1.2...
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Damion Rayne
Lorentz Technology Group
107
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:52:00 -
[102] - Quote
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. Teamwork.. Maturity.. Tactics.. www.tacticalgamer.com |
Ryakel
The Royal Guard Imperial Hull Tankers
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:53:00 -
[103] - Quote
OK, so EVE players may be able to get away with ducking out to nuke a hotpocket or a bowl of ramen, maybe even crack open a bottle of beer and/or drop a deuce. So help me though, if CCP catches you taking a shower or doing laundry or ironing, rest assured this violates the EULA.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1812
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:53:00 -
[104] - Quote
Legiolith wrote:It's a sandbox. You put in the mechanics and we make the most of them. If a plex is broken, fix it, don't throw bs around that you will ban people for afk'ing while playing this game as 90% of the damn game can be accomplished while beeing afk. INCLUDING SKILL TRAINING, TRADING, MINING etc...
For the record, I dont do this myself and I think it's f'ed up that you can do it. But if you play by the rules, ie. the game mechanics that are not broken, then you should not be banned for it.
So man the f up and change the plex(es?) in question so you can't do it for 23/7 and stop being a-holes and remove that ******** post about banning players for playing by the rules introduced by you. And we will pretend that his never happened and move on...
DO NOT BREAK THIS GAME! I enjoy it. And I am all that matters.
Love, Legio
They do this exactly to avoid "BREAK THIS GAME". COSMOS code is older than a dinosaur, it's some of that stuff you don't ever want to look at it again, and changing a *comment* in the source code might suddenly bug a random part of the game and make Avatars look like a giant phallus. Oh wait... Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vera Algaert
Republic University Minmatar Republic
302
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:55:00 -
[105] - Quote
You discover an issue with game design that allows for unintended consequences. Now you can
(A) Fix game design so the unintended consequences can no longer happen. (B) Leave the "trick" in the game but ban everyone who uses it.
Takes a special kind of developer to choose (B).
This issue has been known for months and yet there is no proper fix (rework static plexes), instead we get a honeytrap because Sreegs just enjoys blowing up AT ships and banning unsuspecting players.
The very least you could do is give us an official database of behaviors that are consciously made possible but CCP but will get you banned - this news article and discussion thread will be buried in a few weeks and smart players will keep rediscovering this "exploit" over and over. I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1812
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:55:00 -
[106] - Quote
Caellach Marellus wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote: He isn't talking about missions
Pity, AFK missioners should get whacked with the same thing.
Missions are clearly static and their NPCs clearly respawn... Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
332
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 14:56:00 -
[107] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong
Why is this being handled by Team Security instead of the GM team? It appears Team Security's only involvement in this case should be clearing the false positive botting mark against the account, then turning it over to the GM team which is in charge of determining what is and is not an exploit when no bots/hacks/etc is involved. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
332
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:00:00 -
[108] - Quote
I mean "the automated systems handling it" isn't something you've decided on as the proper way to handle non-bot eula violations: it's that the automated systems are creating a false positive and you're refusing to fix it. This isn't a botting issue, and it shouldn't be being handled by the botting team.
The algorithm ****** up. It should be fixed, not defined as "not ******* up" and team security taking over part of GM responsibilities instead of fixing it.
|
Damion Rayne
Lorentz Technology Group
108
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:02:00 -
[109] - Quote
Vera Algaert wrote:You discover an issue with game design that allows for unintended consequences. Now you can
(A) Fix game design so the unintended consequences can no longer happen. (B) Leave the "trick" in the game but ban everyone who uses it.
Takes a special kind of developer to choose (B).
This issue has been well known for months and yet there is no proper fix (rework static plexes), instead we get a honeytrap because Sreegs just enjoys blowing up AT ships and banning unsuspecting players.
The very least you could do is give us an official database of behaviors that are consciously made possible but CCP but will get you banned - this news article and discussion thread will be buried in a few weeks (and compete for attention with many prior GD threads which generally declared this behavior legal) and smart players will keep rediscovering this "exploit" over and over.
Agreed with pretty much all of this. Teamwork.. Maturity.. Tactics.. www.tacticalgamer.com |
nahjustwarpin
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
32
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:04:00 -
[110] - 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.
read the damn topic!
it's about a specific cosmos plex and not general nullsec anoms...... |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2020
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:06:00 -
[111] - Quote
Damion Rayne wrote:Brokers Clone wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:If you are aware of a way for miners to mine AFK with no third party programs 24 hours a day without being at their machines and managing cargo then I'm all ears. Enter belt with uuber-tanked ship and some nice shiney drones Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty etc...etc...etc... This Sreegs, you obviously don't play the game anymore mate.
Except that he stated mining then used ratting as an example, which would certainly still be detected and fall into the same category. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2020
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:08:00 -
[112] - 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.
What you're referring to was never mentioned in the news item. You're deciding for yourself what the news item means and applying it in a way that is not what is discussed. This has been edited in the news item and repeated more than once in this thread, but you're still deciding that I'm staring through the internet at you waiting for you to walk away from your PC instead of what the content of the news article is really about which is extreme and isolated scenarios where people are able to login at downtime, release sentries, and go do something else until the next downtime. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
335
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:09:00 -
[113] - Quote
100% passive income has been a part of this game since datacore agents were invented, and especially since PI was introduced. Both allow you to make money with less "at the keyboard"ness than this.
It's not a team security issue and team security has no business declaring it botting: it should be punted to the GM team and the game design team for exploit determinations and fixing respectively. The GM team exists to make consistent decisions that respect previous decisions on how the game can be played, and to provide the proper layers of asking things be looked at again by a fresh set of eyes. It has no business being the province of an algorithm gone rogue. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
986
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:11:00 -
[114] - 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... |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
335
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:11:00 -
[115] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: What you're referring to was never mentioned in the news item. You're deciding for yourself what the news item means and applying it in a way that is not what is discussed. This has been edited in the news item and repeated more than once in this thread, but you're still deciding that I'm staring through the internet at you waiting for you to walk away from your PC instead of what the content of the news article is really about which is extreme and isolated scenarios where people are able to login at downtime, release sentries, and go do something else until the next downtime.
If you think it's an exploit, then the GM team should be alerted to the details and allowed to handle it as they see fit. We're all 100% clear it's not a bot, it's not RMT, it's not a hack, and so there's no reason for team security to be involved. |
Damion Rayne
Lorentz Technology Group
109
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:11:00 -
[116] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Damion Rayne wrote:Brokers Clone wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:If you are aware of a way for miners to mine AFK with no third party programs 24 hours a day without being at their machines and managing cargo then I'm all ears. Enter belt with uuber-tanked ship and some nice shiney drones Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty etc...etc...etc... This Sreegs, you obviously don't play the game anymore mate. Except that he stated mining then used ratting as an example, which would certainly still be detected and fall into the same category.
It's the same bloody thing! Let me give you an example,
I park my hulk in a belt, target roids, put out some drones and practically go afk watching tv on net flix while only every so often switching clients to have my alt come pick up a load. The main account is for all intents, AFK..pretty sure the way I understand how you're handling things lately, you'd ban us from doing this to eventually. I mean come on...what's the exact details of this?
What do you define as "Normal Game-play", because I'd like to know. I've been online for 12-13 hour sessions before, and I know other people have. Teamwork.. Maturity.. Tactics.. www.tacticalgamer.com |
Fatbear
Starwinders The Unwilling.
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:12:00 -
[117] - Quote
Vera Algaert wrote:You discover an issue with game design that allows for unintended consequences. Now you can
(A) Fix game design so the unintended consequences can no longer happen. (B) Leave the "trick" in the game but ban everyone who uses it.
Takes a special kind of developer to choose (B).
This issue has been well known for months and yet there is no proper fix (rework static plexes), instead we get a honeytrap because Sreegs just enjoys blowing up AT ships and banning unsuspecting players.
The very least you could do is give us an official database of behaviors that are consciously made possible but CCP but will get you banned - this news article and discussion thread will be buried in a few weeks (and compete for attention with many prior GD threads which generally declared this behavior legal) and smart players will keep rediscovering this "exploit" over and over.
edit: on a related note: the drama around the recent give-aways (many people missing the deadlines as they never read the news items) has clearly shown that login screen items and news are not a suitable way to reach out to the EVE playerbase. Using this medium to spread information that is vital to players is asinine.
Most sensible post in this thread.
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. |
Legiolith
Hard Knocks Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:12:00 -
[118] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Legiolith wrote:It's a sandbox. You put in the mechanics and we make the most of them. If a plex is broken, fix it, don't throw bs around that you will ban people for afk'ing while playing this game as 90% of the damn game can be accomplished while beeing afk. INCLUDING SKILL TRAINING, TRADING, MINING etc...
For the record, I dont do this myself and I think it's f'ed up that you can do it. But if you play by the rules, ie. the game mechanics that are not broken, then you should not be banned for it.
So man the f up and change the plex(es?) in question so you can't do it for 23/7 and stop being a-holes and remove that ******** post about banning players for playing by the rules introduced by you. And we will pretend that his never happened and move on...
DO NOT BREAK THIS GAME! I enjoy it. And I am all that matters.
Love, Legio They do this exactly to avoid "BREAK THIS GAME". COSMOS code is older than a dinosaur, it's some of that stuff you don't ever want to look at it again, and changing a *comment* in the source code might suddenly bug a random part of the game and make Avatars look like a giant phallus. Oh wait...
Haha, well I am happy that you spend most of your time messing with your avatars looks and that it's of a big concern to you. However for the rest of us that don't play "Dress Up My Little Pony" during downtime, "BREAK THIS GAME" means CCP telling us how to play a SANDBOX game. And old code is no excuse... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
986
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:13:00 -
[119] - 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... |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2020
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:14:00 -
[120] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:100% passive income has been a part of this game since datacore agents were invented, and especially since PI was introduced. Both allow you to make money with less "at the keyboard"ness than this.
It's not a team security issue and team security has no business declaring it botting: it should be punted to the GM team and the game design team for exploit determinations and fixing respectively. The GM team exists to make consistent decisions that respect previous decisions on how the game can be played, and to provide the proper layers of asking things be looked at again by a fresh set of eyes. It has no business being the province of an algorithm gone rogue.
Nobody ever said anything about passive income. Every example of passive income mentioned thus far has been designed purposely to be so. This was not. It becomes a security issue when it is egregious enough to be virtually identical to botting. The GM team is aware of this news item and the details and the game design team has committed to fixing the problem.
If you have some insight that I don't as to what is or isn't my team's responsibility however please feel free to clue me in because it seems to differ from that of my boss. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
Dregol
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
13
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:14:00 -
[121] - Quote
Damion Rayne wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Damion Rayne wrote:Brokers Clone wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:If you are aware of a way for miners to mine AFK with no third party programs 24 hours a day without being at their machines and managing cargo then I'm all ears. Enter belt with uuber-tanked ship and some nice shiney drones Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty etc...etc...etc... This Sreegs, you obviously don't play the game anymore mate. Except that he stated mining then used ratting as an example, which would certainly still be detected and fall into the same category. It's the same bloody thing! Let me give you an example, I park my hulk in a belt, target roids, put out some drones and practically go afk watching tv on net flix while only every so often switching clients to have my alt come pick up a load. The main account is for all intents, AFK..pretty sure the way I understand how you're handling things lately, you'd ban us from doing this to eventually. I mean come on...what's the exact details of this? What do you define as "Normal Game-play", because I'd like to know. I've been online for 12-13 hour sessions before, and I know other people have.
For those 12-13 hours you still have to be at your computer every so often to empty your cargo hold and haul the ore to a station/pos etc. Killing respawning NPCs 23/7 while not being at your computer is not the same thing.
|
cheese monkey
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:14:00 -
[122] - Quote
Sreegs... Before you alienate your entire player/customer base i suggest you withdraw this and have a think a bit longer. The mere fact that u have edited it 3 times is negligence at best! Its ok to admit you were wrong and say sorry. If anything doing so would GAIN you some respect. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2021
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:15:00 -
[123] - Quote
Damion Rayne wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Damion Rayne wrote:Brokers Clone wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:If you are aware of a way for miners to mine AFK with no third party programs 24 hours a day without being at their machines and managing cargo then I'm all ears. Enter belt with uuber-tanked ship and some nice shiney drones Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty etc...etc...etc... This Sreegs, you obviously don't play the game anymore mate. Except that he stated mining then used ratting as an example, which would certainly still be detected and fall into the same category. It's the same bloody thing! Let me give you an example, I park my hulk in a belt, target roids, put out some drones and practically go afk watching tv on net flix while only every so often switching clients to have my alt come pick up a load. The main account is for all intents, AFK..pretty sure the way I understand how you're handling things lately, you'd ban us from doing this to eventually. I mean come on...what's the exact details of this? What do you define as "Normal Game-play", because I'd like to know. I've been online for 12-13 hour sessions before, and I know other people have.
And how many times have you been banned for this? "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Cifese
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:15:00 -
[124] - 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.
No, you are an idiot because you can't understand the original (updated) news post and the context.
There are complexes that continually spawn rats. They never end. There is no scanning down, no warping to a new site, no action required other than shooting said rats.
IF you enter this complex, drop sentry drones, assign remote reps to those drones, leave your computer for the entire day then repeat that action daily, you have been flagged by the system for this exploit.
Is that clear enough for you? |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
987
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:17:00 -
[125] - 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... |
Damion Rayne
Lorentz Technology Group
109
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:18:00 -
[126] - Quote
War Kitten wrote: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...
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. Teamwork.. Maturity.. Tactics.. www.tacticalgamer.com |
Neidrig
The United Republic of Eve
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:19:00 -
[127] - Quote
Two interesting game mechanics might address the problem and make the game more fun.
First is random spawning super bosses. The most interesting would be a small sleeper or incursion level fleet. These can spawn anywhere. Anyone who is awake and paying attention can escape. Otherwise this roaming boss will just pod you and your little drones 2. For those who are awake and can scramble the appropriate response fleet they get the possibility of sleeper or incursion loot but only after a nasty and costly fight.
As it is incursions are too predictable and not sufficiently menacing. The same goes for sleepers. Where ever there are worm holes there should be the danger of something really dangerous coming in.
The second game mechanic is flying for Concord. I have always been disappointed that there are no Concord or DED agents. Unlike standard mission agents Concord missions would have a definite Game Policing function. The main twist is that these Concord actions would not be just AI based. In general this mechanism would give developers a dynamic interface where any game / player behavior anomalies could be addressed.
As it is Concord, criminal flags and the bounty system are no real threat and have no real teeth.
|
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Test Alliance Please Ignore
93
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:23:00 -
[128] - Quote
If you check out the COSMOS complexes, they are old, old code. They do not de-spawn. Horribly farmed. Biggest problem with completing COSMOS for a normal player is actually being able to get the things you need before the farmers grab them. Players have complained for years about that. The upper level COSMOS are basically unusable at this point because of farmers. So, I'm happy Sreegs did this, even though it is a bandaid fix.
Honestly, I'm not sure why CCP doesn't yank them, then replace them with a more dynamic PVE experience.
When I saw the new and improved mining boats, I saw the massive ore hold of the Mackinaw, my immediate reaction was to start training a mack pilot to "basically AFK mine" on a laptop while I do other things. It isn't a 24/7 thing, sure, but it still feels like it boarders on cheating to me. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
337
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:25:00 -
[129] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Nobody ever said anything about passive income. Every example of passive income mentioned thus far has been designed purposely to be so. This was not. It becomes a security issue when it is egregious enough to be virtually identical to botting. The GM team is aware of this news item and the details and the game design team has committed to fixing the problem.
If you have some insight that I don't as to what is or isn't my team's responsibility however please feel free to clue me in because it seems to differ from that of my boss. There was no botting issue here. This was started by your algorithm thinking that someone was a bot, them challenging that, and the decision being made to decide they were a bot despite no botting software, macro software, game hacks, or the like. Instead of fixing the issue with the botting algorithm (suggested fix: if the client isn't sending server commands it's probably not botting because it's not doing anything), team security decided to take over running enforcement of edge cases where 100% legitimate game behavior allows for something the game designers decide is a bad idea.
There's no good reason for team security to be involved because they don't know what has/hasn't been decided in the past, they don't have layers of review to handle hard cases fairly (if something's a hard case, like 100% legitimate game behavior doing something unexpected you want several sets of eyes on it reviewing it independently, such as regular and senior GMs). Team Security should deal with stuff the GMs are incapable of handling: botting detection, RMT, hacks, and the like that does not involve 100% in-game behavior. Things involving pure in-game behavior is what the GM team is designed to handle and it's their job to handle.
As for the "designed/non-designed" thing (which is nonsense: half of EVE is about doing things that were not designed, from hotdrops to defensive SBUs), here's this:
Say I idle in a NC. system with the name "down with goons" and a bio saying all donations go to fighting goonswarm in some verifiable way, say by a public api (though I keep a percentage, making it personal income). Every so often people go "damn straight down with those goons" and send me money. Am I a bot? I'm just parked in space, cloaked. I suspect I would be, because I'm logged into game making money and the combination of the two would trigger your algorithm (since it clearly doesn't take into account failing to send any commands at all to the server).
Hell, I make passive income every day from simply holding various items that will appreciate in value: fortunately your algorithms don't detect that sort of thing or I might get banned for holding guidance systems as they steadily appreciate in value even if I'm unsubbed. |
DoLoc Two
Grim Determination Clockworks Inc. Nulli Tertius
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:25:00 -
[130] - Quote
Quote:Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong
Mr. GM - Respectfully - BULL! You must live in a socialist world where everybody watches the big screen to see the blinky object move! This game has so many afk features it boggles the mind for anyone to try to control them. This can only be seen as an action to keep your programming job.
Ask your supervisor for an assignment that solves a progammatic error.
I'm going to deploy my t2 mining drones from my orca while I go back to sleeping/mining now. ROFL @ U |
|
Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
1261
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:26:00 -
[131] - Quote
Well, this does seem an ass-backwards way of dealing with the situation CCP
Be sensible and remove these static sites
Make these plexes despawn
Give the rats a finite number of respawns
So basically, fix the game instead of calling out these players as a teacher would to school children
Dont expect players to play how you want them to in a sandbox My homeboys tried to warn me But that butt you got makes me so horny |
Fatbear
Starwinders The Unwilling.
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:27:00 -
[132] - Quote
War Kitten wrote: 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.
The original news article was incredibly ambiguous, as evidenced by the fact it's been edited NUMEROUS times.
I'll use a real world situation as an example of what's taken place here today. UK police (and probably others, but not relevant) use heat detection gear to pickup excessive heating and lighting in house attics to spot illegal cannabis farms. During the winter and snow, these houses stick out like a sore thumb because they're the only building in a ten mile radius that has no snow on their roof (due to the heating systems melting it).
The ORIGINAL unedited unclarified news post was akin to British Police releasing a news article saying "It has come to our attention that drug growers use heating and lighting a lot, which is easy to spot during the winter. Anyone found to use their central heating a lot during December to February may come under investigation".
Ambiguous/vague, borderline erroneous, and frankly panic-causing.
After numerous edits and clarification it is now possibly to see that SPECIFIC fixed cosmos sites (at least known of at present) are creating a UNIQUE set of circumstances that can lead to abuse, and said abuse is punishable. If the original post was as clear and precise as some of you seem to pretend (with all the "lots of people clearly don't have Reading 5 trolllololol" comments and the like), then it wouldn't have needed clarifying so much.
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2023
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:28:00 -
[133] - Quote
cheese monkey wrote:Sreegs... Before you alienate your entire player/customer base i suggest you withdraw this and have a think a bit longer. The mere fact that u have edited it 3 times is negligence at best! Its ok to admit you were wrong and say sorry. If anything doing so would GAIN you some respect.
It was edited once because people misinterpreted my comments to mean that we were banning activity that we aren't. This seems to still be the case. There is a very specific situation which caused this detection which is essentially warping into a particular cosmos plex at downtime, dropping your sentry drones, applying reps to them then leaving your computer until the next downtime. This is possible because in that particular room the drones respawn.
This is going on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. That is bad. If you haven't already heard from us then to date you haven't been doing it. However, there have been cases where people HAVE been doing this and complained that there was no announcement put out about it. Here is the announcement.
This potentially impacts more than the one COSMOS plex which is why the specific COSMOS plex was not mentioned in the OP. Were I to mention it then they would move to a new plex and we'd be dealing with the same rage from them because THIS IS A DIFFERENT PLEX. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
987
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:30:00 -
[134] - 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... |
Octoven
Four Pillar Production Dragehund
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:31:00 -
[135] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:coolzero wrote: it does now at list in a limited way..... mack have 31000m3 ore hold.....this will still take some time to fill while you can go afk while ice mining.
CCP sanctioned AFKness with a CCP set maximum time limit. This is 24 hours, CCP doesn't want 24 hours nor in this way so they are saying you can't do it until they find a solution. This particular form of AFK play has been declared an exploit. If you have feeling on other CCP sanctioned AFK activities it has nothing to do with this declared exploit. Octoven wrote: Your point is valid; however, if they enforce that penalty on AFKing a complex then they must do the same with any other form of AFK actions which is just too much ******* monitoring IMHO they need to focus more on third party programs and fixing their own mechanics instead of saying, "we call party foul, we cant change ti yet but you arent allowed to use it till we do."
No they don't. All they need to moniter is a specific tactic that is used to keep the sentry drones undamaged in only a few of static complex's. Nothing else is needed for this particular exploit. As for calling foul but saying we can't fix it yet, that is the same for all exploits. The Wormhole neg tracking, POS Bowling, Ect.
True enough they DONT have to, but I mean if they are going to go out of the way to look for a specific afk action that fits a broad spectrum of pilots, it only stands to reason they would cover other forms of afk as well |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2023
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:33:00 -
[136] - Quote
Octoven wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote:coolzero wrote: it does now at list in a limited way..... mack have 31000m3 ore hold.....this will still take some time to fill while you can go afk while ice mining.
CCP sanctioned AFKness with a CCP set maximum time limit. This is 24 hours, CCP doesn't want 24 hours nor in this way so they are saying you can't do it until they find a solution. This particular form of AFK play has been declared an exploit. If you have feeling on other CCP sanctioned AFK activities it has nothing to do with this declared exploit. Octoven wrote: Your point is valid; however, if they enforce that penalty on AFKing a complex then they must do the same with any other form of AFK actions which is just too much ******* monitoring IMHO they need to focus more on third party programs and fixing their own mechanics instead of saying, "we call party foul, we cant change ti yet but you arent allowed to use it till we do."
No they don't. All they need to moniter is a specific tactic that is used to keep the sentry drones undamaged in only a few of static complex's. Nothing else is needed for this particular exploit. As for calling foul but saying we can't fix it yet, that is the same for all exploits. The Wormhole neg tracking, POS Bowling, Ect. True enough they DONT have to, but I mean if they are going to go out of the way to look for a specific afk action that fits a broad spectrum of pilots, it only stands to reason they would cover other forms of afk as well
We aren't looking for that action. We're looking for bots. In this case the behavior is similar and it is being abused 24 hours a day. Therefore, we are treating it the same. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Bubanni
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
414
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:35:00 -
[137] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:cheese monkey wrote:Sreegs... Before you alienate your entire player/customer base i suggest you withdraw this and have a think a bit longer. The mere fact that u have edited it 3 times is negligence at best! Its ok to admit you were wrong and say sorry. If anything doing so would GAIN you some respect. It was edited once because people misinterpreted my comments to mean that we were banning activity that we aren't. This seems to still be the case. There is a very specific situation which caused this detection which is essentially warping into a particular cosmos plex at downtime, dropping your sentry drones, applying reps to them then leaving your computer until the next downtime. This is possible because in that particular room the drones respawn. This is going on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. That is bad. If you haven't already heard from us then to date you haven't been doing it. However, there have been cases where people HAVE been doing this and complained that there was no announcement put out about it. Here is the announcement. This potentially impacts more than the one COSMOS plex which is why the specific COSMOS plex was not mentioned in the OP. Were I to mention it then they would move to a new plex and we'd be dealing with the same rage from them because THIS IS A DIFFERENT PLEX.
So what your saying is you havn't banned anyone for doing this yet? Because people have been doing this for years (very few of cause can do it because of the limited amount of these sites)
I think it's fine that CCP now decides this isn't okay anymore, and change the mechanics so it can't be done anymore, but as long as you don't ban anyone for using these simple game mechanics (drop drones, rep them, go afk)
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) Christmas wish list https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134275 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934 |
Kazanir
Eighty Joule Brewery Goonswarm Federation
428
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:36:00 -
[138] - Quote
Every single highsec COSMOS plex behaves in this way -- a static beacon with regularly-respawning rats so that various players can come through the beacon (and its attendant gates and rooms) and complete different missions depending on where they are in which COSMOS chains. If CCP wants this behavior to stop, then they need to make game design changes to every single one of these static beacons, which probably number in the dozens if not hundreds. (Lowsec and nullsec have such static beacons+rooms also.) |
Antihrist Pripravnik
Naglfar Rising
44
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:37:00 -
[139] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:cheese monkey wrote:Sreegs... Before you alienate your entire player/customer base i suggest you withdraw this and have a think a bit longer. The mere fact that u have edited it 3 times is negligence at best! Its ok to admit you were wrong and say sorry. If anything doing so would GAIN you some respect. It was edited once because people misinterpreted my comments to mean that we were banning activity that we aren't. This seems to still be the case. There is a very specific situation which caused this detection which is essentially warping into a particular cosmos plex at downtime, dropping your sentry drones, applying reps to them then leaving your computer until the next downtime. This is possible because in that particular room the drones respawn. This is going on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. That is bad. If you haven't already heard from us then to date you haven't been doing it. However, there have been cases where people HAVE been doing this and complained that there was no announcement put out about it. Here is the announcement. This potentially impacts more than the one COSMOS plex which is why the specific COSMOS plex was not mentioned in the OP. Were I to mention it then they would move to a new plex and we'd be dealing with the same rage from them because THIS IS A DIFFERENT PLEX. This makes sense. Thank you for the explanation. You'll just have to understand community's outrage regarding this matter. It's a very delicate situation that opened some old wounds.
Best of luck in hunting down the bots. CCP Ytterbium: Yarrblblbgrlblbgrlblblblbblbgrlblblbgrblblyarrrrdrooooooolonthekeyboardlikealunatic |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
337
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:37:00 -
[140] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: It was edited once because people misinterpreted my comments to mean that we were banning activity that we aren't. This seems to still be the case. There is a very specific situation which caused this detection which is essentially warping into a particular cosmos plex at downtime, dropping your sentry drones, applying reps to them then leaving your computer until the next downtime. This is possible because in that particular room the drones respawn..
So warn the GMs, have them pay attention to that plex, and don't have the botting algorithm banning people for not-botting? This isn't botting, it's someone figuring out a spot where money rains down on you and standing in that spot. It's not botting, it shouldn't be considered botting, and if you need to get told "sorry we decided you can't stand on that spot" the GM team should be doing it.
This is being delt with by Team Security because of a false positive: this should be used as a case study of types of false positives and the situation handled normally. Hell, it might be a good idea to tweak the algorithm to say "hey this guy appears to be making purely passive income but without botting" and use that to alert the GM team - but it shouldn't be banning a notbot as a bot. |
|
highonpop
Void.Tech Fatal Ascension
198
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:37:00 -
[141] - Quote
CCP could just get rid on infinite respawns
TADA!
Problem solved
http://www.soundboard.com/sb/Very%20best%20of%20Makalu%20Zarya |
MezriDax
BlackWatch Industrial Group Intrepid Crossing
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:38:00 -
[142] - Quote
Does this mean I can't go to the bathroom or get a drink while ice mining anymore? Do I gotta bring in my ship before I go potty? |
Zapson
The Companionship Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:38:00 -
[143] - Quote
Pro Tip: We call it "meetings", we have them before we announce important things or make important decisions. Pro Tip: Bugs can be fixed by Developers, even if you are CCP and you have super large and complex cluster Pro Fact: You should be able to fix such problems, even from a financial standpoint, last time I checked you weren't bankrupt, because some investors saved you.
WE players do not complain about something being bannable because it's "exploity", we are feared because CCP is going down a way, where hard bugged mechanics are reasons for bans. It's like banning people in a public test alpha for encountering and using broken mechanics.
You are constantly enraging the community instead of searching any form of dialogue. I think every EVE player would be very happy to participate in discussions about new PvE/PvP/whatSoEver experiences.
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2024
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:38:00 -
[144] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Nobody ever said anything about passive income. Every example of passive income mentioned thus far has been designed purposely to be so. This was not. It becomes a security issue when it is egregious enough to be virtually identical to botting. The GM team is aware of this news item and the details and the game design team has committed to fixing the problem.
If you have some insight that I don't as to what is or isn't my team's responsibility however please feel free to clue me in because it seems to differ from that of my boss. There was no botting issue here. This was started by your algorithm thinking that someone was a bot, them challenging that, and the decision being made to decide they were a bot despite no botting software, macro software, game hacks, or the like. Instead of fixing the issue with the botting algorithm (suggested fix: if the client isn't sending server commands it's probably not botting because it's not doing anything), team security decided to take over running enforcement of edge cases where 100% legitimate game behavior allows for something the game designers decide is a bad idea. There's no good reason for team security to be involved because they don't know what has/hasn't been decided in the past, they don't have layers of review to handle hard cases fairly (if something's a hard case, like 100% legitimate game behavior doing something unexpected you want several sets of eyes on it reviewing it independently, such as regular and senior GMs). Team Security should deal with stuff the GMs are incapable of handling: botting detection, RMT, hacks, and the like that does not involve 100% in-game behavior. Things involving pure in-game behavior is what the GM team is designed to handle and it's their job to handle. As for the "designed/non-designed" thing (which is nonsense: half of EVE is about doing things that were not designed, from hotdrops to defensive SBUs), here's this: Say I idle in a NC. system with the name "down with goons" and a bio saying all donations go to fighting goonswarm in some verifiable way, say by a public api (though I keep a percentage, making it personal income). Every so often people go "damn straight down with those goons" and send me money. Am I a bot? I'm just parked in space, cloaked. I suspect I would be, because I'm logged into game making money and the combination of the two would trigger your algorithm (since it clearly doesn't take into account failing to send any commands at all to the server). Hell, I make passive income every day from simply holding various items that will appreciate in value: fortunately your algorithms don't detect that sort of thing or I might get banned for holding guidance systems as they steadily appreciate in value even if I'm unsubbed.
Except that the strawman you're presenting isn't the situation we're discussing or saying we're going to be handling and has no bearing or relevance on this particular discussion. We would not be having this conversation based on that activity.
The activity we ARE discussing is identical in every aspect other than involving a 3rd party piece of software to botting. Therefore, until Design can fix it we are not giving people passes when the sensors are tripped.
This might be the 6th time I've said that in this thread. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
CARB0N FIBER
Derailleurs
41
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:39:00 -
[145] - Quote
How do you know I'm AFK?
Are you hacking my web cam?
Is there a time limit on how long I can play?
What is this time limit?
Will this time limit be like other rules, where we don't know what it is till we are banned?
Since playing 23 hours a day is now a bannable offense will we be getting a dicounted rate?
So we pay for 720 hours of game time, in which we can play 690 hours. So how many of the 690 hours of the 720 hours we pay for can we play without getting banned?
Another thing, ALT's. Obviously if you have multiple accounts logged in one is AFK. So should you banned if you have multiple accounts?
I know you saying something like I'm not AFK, I have a screen and keyboard for every account. How do we know that? |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2024
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:39:00 -
[146] - Quote
highonpop wrote:CCP could just get rid on infinite respawns
TADA!
Problem solved
That would certainly fix this particular issue yes. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
337
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:40:00 -
[147] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: We aren't looking for that action. We're looking for bots. In this case the behavior is similar and it is being abused 24 hours a day. Therefore, we are treating it the same.
It's not a bot. It's 100% agreed its a NotBot. There's no reason for it to be treated as "the same" except that the algorithm to detect bots detected a NotBot as a bot. There was no reasoned decision to start treating cases like this where a NotBot is making money in a way that CCP has decided shouldn't be, and the bot detection algorithm changed to do so. Instead, the bot detection system decided a NotBot was a bot, and after proof was supplied the algorithm was wrong, the algorithm was redefined to be right. That's a bad policy and this should be given back to the GM team and the algorithm fixed. |
Diomedes Gambito
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:40:00 -
[148] - Quote
Bagehi wrote:If you check out the COSMOS complexes, they are old, old code. They do not de-spawn. Horribly farmed. Biggest problem with completing COSMOS for a normal player is actually being able to get the things you need before the farmers grab them. Players have complained for years about that. The upper level COSMOS are basically unusable at this point because of farmers. So, I'm happy Sreegs did this, even though it is a bandaid fix.
Simple solution to the old code: Add a random direction warp out command as in log-off sequence within 5 minutes as last rat in the complex was killed at 400km radius. Without the person being around keyboard and mouse to cancel the warpout (collecting his drones etc.) the AFK pilot will find his ship out of the plex and thus unable to generate AFK ISK. Unless the AFK farmers use 3rd party software to cancel the warp ( ban able activity) this will stop the AFK ISK farming.
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2024
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:41:00 -
[149] - Quote
Bubanni wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:cheese monkey wrote:Sreegs... Before you alienate your entire player/customer base i suggest you withdraw this and have a think a bit longer. The mere fact that u have edited it 3 times is negligence at best! Its ok to admit you were wrong and say sorry. If anything doing so would GAIN you some respect. It was edited once because people misinterpreted my comments to mean that we were banning activity that we aren't. This seems to still be the case. There is a very specific situation which caused this detection which is essentially warping into a particular cosmos plex at downtime, dropping your sentry drones, applying reps to them then leaving your computer until the next downtime. This is possible because in that particular room the drones respawn. This is going on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. That is bad. If you haven't already heard from us then to date you haven't been doing it. However, there have been cases where people HAVE been doing this and complained that there was no announcement put out about it. Here is the announcement. This potentially impacts more than the one COSMOS plex which is why the specific COSMOS plex was not mentioned in the OP. Were I to mention it then they would move to a new plex and we'd be dealing with the same rage from them because THIS IS A DIFFERENT PLEX. So what your saying is you havn't banned anyone for doing this yet? Because people have been doing this for years (very few of cause can do it because of the limited amount of these sites) I think it's fine that CCP now decides this isn't okay anymore, and change the mechanics so it can't be done anymore, but as long as you don't ban anyone for using these simple game mechanics (drop drones, rep them, go afk) 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)
What I'm saying is that any bans that were applied (and they wouldhave been recent) will be undone but in the future they will not, as I stated in the news item. This only becomes a problem when it is abused. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
highonpop
Void.Tech Fatal Ascension
198
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:42:00 -
[150] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:highonpop wrote:CCP could just get rid on infinite respawns
TADA!
Problem solved That would certainly fix this particular issue yes.
I've never understood why anything would have a perma-respawn involved. Unless it was a glitch..
http://www.soundboard.com/sb/Very%20best%20of%20Makalu%20Zarya |
|
Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
1261
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:43:00 -
[151] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:highonpop wrote:CCP could just get rid on infinite respawns
TADA!
Problem solved That would certainly fix this particular issue yes. Wouldnt it have been a better move to release a statement saying that you are changing the way that certain plexes work to discourage 'unsavory-but-otherwise-legal' activities of a few players? My homeboys tried to warn me But that butt you got makes me so horny |
Zapson
The Companionship Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:43:00 -
[152] - Quote
I'd like to see more entitlement for MMORPG customers, so that developers are forced to have a minimum standard of stability, otherwise you should be able to sue the hell out of them for banning you, just because they programmed the game terrible. It sounds harsh, but sometimes I just have to shake my head |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
337
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:44:00 -
[153] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: Except that the strawman you're presenting isn't the situation we're discussing or saying we're going to be handling and has no bearing or relevance on this particular discussion. We would not be having this conversation based on that activity.
Exactly!
You're making rules. When you make rules, those apply to new situations you didn't think of. That's what the GM team knows, and that's why they're very careful about making rules because they understand those rules apply in new circumstances unforseen at the time.
The GM team has rules and gives rules to players to allow them to shape their behavior so they don't get punished after the fact for something legitimate. Rules are a good thing: but rules get applied to more than just the situation that made you make the initial rule.
It's not an excuse to say "well, that is different and not what we're talking about". You're making a rule, and that means that it needs to hold up in circumstances you're not looking at right now. That's why it should be handed back to the team in charge of working with players to make rules, so they can make a clear rule for players and deal with the situation appropriately. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
988
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:44:00 -
[154] - 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... |
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Test Alliance Please Ignore
93
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:44:00 -
[155] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: It was edited once because people misinterpreted my comments to mean that we were banning activity that we aren't. This seems to still be the case. There is a very specific situation which caused this detection which is essentially warping into a particular cosmos plex at downtime, dropping your sentry drones, applying reps to them then leaving your computer until the next downtime. This is possible because in that particular room the drones respawn..
So warn the GMs, have them pay attention to that plex, and don't have the botting algorithm banning people for not-botting? This isn't botting, it's someone figuring out a spot where money rains down on you and standing in that spot. It's not botting, it shouldn't be considered botting, and if you need to get told "sorry we decided you can't stand on that spot" the GM team should be doing it. This is being delt with by Team Security because of a false positive: this should be used as a case study of types of false positives and the situation handled normally. Hell, it might be a good idea to tweak the algorithm to say "hey this guy appears to be making purely passive income but without botting" and use that to alert the GM team - but it shouldn't be banning a notbot as a bot.
The EULA does not say "you cannot bot" it says this:
Quote:You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game.
This falls under the bolded phrase. |
Bubanni
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
414
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:45:00 -
[156] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Bubanni wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:cheese monkey wrote:Sreegs... Before you alienate your entire player/customer base i suggest you withdraw this and have a think a bit longer. The mere fact that u have edited it 3 times is negligence at best! Its ok to admit you were wrong and say sorry. If anything doing so would GAIN you some respect. It was edited once because people misinterpreted my comments to mean that we were banning activity that we aren't. This seems to still be the case. There is a very specific situation which caused this detection which is essentially warping into a particular cosmos plex at downtime, dropping your sentry drones, applying reps to them then leaving your computer until the next downtime. This is possible because in that particular room the drones respawn. This is going on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. That is bad. If you haven't already heard from us then to date you haven't been doing it. However, there have been cases where people HAVE been doing this and complained that there was no announcement put out about it. Here is the announcement. This potentially impacts more than the one COSMOS plex which is why the specific COSMOS plex was not mentioned in the OP. Were I to mention it then they would move to a new plex and we'd be dealing with the same rage from them because THIS IS A DIFFERENT PLEX. So what your saying is you havn't banned anyone for doing this yet? Because people have been doing this for years (very few of cause can do it because of the limited amount of these sites) I think it's fine that CCP now decides this isn't okay anymore, and change the mechanics so it can't be done anymore, but as long as you don't ban anyone for using these simple game mechanics (drop drones, rep them, go afk) 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) What I'm saying is that any bans that were applied (and they wouldhave been recent) will be undone but in the future they will not, as I stated in the news item. This only becomes a problem when it is abused.
That sounds fair enough :) as long all the "few" people doing it gets a heads up (not everyone reads the forums or login informations)
Christmas wish list https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134275 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934 |
CARB0N FIBER
Derailleurs
41
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:47:00 -
[157] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Nobody ever said anything about passive income. Every example of passive income mentioned thus far has been designed purposely to be so. This was not. It becomes a security issue when it is egregious enough to be virtually identical to botting. The GM team is aware of this news item and the details and the game design team has committed to fixing the problem.
If you have some insight that I don't as to what is or isn't my team's responsibility however please feel free to clue me in because it seems to differ from that of my boss. There was no botting issue here. This was started by your algorithm thinking that someone was a bot, them challenging that, and the decision being made to decide they were a bot despite no botting software, macro software, game hacks, or the like. Instead of fixing the issue with the botting algorithm (suggested fix: if the client isn't sending server commands it's probably not botting because it's not doing anything), team security decided to take over running enforcement of edge cases where 100% legitimate game behavior allows for something the game designers decide is a bad idea. There's no good reason for team security to be involved because they don't know what has/hasn't been decided in the past, they don't have layers of review to handle hard cases fairly (if something's a hard case, like 100% legitimate game behavior doing something unexpected you want several sets of eyes on it reviewing it independently, such as regular and senior GMs). Team Security should deal with stuff the GMs are incapable of handling: botting detection, RMT, hacks, and the like that does not involve 100% in-game behavior. Things involving pure in-game behavior is what the GM team is designed to handle and it's their job to handle. As for the "designed/non-designed" thing (which is nonsense: half of EVE is about doing things that were not designed, from hotdrops to defensive SBUs), here's this: Say I idle in a NC. system with the name "down with goons" and a bio saying all donations go to fighting goonswarm in some verifiable way, say by a public api (though I keep a percentage, making it personal income). Every so often people go "damn straight down with those goons" and send me money. Am I a bot? I'm just parked in space, cloaked. I suspect I would be, because I'm logged into game making money and the combination of the two would trigger your algorithm (since it clearly doesn't take into account failing to send any commands at all to the server). Hell, I make passive income every day from simply holding various items that will appreciate in value: fortunately your algorithms don't detect that sort of thing or I might get banned for holding guidance systems as they steadily appreciate in value even if I'm unsubbed. Except that the strawman you're presenting isn't the situation we're discussing or saying we're going to be handling and has no bearing or relevance on this particular discussion. We would not be having this conversation based on that activity. The activity we ARE discussing is identical in every aspect other than involving a 3rd party piece of software to botting. Therefore, until Design can fix it we are not giving people passes when the sensors are tripped. This might be the 6th time I've said that in this thread.
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?
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2024
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:49:00 -
[158] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: We aren't looking for that action. We're looking for bots. In this case the behavior is similar and it is being abused 24 hours a day. Therefore, we are treating it the same.
It's not a bot. It's 100% agreed its a NotBot. There's no reason for it to be treated as "the same" except that the algorithm to detect bots detected a NotBot as a bot. There was no reasoned decision to start treating cases like this where a NotBot is making money in a way that CCP has decided shouldn't be, and the bot detection algorithm changed to do so. Instead, the bot detection system decided a NotBot was a bot, and after proof was supplied the algorithm was wrong, the algorithm was redefined to be right. That's a bad policy and this should be given back to the GM team and the algorithm fixed.
The activity itself falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within. I get it you don't like it. You can't change that however. With botting we concern ourselves with more than the technical limitations but rather what types of behavior and automation we find unacceptable.
You can say that you prefer that we allow people to AFK farm complexes with sentry drones 24 hours a day and that's a position we'd disagree with, but it's a position.
It's really hard to respond with facts to completely made up scenarios so if we're to have a dialogue of this sort at any point in the future hopefully we can stick to what actually happened instead of how you've decided in your head the process went or how the reporting structure works. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Brokers Clone
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:50:00 -
[159] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Brokers Clone wrote:...Stuff... Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty etc...etc...etc... Except that he stated mining then used ratting as an example, which would certainly still be detected and fall into the same category.
WOW.
Dude, I am beginning to think that this is an issue that is going to need CSM input.. I mean.... there are LOTS of cases where Rats spawn.... and lots of people sit and wait (at PC or away)
There are mining ships that mine all day long, unattended (with alts or team members lugging away can contents from time to time)
If ANY of this, NON-BOTTING, Activity is going to change, Fine BUT YOU NEED TO SAY SO IN 70 point Font, Everywhere And I think you might want to ring the CSM
|
Octoven
Four Pillar Production Dragehund
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:50:00 -
[160] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:
And how many times have you been banned for this?
Obviously he hasnt been banned any since this new policy hasnt been implemented before today so why should he be banned? Yes, I see it the same way. I mean your account can sit there for 24 hours ratting belts and do nothing else. Just tank up and set the drones out on aggressive. Now your making bounty you can go out and have a dinner and a movie, do some shopping. I mean your making money on a mechanic that is never designed for passive income, should this be a bannable offense as well? |
|
Lord Helghast
Dirty Old Bastards Nulli Secunda
113
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:52:00 -
[161] - Quote
If this is the case does that finally mean AFK Cloaking is also going to be an offense since it is affecting the game while completely away from the computer? |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
989
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:53:00 -
[162] - 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... |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2024
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:53:00 -
[163] - Quote
Brokers Clone wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Brokers Clone wrote:...Stuff... Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty etc...etc...etc... Except that he stated mining then used ratting as an example, which would certainly still be detected and fall into the same category. WOW. Dude, I am beginning to think that this is an issue that is going to need CSM input.. I mean.... there are LOTS of cases where Rats spawn.... and lots of people sit and wait (at PC or away) There are mining ships that mine all day long, unattended (with alts or team members lugging away can contents from time to time) If ANY of this, NON-BOTTING, Activity is going to change, Fine BUT YOU NEED TO SAY SO IN 70 point Font, Everywhere And I think you might want to ring the CSM
And none of them fall within this category. Feel free to alert the CSM. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
339
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:53:00 -
[164] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: You can say that you prefer that we allow people to AFK farm complexes with sentry drones 24 hours a day and that's a position we'd disagree with, but it's a position.
It's really hard to respond with facts to completely made up scenarios so if we're to have a dialogue of this sort at any point in the future hopefully we can stick to what actually happened instead of how you've decided in your head the process went or how the reporting structure works.
I don't really. I do have a problem with an automated system going rogue and banning people for things that are different than what it is supposed to ban people for, and that failure being redefined into a success. The proper method for dealing with this exists and I want that used both now and in the future.
If a GM had come out and said "we've investigated this and decided it shouldn't be allowed anymore", that'd be one thing. That happens - for example, pos bowling was legitimate and then after human review people decided it was a bad mechanic that needed to be banned until it was patched out. But players in that circumstance should have the ability to deal with a GM just like anyone doing anything else on the edge of the game rules but without violating the bots/hacks/macros/rmt rules.
And those rules should be thought about ahead of time (by humans) and then applied prospectively. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2027
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:56:00 -
[165] - Quote
Octoven wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
And how many times have you been banned for this?
Obviously he hasnt been banned any since this new policy hasnt been implemented before today so why should he be banned? Yes, I see it the same way. I mean your account can sit there for 24 hours ratting belts and do nothing else. Just tank up and set the drones out on aggressive. Now your making bounty you can go out and have a dinner and a movie, do some shopping. I mean your making money on a mechanic that is never designed for passive income, should this be a bannable offense as well?
Anyone who was performing the activity I'm referring to in the news item has most likely already been banned for doing so. Another item about the belt ratting bit is that in the scenario you paint the amount of income gained is basically nothing. In the scenario we're specifically discussing in this thread you are making a lot more money. By a factor of a whole bunch. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
arcca jeth
Dark Alliance Dark Empire Alliance
134
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:57:00 -
[166] - Quote
I think that some people are taking this way too far. Don't be ridiculous with your assumptions people. I support CCP's better judgement here. No one could possibly play 24hours straight and be at the keyboard the whole time. Unless you have your laptop on the counter in the kitchen and using a bucket as a toilet.
This doesn't affect me, and a big LOL at the people who it does affect. GAME ON! |
CARB0N FIBER
Derailleurs
41
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:57:00 -
[167] - Quote
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.
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
339
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:58:00 -
[168] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: Anyone who was performing the activity I'm referring to in the news item has most likely already been banned for doing so. Another item about the belt ratting bit is that in the scenario you paint the amount of income gained is basically nothing. In the scenario we're specifically discussing in this thread you are making a lot more money. By a factor of a whole bunch.
What amount of money changes NotBotting into Botting, given the exact same use of game mechanics? |
Florestan Bronstein
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
552
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:59:00 -
[169] - Quote
When I was ready to build my first battlecruiser I grabbed a Bestower, fitted a T1 mining laser to it, activated it on a huge Veldspar asteroid and went to sleep. The next morning I had enough Tritanium to start the production job.
Guess it's time to hand myself in for botting? |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
989
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:00:00 -
[170] - 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... |
|
BrianOfNazerath
Eclipse Navy Get Off My Lawn
32
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:02:00 -
[171] - Quote
So i am not allowed to go afk in a plex, while mining, or hell going AFk at all while logged in or i am going to get banned for it? |
arcca jeth
Dark Alliance Dark Empire Alliance
134
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:02:00 -
[172] - Quote
Lord Helghast wrote:If this is the case does that finally mean AFK Cloaking is also going to be an offense since it is affecting the game while completely away from the computer?
AFK cloaking is not an isk generating activity. where do you people learn how to make comparisons? It's like those kids in pre-school who keep trying to shove that square into a round hole |
CARB0N FIBER
Derailleurs
41
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:03:00 -
[173] - Quote
War Kitten wrote: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
First I am no way part of this AFK play style, I can barely keep a connection long enough to warp from the station to the gate.
My point is you can't prove I'm away from my keyboard. Even if you could, no where in the EULA does it say I have to be at my keyboard. The rules can't be out to get me because it doesn't exist. What I'm saying is these people are not altering the game. If CCP doesn't like how they are playing, CCP needs to change the way the game works. Not ban people for playing the game they are paying for. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2027
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:04:00 -
[174] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: You can say that you prefer that we allow people to AFK farm complexes with sentry drones 24 hours a day and that's a position we'd disagree with, but it's a position.
It's really hard to respond with facts to completely made up scenarios so if we're to have a dialogue of this sort at any point in the future hopefully we can stick to what actually happened instead of how you've decided in your head the process went or how the reporting structure works.
I don't really. I do have a problem with an automated system going rogue and banning people for things that are different than what it is supposed to ban people for, and that failure being redefined into a success. The proper method for dealing with this exists and I want that used both now and in the future. If a GM had come out and said "we've investigated this and decided it shouldn't be allowed anymore", that'd be one thing. That happens - for example, pos bowling was legitimate and then after human review people decided it was a bad mechanic that needed to be banned until it was patched out. But players in that circumstance should have the ability to deal with a GM just like anyone doing anything else on the edge of the game rules but without violating the bots/hacks/macros/rmt rules. And those rules should be thought about ahead of time (by humans) and then applied prospectively.
If I'm reading what you're saying here correctly you're presuming that we haven't already gone over this internally. 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.
The only difference between now and the halcyon days of yesteryear is that when I tell you something's bad I can actually monitor it to make sure you're not doing it with some accuracy. There may very well be other exploitable conditions in the future that will fall within this same ideal. Detecting bad activity is detecting bad activity. I don't really see how it's relevant that a particular system alerted us to the anomaly, regardless of its function. If we WERE measuring for this then we wouldn't have had to make this news item because it would already have been made.
"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Eli Green
The Arrow Project
15
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:04:00 -
[175] - Quote
What about trading? you don't even have to be logged in, yet you can be making huge amounts of isk every day. Does this go against your (CCPs) concept of AFK passive isk making as? |
arcca jeth
Dark Alliance Dark Empire Alliance
134
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:05:00 -
[176] - Quote
BrianOfNazerath wrote:So i am not allowed to go afk in a plex, while mining, or hell going AFk at all while logged in or i am going to get banned for it?
look at all these Scott Tenormans!
go re-read his announcement |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2032
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:06:00 -
[177] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: Anyone who was performing the activity I'm referring to in the news item has most likely already been banned for doing so. Another item about the belt ratting bit is that in the scenario you paint the amount of income gained is basically nothing. In the scenario we're specifically discussing in this thread you are making a lot more money. By a factor of a whole bunch.
What amount of money changes NotBotting into Botting, given the exact same use of game mechanics?
Instead of inventing words that we don't use internally and applying them to your own perception of what we're looking at let's ask about behavior which is what we usually talk about publically. In that case behavior which leads to no tangible benefit is acceptable.
It's not about botting. It just so happens that this is the discussion we're usually having when we're talking about this type of behavior.
:edit: In this case someone was making significant income running their PC 24 hours a day 7 days a week. The system designed to detect that did. Enter news item. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Octoven
Four Pillar Production Dragehund
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:07:00 -
[178] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Octoven wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
And how many times have you been banned for this?
Obviously he hasnt been banned any since this new policy hasnt been implemented before today so why should he be banned? Yes, I see it the same way. I mean your account can sit there for 24 hours ratting belts and do nothing else. Just tank up and set the drones out on aggressive. Now your making bounty you can go out and have a dinner and a movie, do some shopping. I mean your making money on a mechanic that is never designed for passive income, should this be a bannable offense as well? Anyone who was performing the activity I'm referring to in the news item has most likely already been banned for doing so. Another item about the belt ratting bit is that in the scenario you paint the amount of income gained is basically nothing. In the scenario we're specifically discussing in this thread you are making a lot more money. By a factor of a whole bunch.
Well you cant very well say that I mean you cant place a monetary value on AFKing. Especially after you blatantly stated,
"The activity itself falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within. I get it you don't like it. You can't change that however. With botting we concern ourselves with more than the technical limitations but rather what types of behavior and automation we find unacceptable."
Essentially the ideology of AFKing is to generate profit. Granted its small amounts; however, it still falls under the same philosophical idea. The moment you blurred the lines between botting and AFK actions is the moment that idea became more prevalent to apply to all forms of AFK income. |
arcca jeth
Dark Alliance Dark Empire Alliance
134
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:08:00 -
[179] - Quote
Eli Green wrote:What about trading? you don't even have to be logged in, yet you can be making huge amounts of isk every day. Does this go against your (CCPs) concept of AFK passive isk making as?
Go re-read the announcement |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
292
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:08:00 -
[180] - Quote
Damion Rayne wrote:I honestly and whole hardheartedly believe you have NO clue what you're doing. I'm going to go out on a limb here and publicly denounce pretty much everything you say. 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? I've got NO confidence in you as a Dev Sreegs, None.
You're, quite frankly, an idiot.
This ruling in no way affects what you do in 0.0 while running PLEXes in the safety of your Sov under the comforting blankie of Intel networks. This is specifically about High-sec STATIC PLEXes that continuously spawn NPCs and can be farmed 100% AFK from DT to DT.
Try not to be so intentionally clueless and obtuse if you choose to post again in this thread which, clearly, would just make you look dumber. |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
2036
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:08:00 -
[181] - Quote
Octoven wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Octoven wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
And how many times have you been banned for this?
Obviously he hasnt been banned any since this new policy hasnt been implemented before today so why should he be banned? Yes, I see it the same way. I mean your account can sit there for 24 hours ratting belts and do nothing else. Just tank up and set the drones out on aggressive. Now your making bounty you can go out and have a dinner and a movie, do some shopping. I mean your making money on a mechanic that is never designed for passive income, should this be a bannable offense as well? Anyone who was performing the activity I'm referring to in the news item has most likely already been banned for doing so. Another item about the belt ratting bit is that in the scenario you paint the amount of income gained is basically nothing. In the scenario we're specifically discussing in this thread you are making a lot more money. By a factor of a whole bunch. Well you cant very well say that I mean you cant place a monetary value on AFKing. Especially after you blatantly stated, "The activity itself falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within. I get it you don't like it. You can't change that however. With botting we concern ourselves with more than the technical limitations but rather what types of behavior and automation we find unacceptable." Essentially the ideology of AFKing is to generate profit. Granted its small amounts; however, it still falls under the same philosophical idea. The moment you blurred the lines between botting and AFK actions is the moment that idea became more prevalent to apply to all forms of AFK income.
Nothing has changed about our philosophy as regards what we are or aren't looking for behavior-wise. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Naomi Shana
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:14:00 -
[182] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Anyone who was performing the activity I'm referring to in the news item has most likely already been banned for doing so. Another item about the belt ratting bit is that in the scenario you paint the amount of income gained is basically nothing. In the scenario we're specifically discussing in this thread you are making a lot more money. By a factor of a whole bunch.
So the concern really isn't that people are using the tools given to them by the game design to make isk, it's that they're making a lot of isk doing it.
You just keep digging the hole deeper and deeper. I highly suggest back off your position and fix the problem in the game mechanics instead of making threats about banning non-botters and scaring the crap out of everyone.
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?!"
And then they come here and read that CCP would rather make non-specific threats and varied explanations (is the issue afk isk or lots of afk isk?) as to why this is being done instead of simply fixing the problem where it started: in the code.
Less Godzilla, more diplomacy.
Let me help:
"Hit there, this is CCP. We're turning off a few high-sec missions while we adjust the code, sorry for the inconvenince."
And if you can't simply turn them off while fixing them, then let the problem continue until you do fix it. You caused the problem, it's not causing any huge issues, what's the big deal if some afk'ers make a few more iskies until you can roll out the fix? It's certainly 100x better than the customer relations problem you're causing by going this route. |
Octoven
Four Pillar Production Dragehund
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:14:00 -
[183] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: Nothing has changed about our philosophy as regards what we are or aren't looking for behavior-wise.
The philosophy hasn't changed, only the areas by which that philosophy governs has been changed. Botting and Exploiting are zero tolerance actions, as such by including one form of AFK income generation you have to include it all. Failure to do this results in questioning what types of botting are acceptable. CCP has banned botting and by doing so banned all forms of botting, thus if you banned AFKing for huge profits you have to do it all the way round.
Right now your cutting off the arm to save the patient but you arent stopping the bleeding. |
Evanga
Trust Doesn't Rust Against ALL Authorities
21
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:17:00 -
[184] - Quote
yes, stop afk cloaking! |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
994
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:18:00 -
[185] - 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... |
SmashTech
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
75
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:21:00 -
[186] - Quote
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. |
ps3ud0nym
O C C U P Y Tribal Band
94
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:22:00 -
[187] - Quote
This is a fantastic change! The big question though, is this going to be applied fairly? If you are going to hit AFK complex runners, then you most certainly should be hitting AFK miners. |
Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
1263
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:24:00 -
[188] - Quote
Why was the first priority to ban the player instead of fixing the game? My homeboys tried to warn me But that butt you got makes me so horny |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
292
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:24:00 -
[189] - Quote
ps3ud0nym wrote:This is a fantastic change! The big question though, is this going to be applied fairly? If you are going to hit AFK complex runners, then you most certainly should be hitting AFK miners.
Are you unable to read? Or is it simply your comprehension that is stunted? This is about a very specific form of AFK Plexing that in no way has anything to do with mining or any other activities or scenarios that your feeble mind can imagine. Enough with the strawmen, k? |
Hassel Leet
New Rules
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:25:00 -
[190] - Quote
War Kitten wrote: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*
This ^ |
|
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
996
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:27:00 -
[191] - 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... |
Fatbear
Starwinders The Unwilling.
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:28:00 -
[192] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: Anyone who was performing the activity I'm referring to in the news item has most likely already been banned for doing so. Another item about the belt ratting bit is that in the scenario you paint the amount of income gained is basically nothing. In the scenario we're specifically discussing in this thread you are making a lot more money. By a factor of a whole bunch.
This is a worrying post.
As stated by others, you've just placed a monetary value on the acceptable limit of AFK performance.
You've just quite directly said that 23/7 AFK drone farming is perfectly acceptable in one form (belt ratting) because the income is low, but bannable in another form (these funky COSMOS things) because the income is high.
I really don't mean to sound as if I'm jumping on the "flame a dev" wagon here, but I'd rather be clear on details and you seem to clarify in one step then muddy the waters with another. |
A Research Alt
Perkone Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:30:00 -
[193] - Quote
Yeah now that I think about it CCP should ban everyone involved in moon mining, too, since they never do anything past the initial set up and the occasional run every few days to collect money.
BAN MOON MINERS, IT'S ONLY FAIR. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
343
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:32:00 -
[194] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: It's not about botting. It just so happens that this is the discussion we're usually having when we're talking about this type of behavior.
:edit: In this case someone was making significant income running their PC 24 hours a day 7 days a week. The system designed to detect that did. Enter news item.
Of course this is about botting. It was detected by the "never a false positive" botting system, botting sanctions (presumably including the 'no character transfers' sanction) were applied, and the activity was described as being effectively the same as botting when - according to the rule players have for what botting is, "using a bot" - it isn't, all make this an issue where we're talking about botting. And we're talking about botting because Team Security is handling it instead of the GM team. And it's not that there was internal deliberation over who ought to handle this. The sequence of events was that Team Security had a false positive and flagged a NotBot as a bot. Botting sanctions were applied, and the player at issue petitioned to prove he was not a bot and did so successfully. In response, Team Security declared that it didn't matter he was a Notbot instead of a bot, and declared that the botting algorithms flagging him as a bot were not a false positive. That response wasn't from a GM. That was from a member of team security.
Only after outrage over this response, presumably, was this internal deliberative process invoked where Team Security had already taken over, to confirm what had already happened. That was a mistake. Team Security deals with botting issues, and we know this is a botting issue and not a standard "spirit of the EULA" issue because it's only botting issues that bypass the GMs.
You also, again, give us a really bad rule when you say you can't get a "tangible benefit" from afk activity: afk cloaking gives me an extremely tangible benefit. I deny my opponent income, give myself the chance for kills, get hilarious rage in local. Used en masse, I can shut down an enemy alliance's income stream (as in a post-tech environment ratting and renting fees are your income) allowing me and my friends to take over a region. In fact, this is commonly used for this exact purpose. None of these are raw isk, but it's still an extremely tangible benefit you can quantify relatively easily.
There's a reason the GM team deals with these rules: they're used to thinking them through and giving players good, clear, and fair rules that are intended to apply anywhere they would reasonably be thought to apply rather than simply one-off cases where the rule given doesn't apply anywhere else. |
Octoven
Four Pillar Production Dragehund
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:34:00 -
[195] - Quote
A Research Alt wrote:Yeah now that I think about it CCP should ban everyone involved in moon mining, too, since they never do anything past the initial set up and the occasional run every few days to collect money.
BAN MOON MINERS, IT'S ONLY FAIR.
This would certainly fall under the category of making tons of money in a 24 hour period now doesnt it? lol |
ps3ud0nym
O C C U P Y Tribal Band
96
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:36:00 -
[196] - Quote
Suqq Madiq wrote:ps3ud0nym wrote:This is a fantastic change! The big question though, is this going to be applied fairly? If you are going to hit AFK complex runners, then you most certainly should be hitting AFK miners. Are you unable to read? Or is it simply your comprehension that is stunted? This is about a very specific form of AFK Plexing that in no way has anything to do with mining or any other activities or scenarios that your feeble mind can imagine. Enough with the strawmen, k?
Apparently you didn't read the entire dev blog. I shall repost the parts that are relevant, but I doubt your ability to read words of more than a single syllable. You seem particularly stupid:
"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."
AFK mining is also "Generating an income in an automated fashion".
How exactly do you manage to live without a brain is a mystery for the ages. |
Gossamer DT
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
82
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:38:00 -
[197] - Quote
I too once had a sandbox, I keep changing it adding restriction that firmed up the sand like: Calcium, Aluminum, iron and water...
I no longer have a sandbox who is your main, and what does he do? |
Claire Voyant
135
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:38:00 -
[198] - Quote
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? |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
769
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:38:00 -
[199] - Quote
Octoven wrote:A Research Alt wrote:Yeah now that I think about it CCP should ban everyone involved in moon mining, too, since they never do anything past the initial set up and the occasional run every few days to collect money.
BAN MOON MINERS, IT'S ONLY FAIR. This would certainly fall under the category of making tons of money in a 24 hour period now doesnt it? lol
Agreed. Ban all moon mining.
Trillions made a week.
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
292
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:40:00 -
[200] - Quote
ps3ud0nym wrote:Suqq Madiq wrote:ps3ud0nym wrote:This is a fantastic change! The big question though, is this going to be applied fairly? If you are going to hit AFK complex runners, then you most certainly should be hitting AFK miners. Are you unable to read? Or is it simply your comprehension that is stunted? This is about a very specific form of AFK Plexing that in no way has anything to do with mining or any other activities or scenarios that your feeble mind can imagine. Enough with the strawmen, k? Apparently you didn't read the entire dev blog. I shall repost the parts that are relevant, but I doubt your ability to read words of more than a single syllable. You seem particularly stupid: "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."AFK mining is also "Generating an income in an automated fashion". How exactly do you manage to live without a brain is a mystery for the ages.
Look at you with all your wits about you. It's cute and mildly impressive. But it still doesn't discount the fact that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Keep throwing out those strawmen though. You totally don't like a tool because of it. |
|
Mike Head
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:40:00 -
[201] - Quote
War Kitten wrote: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.
Anyone who understands what's going on should continually quote this. Just quote this. Get the message out.
|
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
997
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:41:00 -
[202] - 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... |
Mr Forsaken
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:43:00 -
[203] - Quote
Suggested Solution:
Make it so drones/sentries/fighters/fighterbombers do not auto engage enemies.
Not that I would like that.. but whatever makes ccp happy and prevents afk carriers or whatever. |
SmashTech
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
75
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:43:00 -
[204] - Quote
Suqq Madiq wrote:Look at you with all your wits about you. It's cute and mildly impressive. But it still doesn't discount the fact that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Keep throwing out those strawmen though. You totally don't like a tool because of it.
Why don't you Suqq Madiq |
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Test Alliance Please Ignore
95
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:44:00 -
[205] - 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?!"
Actually, I immediately knew what this was in reference to and thought "about f'ing time!" considering it has been a problem for years. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
770
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:48:00 -
[206] - Quote
CCP Sreegs, don't hate me for this.
What happens if I prove I was at the controls for 8 hours, away for 8 hours and back for 8 hours for the rest of the day?
Do the 8 hours I was AFK count as breaking the rules despite the other 8 Hours being actively available at the controls? Chatting, marketing, etc, etc?
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
1266
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:53:00 -
[207] - Quote
This is a whole load of preventable drama
pointing the fingers at the players instead of the game My homeboys tried to warn me But that butt you got makes me so horny |
Xenuria
Marcabian 5th Invasion Fleet
594
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:54:00 -
[208] - Quote
The perfect opportunity to plug my stance on the matter.
http://soundcloud.com/xenuria/csm8-activity-vs-inactivity Xenuria CSM 8 |
Cifese
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:54:00 -
[209] - Quote
So this thread is pure gold. For those of you too busy to read it all, here's a tl:dr:
1. CCP has a system/algorithm that detects botting. 2. This system caught some folks who petitioned, saying they weren't botting. 3. CCP evaluated, said, "yep, you weren't botting, but what you were doing isn't allowed, so stop it" 4. They made that information public, so others wouldn't repeat the mistakes already flagged. 5. They have said they are going to "fix it" but there isn't a schedule, so it's an exploit.
and
6. Lots of people can't read, so they don't comprehend the news item and ragepost. 7. Others want to know the exact details of CCP's algorithm for botting detection so they can work around it (hmmm) 8. Forum Trolls do their job here as well.
That should about sum it up. |
cheese monkey
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:55:00 -
[210] - Quote
Naomi Shana wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Anyone who was performing the activity I'm referring to in the news item has most likely already been banned for doing so. Another item about the belt ratting bit is that in the scenario you paint the amount of income gained is basically nothing. In the scenario we're specifically discussing in this thread you are making a lot more money. By a factor of a whole bunch. So the concern really isn't that people are using the tools given to them by the game design to make isk, it's that they're making a lot of isk doing it. You just keep digging the hole deeper and deeper. I highly suggest back off your position and fix the problem in the game mechanics instead of making threats about banning non-botters and scaring the crap out of everyone. 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?!" And then they come here and read that CCP would rather make non-specific threats and varied explanations (is the issue afk isk or lots of afk isk?) as to why this is being done instead of simply fixing the problem where it started: in the code. Less Godzilla, more diplomacy. Let me help: "Hit there, this is CCP. We're turning off a few high-sec missions while we adjust the code, sorry for the inconvenince." And if you can't simply turn them off while fixing them, then let the problem continue until you do fix it. You caused the problem, it's not causing any huge issues, what's the big deal if some afk'ers make a few more iskies until you can roll out the fix? It's certainly 100x better than the customer relations problem you're causing by going this route.
THIS |
|
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
292
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:55:00 -
[211] - Quote
Skippermonkey wrote:This is a whole load of preventable drama
pointing the fingers at the players instead of the game
It's not the game that's abusing game mechanics. It's the players. Like every other instance in the past of the players abusing game mechanics, they pay for it first and then the mechanic is fixed. This should come as no surprise to anybody. |
Radgette
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:56:00 -
[212] - Quote
lol i think for any future posting Mr Sreegs you should ask for the community teams permission and get them to proof read any pish you write first because you come over as a total douche in both the news item and this thread.
a more informative and less aggresively toned news item would have avoided this entire stupid thread of back and forth crap.
yes this is unintended and needs to change BUT it's been happening for what 3 years now, hardly a new occurance and also you added a NEW way to do it recently with the main faction epic arcs. doing things unintended by ccp has been happening since eve began :p
fyi i have never done it because i make more money at my pc than doing this afk and haven't trained sentries .
|
SmashTech
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:57:00 -
[213] - Quote
Hey Sreegs, answer me this
How much money is "too much money"?
Give me a concrete answer, not just "a lot." Bullshit rules are vague. Good ones are not. |
Antal Jozsef
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:59:00 -
[214] - Quote
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? |
Mike Head
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:02:00 -
[215] - 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.
Fozzy, please read the entirety of the news article. It explicitly explains that only one form of AFK activity has been banned, and that eating, peeing, and anything that doesn't require you to be inactive for 24 hour stints is acceptable.
The reason mining is acceptable is because you can't possibly fit something to be AFK for 24 hours, continually mining and never run out of room, and never ONCE be touched to jettison cargo.
Certain elements were designed to be done in an AFK fashion, such as PI and trade.
What was NOT designed to be done in an AFK fashion is camping a rat respawn for days at a time, without touching your ship or issuing further commands.
I hope this clarifies everything, and if anyone else doesn't get it, I'm fairly certain you're a troll so please troll someone else's bridge. |
SmashTech
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:04:00 -
[216] - Quote
Here's my stance on your post: get out |
Mike Head
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:04:00 -
[217] - 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 can't read. They are working on fixing it. UNTIL THEY'RE DONE FIXING IT, IT'S A BANNABLE OFFENSE.
I decided to play EVE because I was under the impression you had to have a certain level of intellectual ability to play. But if you can't read the entirety of an article and get the gist, I think you should retake the tutorial. |
Ghost Frog
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:05:00 -
[218] - Quote
it occurs to me that in order to catch people doing this, you'll have to be flagging them in some way. why not just feed the flag to the NPCs? If {player name} kills {total number of rats for 1 plex spawn} then spawn {2*[total number of rats for 1 plex spawn]} Incursion rats. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
998
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:06:00 -
[219] - 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... |
Georgiy Giggle
REFORD Division REFORD
55
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:08:00 -
[220] - Quote
Bull sh*t. If you do not like your mechanic, maybe you should remove sentry drones from a game, hah?
Stop this cr*p! Better find out how to remove macrobots, who farm trillions per week and build cap ships every day. Bring a balance to game between real players and bots, instead of beating REAL players only!!!
BTW, are you talking about all complexes or only about rapidly-spawning npcs complexes? Not mastering proprieties, won't become firmly established. - Confucius |
|
Puissant
Tempora Heroica
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:09:00 -
[221] - Quote
Sarik Olecar wrote:Oh noez! My PI! My Market Orders! My Ice Mining!
Will I be banned too???
Seriously, if Drones weren't meant for AFK / Computer assisted play then what CCP? How much ISK could these AFK complex runners be injecting into the EVEverse? |
Naomi Shana
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:10:00 -
[222] - Quote
Mike Head wrote: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. Fozzy, please read the entirety of the news article. It explicitly explains that only one form of AFK activity has been banned, and that eating, peeing, and anything that doesn't require you to be inactive for 24 hour stints is acceptable. The reason mining is acceptable is because you can't possibly fit something to be AFK for 24 hours, continually mining and never run out of room, and never ONCE be touched to jettison cargo. Certain elements were designed to be done in an AFK fashion, such as PI and trade. What was NOT designed to be done in an AFK fashion is camping a rat respawn for days at a time, without touching your ship or issuing further commands. I hope this clarifies everything, and if anyone else doesn't get it, I'm fairly certain you're a troll so please troll someone else's bridge.
You're missing points as well.
Sreegs has said that you CAN sit in a belt letting your drones kill rats all day while afk but you CAN'T do the same exact thing in some specific missions because of the difference in income.
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. |
Ghost Frog
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:11:00 -
[223] - Quote
Mike Head wrote: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 can't read. They are working on fixing it. UNTIL THEY'RE DONE FIXING IT, IT'S A BANNABLE OFFENSE. I decided to play EVE because I was under the impression you had to have a certain level of intellectual ability to play. But if you can't read the entirety of an article and get the gist, I think you should retake the tutorial. Perhaps your intellect isn't as sharp as you would like to believe. I was under the impression that everyone knew that the EVE forums were heavily populated with players looking to spin various arguments for their own purposes. "Meta" and all that. IF YOU READ CAREFULLY, MAYBE YOU WILL FIGURE IT OUT. But I doubt it. |
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:13:00 -
[224] - Quote
Pak Narhoo wrote:Reading skill are not at 5 for a lot of posters here.
/me sad....
QFT
TLDR:
Everybody who is blaming CCP or whining about GÇ£the sandboxGÇ¥ GÇô get a f*****g clue!
Solution to the problem GÇô revise COSMOS missions and complexes. They havenGÇÖt been touched since they were implemented, and that was how long ago GÇô 6-7 years? Increase the rewards from COSMOS missions GÇô most of the storyline modules you receive are worthless and way too expensive to build. At the same time, increase the difficulty of the COSMOS missions GÇô make the NPCs tougher, maybe give them Sleeper-like AI. Turn COSMOS missions into a real end-game PvE content.
Long, idiot friendly version:
I canGÇÖt believe I am going to agree with a goon and defend CCP, but I am still not at the point where I will call the white color black, just because I donGÇÖt like it. So here it goesGǪ
Almost all legitimate (which do not include a third party automation software and will NOT get you banned) AFK activities in EVE are limited by game mechanics or by the EVE players themselves. For example - every afk miner has to empty his cargohold manually after a period of time (40 minutes or so), every afk mission runner has to manually move his ship to the next pocket after clearing the one he is currently in, afk ratting in 0.0 gets you killed and so on. The people that CCPGÇÖs message was addressed to, are not limited by game mechanics and they were exploiting this. So even though this was not made very clear in the original message, everyone with simple powers of deduction should have been able to reach this logical conclusion. For the special boys GÇô AFK MINING/MISSIONING IS NOT THE SAME AS AFK FARMING A COSMOS COMPLEX.
I can think of at least 3 or 4 complexes in the Caldari and Amarr COSMOS constellations which can be farmed by utilizing the sentry drones tactic. I guess there are some complexes in the Gallente and Minmatar constellations as well. The reason why there are BS-sized rats with high bounties spawning in those places, is because they are part of lvl 3-4 COSMOS missions and should pose an appropriate challenge. The reason why the rats respawn inside the complex constantly, is so that player B can come in, run the plex, and get his mission item after player A has done so before him. Keep in mind, that some of those complexes are not there solely for the purpose of certain missions, but they also provide you with tools and materials for producing the storyline items. For the special boys GÇô THE COMPLEXES ARE SERVING THEIR PURPOSE JUST FINE. (HINT GÇô THEIR PURPOSE IS NOT TO PROVIDE YOU WITH FREE ISK 23/7)
And now for all those wiseguys (like Jame Jarl Retief), saying this is CCPGÇÖs fault, they broke it, they should fix it, leave the AFK-ers alone, etc. THE COSMOS COMPLEXES ARE NOT BROKEN! They might be obsolete and in need of an update, but they are not broken. They served their purpose for a very long time. So before you start bitching, and whining, and pointing fingers again, please consider the following:
1. When COSMOS missions/complexes were first implemented 7 years ago, there were no passive tanked drone boats! The Gila and the Rattlesnake didnGÇÖt have drone and shield resist bonuses. The Ishtar was around, but back then there were no sentry drones. So NO, jackass GÇô I guess it didnGÇÖt occur to them that something like this could happen.
2. EVE is the largest, most diverse, player populated game universe. Creating and updating content for this universe is not exactly easy. If the devs could anticipate all the possible scenarios and how players would react in every given situation, they probably wouldnGÇÖt be bothering with EVE anymore GÇô they would be playing the stock market and winning millionsGǪ hey, Iceland probably wouldnGÇÖt have gone bankrupt.
Could this issue have been looked at and fixed earlier GÇô yeah, probably. But CCP seems to be on the right track now, so how about we cut them some slack?
And whoever suggested the GÇ£fixGÇ¥ with turning off drone automatic switching of targets GÇô thatGÇÖs a brilliant idea! As if drones are not stupid and irresponsive enough as it is, letGÇÖs make them even dumberGǪ genius!
P.S. When I first visited the EVE forums 6 years ago, I was impressed with how mature and sensible people were. Today, itGÇÖs like I am looking at a WoW forum, only with less leet-speak (for which I guess I should be grateful). Whining and stupidity all aroundGǪ the EVE world is going to hell, just like the real one. Any suggestions on how to fix that? Let the gun do the talking! |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
292
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:13:00 -
[225] - Quote
Georgiy Giggle wrote:Bring a balance to game between real players and bots, instead of beating REAL players only!!!
You think these players who park their Sentry ships in PLEXes 23hrs / day, 7days / week are real players. That's your problem. They're no better than bots and deserve to be banned. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
270
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:14:00 -
[226] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: I'm merely going to quote this. It's not going to please everyone and certainly not going to please those who were making isk while going about their lives doing things other than playing EVE actively but at the end of the day we're only referring to situations in THIS PARTICULAR CASE where you could in theory generate isk 24 hours a day without ever touching your computer. This does not apply to every situation you might perhaps maybe possibly use sentry drones in and nobody's going to ban your accounts because you went to get a cup of coffee.
There were however cases where this was being abused and so we're stating publically that abusing it is wrong and from this point forward the automated systems will handle it.
Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong
Protip for CCPs higher ups if your PvE has withered so bad and is prone to such 'exploights' then it needs a serious revamp. In CCP Unifex's last interview he was proud & crowing over only having 4 content designers in his employ while having many programmers. How about putting these programmers to work on the content so we don't have these issues... like say immediately start implementing sleeper & Incursion AI on missions & complexes you don't see these being AFK'd now do you? This is not a case of the players doing something wrong this is a case of CCP doing something wrong. =========================================================
EVE residents: 5% Wormholes; 8% Lowsec; 20% Nullsec; 67% Highsec. CSM 6: 100% Nullsec residents. EVE demographics vs CSM demographics, nothing to worry about... |
Vera Algaert
Republic University Minmatar Republic
303
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:15:00 -
[227] - Quote
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'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Sexy Cakes
Poasting
32
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:15:00 -
[228] - Quote
The level of reading comprehension in this thread is pathetic.
I'm not sure if you can take what Sreegs is saying out of context anymore than you idiots are. |
SmashTech
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
78
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:15:00 -
[229] - Quote
Seriously Sreegs, how much money is too much money? |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1000
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:15:00 -
[230] - 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... |
|
Daisy Vinthyn
Cassandra's Light
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:18:00 -
[231] - Quote
I've been "out of game" for about two years now but still log in to keep my skills changed. It appears in that two year span all the new players that have joined the game have the comprehension skills of a turtle. |
Naomi Shana
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:21:00 -
[232] - Quote
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?
Yes, CCP says they are working on it. But that doesn't change the fact that they are going to punish players for doing something over HERE that's perfectly fine to do over THERE. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1000
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:23:00 -
[233] - 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... |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
292
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:26:00 -
[234] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:immediately start implementing sleeper & Incursion AI on missions & complexes you don't see these being AFK'd now do you? This is not a case of the players doing something wrong this is a case of CCP doing something wrong.
This is most definitely a case of the players doing something wrong. That you can't see or comprehend that is down to your own narrow-sightedness. The mechanics that prevent Sleeper and Incursion sites from being AFK farmed 23 hours a day have absolutely nothing to do with what allows static PLEXes to be AFK farmed for 23 hours a day. Giving the static PLEX NPCs Sleeper AI would do nothing to curb this botting problem. Banning the botters will. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
345
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:26:00 -
[235] - Quote
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. |
Antal Jozsef
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:27:00 -
[236] - Quote
Ghost Frog wrote:Mike Head wrote: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 can't read. They are working on fixing it. UNTIL THEY'RE DONE FIXING IT, IT'S A BANNABLE OFFENSE. I decided to play EVE because I was under the impression you had to have a certain level of intellectual ability to play. But if you can't read the entirety of an article and get the gist, I think you should retake the tutorial. Perhaps your intellect isn't as sharp as you would like to believe. I was under the impression that everyone knew that the EVE forums were heavily populated with players looking to spin various arguments for their own purposes. "Meta" and all that. IF YOU READ CAREFULLY, MAYBE YOU WILL FIGURE IT OUT. But I doubt it.
And thats exactly why ccp should not do things like this. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
345
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:27:00 -
[237] - Quote
Suqq Madiq wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:immediately start implementing sleeper & Incursion AI on missions & complexes you don't see these being AFK'd now do you? This is not a case of the players doing something wrong this is a case of CCP doing something wrong. This is most definitely a case of the players doing something wrong. That you can't see or comprehend that is down to your own narrow-sightedness. The mechanics that prevent Sleeper and Incursion sites from being AFK farmed 23 hours a day have absolutely nothing to do with what allows static PLEXes to be AFK farmed for 23 hours a day. Giving the static PLEX NPCs Sleeper AI would do nothing to curb this botting problem. Banning the botters will. There is, according to everyone involved, no bots involved here. This is not botting. It never has been botting. It never will be botting. |
Antal Jozsef
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:29:00 -
[238] - Quote
Suqq Madiq wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:immediately start implementing sleeper & Incursion AI on missions & complexes you don't see these being AFK'd now do you? This is not a case of the players doing something wrong this is a case of CCP doing something wrong. This is most definitely a case of the players doing something wrong. That you can't see or comprehend that is down to your own narrow-sightedness. The mechanics that prevent Sleeper and Incursion sites from being AFK farmed 23 hours a day have absolutely nothing to do with what allows static PLEXes to be AFK farmed for 23 hours a day. Giving the static PLEX NPCs Sleeper AI would do nothing to curb this botting problem. Banning the botters will.
They are banning the botters for years, thats why we don't have any oh wait... |
SmashTech
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
79
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:36:00 -
[239] - Quote
can someone point out for me where the automatic keystroke and mouseclick generation parts are
because I must have missed them |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1001
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:38:00 -
[240] - 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... |
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
904
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:38:00 -
[241] - Quote
mkint wrote: Probably should have mentioned that there's a bugged complex in the news post. I was all like "I wonder if afk missioning is on the chopping block next, or rookies mining in industrials, or etc." It sounds like I'm not the only one who was confused by it.
I think there is a bit of confusion on what a "complex" is. There are those that spawn, get completed and de-spawn. But there are many fixed complexes that sit in one spot and keep producing NPCs to shoot, indefinitely. Specifically, the COSMOS complexes in several high sec solar systems. Those are not bugged complexes, they supposed to do that.
Given those, players got this great idea: Get a Domi, fill the highs with remote reps, the mids with cap rechargers, and the lows with tank. Fly to a COSMOS site, launch sentry drones, target them all with the RR, and go afk all day.
Other people got the great idea of suicide attacking the Domi. All it takes is some neuting. The Domi is barely cap stable, so not much is needed to get a cap crash. Then you wait for the NPCs to finish it off and scoop the loot. Best of all the sec status hit for ship aggression is far smaller then it is for ship destruction, so only a little community service is needed to recover it.
But... all gone now. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Psyise
House of Bone
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:39:00 -
[242] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Dregol wrote:Anslo wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Octoven wrote:Your point is valid; however, if they enforce that penalty on AFKing a complex then they must do the same with any other form of AFK actions Says who? You're talking about two totally different things here. No, you're wrong. AFK mining, AFK plexing, AFK missioning, AFK god damn ******* industry then should be policed as it makes isk while afk. Even if tending to the ship to empty ore or change drones or get new ones that popped, it's still an afk action while making isk. So no, you're wrong. Goon. Wrong. If you'd take the time to read this thread, you'd realize that there was a broken complex whereby people could AFK and have drones kill respawns 23/7. This is /not/ working as intended. AFKing through something that isn't respawning (regular complexes) is fine. What CCP is addressing is a mechanic whereby you can do nothing for hours on end and continue to make isk. My point from earlier still stands: isk should not be as easy to make as it is in high sec. I'm glad CCP is actively fixing bugs/broken mechanics, but there are mechanics far more broken than this. I'm merely going to quote this. It's not going to please everyone and certainly not going to please those who were making isk while going about their lives doing things other than playing EVE actively but at the end of the day we're only referring to situations in THIS PARTICULAR CASE where you could in theory generate isk 24 hours a day without ever touching your computer. This does not apply to every situation you might perhaps maybe possibly use sentry drones in and nobody's going to ban your accounts because you went to get a cup of coffee. There were however cases where this was being abused and so we're stating publically that abusing it is wrong and from this point forward the automated systems will handle it. Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong
I don't AFK or play the game this way but I disagree with your logic and would support players who do. You designed the game but then want to punish people for playing the game within the confines you have setup?
It's not cheating or an exploit and players shouldn't be punished. You should fix the game rather than wasting time coming up with a method to make people play the way you want or punish them if they don't.
ie. Fix the game, keep people from being able to idle like this for 23 hours at a time, change the way the respawns occur. Create a timeout on sentry drone operation. The "universe" is the limit in the way you can shape and mold the game but don;t punish players for operating within the confines you have setup. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
270
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:40:00 -
[243] - Quote
The 67% wrote: It has come to our attention recently that there are pilots in New Eden engaging in AFK MOON GOO farming. Specific examples of this include such activities as warping into a particular tech MOON in NULL, dropping a POS, then going to do your laundry or perhaps watch a month long 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. As such our automated systems will continue to detect and institute administrative actions for this activity. We do not find this to be acceptable gameplay.
Fixed =========================================================
EVE residents: 5% Wormholes; 8% Lowsec; 20% Nullsec; 67% Highsec. CSM 6: 100% Nullsec residents. EVE demographics vs CSM demographics, nothing to worry about... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1003
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:45:00 -
[244] - 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... |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
905
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:47:00 -
[245] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:The solution of course is to implement an "raw ISK hold" similar to the ore holds on barges. Once you generate a certain amount of ISK, you have to dock up and refine that raw ISK into ISK. They did this for Sleepers. They do not have bounties but blue loot items you need to loot, take to high sec and sell to NPCs. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
346
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:55:00 -
[246] - Quote
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. 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. |
GFL Kalor
Shadow Council
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 17:57:00 -
[247] - Quote
Glad my account expires in 4 days so this won't effect me. I remember going and setting yourself up to mine an asteroid for a few hours while you did something else. Now exploits bots, farming, etc.
CCP can pack sand on the new rules. |
Aura of Ice
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:05:00 -
[248] - Quote
Quote:...if they enforce that penalty on AFKing a complex then they must do the same with any other form of AFK actions which is just too much ******* monitoring IMHO...
Looks all of you AFKing freighter/indy pilots...
|
Stigman Zuwadza
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:08:00 -
[249] - Quote
lulz
Good for you CCP, you get my thumbs up.
Reading over a few of the posts it appears that some people are missing the point about this activity being a 'set & forget' action that will continue from uptime to downtime. No other PURE ISK generating activity springs to mind so I can see why CCP has honed in on this one.
Fly safe. o7
CCP: Cloak Hunters - CSM6: Cautiously positive - Dec 2011 Summit - Minutes (pg. 22). Cloaking Technicalities Explained - CSM7 Town Hall Meeting - May 2012 |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
905
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:08:00 -
[250] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Ghost Frog wrote:At the risk of escalating this into a shitstorm, I'd like to get clarification about freighters. I have done quite a bit of AFK freighter piloting. In fact, I'm willing to bet the overwhelming majority of EVE players do freighter runs 100% AFK. Will you be ******* with us as well? Because the core of the logic being applied here would seem to fit my situation. No, the core of the logic that's being attributed to it would :) The core of the logic that's actually being applied here is that this only applies to fringe cases and anyone engaging in normal gameplay is completely unaffected. Clearly the news item wasn't clear enough about that so I've had it edited. CCP Sreegs, a question: Which came first, the realization people were farming this way, or those people getting caught by the bot catcher? That is:
Did some of these people get caught, petition the action, and then you realized they were not using a bot program? And CCP decided; "We will just say that AFK farming is botting. Problem solved."
OR: Did CCP decide that AFK farming was bad, and adjust the bot detector to find and stop them?
I ask because many think this ruling was made simply so you could say the bot detector has a low false positive rate. Instead of having to admit you banned people who were not botting, you just re-defined botting.
Or was it sort of a mixed up process, where you were catching these farmers, then realized what they were doing, then had a big internal discussion as to what direction to take? http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1813
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:12:00 -
[251] - Quote
Legiolith wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:They do this exactly to avoid "BREAK THIS GAME". COSMOS code is older than a dinosaur, it's some of that stuff you don't ever want to look at it again, and changing a *comment* in the source code might suddenly bug a random part of the game and make Avatars look like a giant phallus. Oh wait... Haha, well I am happy that you spend most of your time messing with your avatars looks and that it's of a big concern to you. However for the rest of us that don't play "Dress Up My Little Pony" during downtime, "BREAK THIS GAME" means CCP telling us how to play a SANDBOX game. And old code is no excuse...
Dude Avatar with the capital A is a BIG ship Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1813
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:14:00 -
[252] - 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.
Wow, really Dark Rising joined TEST? I thought they were somewhat on an opposite side of CFC. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
905
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:21:00 -
[253] - Quote
Jame Jarl Retief wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Mistakes happen in development. Developers have to correct them. Sometimes, the mistakes are abused and players should be policed as to not abuse those mistakes as they are not intended to be there in the first place. They should have reverted the change, or disabled plexes until it was fixed.............
The COSMOS sites were added years ago, its not a recent change. Disabling them would punish those players who do them legitimately. Why should those players suffer? Better to just tell those few who do the afk thing to stop until ccp gets time to change how fixed site complexes work. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Damion Rayne
Lorentz Technology Group
109
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:22:00 -
[254] - Quote
I wonder when Sreeg's is going to release that this has been handled very very badly. Teamwork.. Maturity.. Tactics.. www.tacticalgamer.com |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1813
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:27:00 -
[255] - Quote
CARB0N FIBER wrote:How do you know I'm AFK?
Are you hacking my web cam?
Is there a time limit on how long I can play?
What is this time limit?
Will this time limit be like other rules, where we don't know what it is till we are banned?
Since playing 23 hours a day is now a bannable offense will we be getting a dicounted rate?
So we pay for 720 hours of game time, in which we can play 690 hours. So how many of the 690 hours of the 720 hours we pay for can we play without getting banned?
Another thing, ALT's. Obviously if you have multiple accounts logged in one is AFK. So should you banned if you have multiple accounts?
I know you saying something like I'm not AFK, I have a screen and keyboard for every account. How do we know that?
This is a very old, old issue.
I have proof of people getting banned and sent a GM message stating they did not detect any botting software but their "too regular and prolonged gameplay" flagged them as bots.
This is why in the past I always asked CCP Sreegs for ways for players to defend and prove their innocence.
This is why I created multiple in game tickets about the same matter and all of them got a "players cannot defend themselves, they will be banned with no ability of recourse" reply.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Shi Xia
The Imperial Fedaykin
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:29:00 -
[256] - Quote
Screegs,
Don't be so lame, and effing lazy. Penalizing us for using the mechanics that were designed by the devs should not bring us under fire. Rather, maybe you should fix the plexes that make this 'exploit' possible. (Seems to me anyone running low sec/nul sec plexes afk is also under risk of being scanned down and popped.) After all, we're just being industrious and playing this game as designed by CCP to the fullest!
Why should the players, who pay your salary have to be penalized for CCP's lack of insight and forethought? |
Damion Rayne
Lorentz Technology Group
109
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:30:00 -
[257] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:CARB0N FIBER wrote:How do you know I'm AFK?
Are you hacking my web cam?
Is there a time limit on how long I can play?
What is this time limit?
Will this time limit be like other rules, where we don't know what it is till we are banned?
Since playing 23 hours a day is now a bannable offense will we be getting a dicounted rate?
So we pay for 720 hours of game time, in which we can play 690 hours. So how many of the 690 hours of the 720 hours we pay for can we play without getting banned?
Another thing, ALT's. Obviously if you have multiple accounts logged in one is AFK. So should you banned if you have multiple accounts?
I know you saying something like I'm not AFK, I have a screen and keyboard for every account. How do we know that? This is a very old, old issue. I have proof of people getting banned and sent a GM message stating they did not detect any botting software but their "too regular and prolonged gameplay" flagged them as bots. This is why in the past I always asked CCP Sreegs for ways for players to defend and prove their innocence. This is why I created multiple in game tickets about the same matter and all of them got a "players cannot defend themselves, they will be banned with no ability of recourse" reply.
Which in fact proves that this entire thing is being handled in an entirely incompetent manner. Let's just remember, big brother Sreegs is watching us and if we play for more than a few hours straight and we're not actively pushing buttons, it's best to just log off. Oh and that will eventually go to hauling, mining, salvaging, PI, day-trading, and mission running. Teamwork.. Maturity.. Tactics.. www.tacticalgamer.com |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1003
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:32:00 -
[258] - 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... |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
292
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:35:00 -
[259] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:There is, according to everyone involved, no bots involved here. This is not botting. It never has been botting. It never will be botting.
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. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
347
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:35:00 -
[260] - Quote
War Kitten wrote: The rule, as you dubbed it, is misleading. They didn't declare "no afking in a complex". Go reread the news item.
There is no actual rule here. There is a "if you get detected as a bot, because you do this, you will be banned. This probably applies anytime you get detected as a bot, regardless of what you were doing" statement but no actual rule that I can apply.
And there was no GM intervention because GMs do not respond to petitions regarding botting bans: those are directly shunted to Security. |
|
Ajit Kumar Bhattacharya
Metaphysical Utopian Society Explorations
290
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:37:00 -
[261] - Quote
Zwo Zateki wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Zwo Zateki wrote:WTF seriously?
Drones were designed to switch targets automatically. I reckon the difference between AFK farming and legitimate plexing is whether you are staring at nebulae or not.
Bullshit. I'm fairly sure that the game designers didn't intend for these two particular things (complexes that continuously spawn rats in a given room + aggressive drones) to work together in such a way that it allows completely and utterly AFK ISK farming. Then FIX it. Set time limit for drone aggressive mode. But do not threaten players. This is the SANDBOX ffs.
Simple, elegant solution. Everyone holster yer pitchforks and put out the damm torches.
|
Pakokkie
Under Heavy Fire Mordus Angels
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:39:00 -
[262] - Quote
Poor game design attracts poor use. CCP should be permabanned for this. |
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:43:00 -
[263] - Quote
Poor Sreegs, getting so much abuse.
The issue is simple.
The behaviour taken by players, whilst within the technical bounds of the game, is an unintended gameplay mechanic, and as a result is impacting the economy unfairly. ( Significant isk income to one or several players with no risk. - No, I'm not getting into the fight over Moon Goo, or market trading, they are different mechanics and systems entirely! )
This specific method of generating large amounts of isk is not intended gameplay, and thus has been called out on as an exploit effectively.. As an example of this happening before: The players who, whilst technically within the mechanics of the game, were able to avoid CONCORDOKEN via gameplay mechanics.
It wasn't intended for a player to be able to print isk in this manner. I imagine they are looking at ways in the backend to fix this case.
Unfortunately, Sreegs couldn't anticipate the outcome of the wording of his post, and despite explaining and confirming that no other mechanic is affected by the call made, people are still running pitchforks at shadows in a blind, unwarranted rage.
CCP is NOT coming after you as AFK miners, AFK hauling, autopiloting to anywhere, market trading, or to go have a crap or do the laundry.
As long as you come back to your computer to interact with it eventually, ( Arrive at your destination, cool! / unload a jetcan into an Orca/ dock up and unload / complete your market trades ), and aren't showing bot-like behaviours ( Being able to mine 23.5/7 constantly, or using unintended game mechanics that are declared as against the rules! ), you have nothing to care about.
This has been called as an unintended gameplay issue, and has fallen under his jurisdiction as mentioned before, as it's close to bot-style behaviour. Sreegs has said that GM's have looked over this, as have other members of CCP, and all agree with the call.
Put the pitchforks away already, and keep playing as you always have. Just don't AFK drone in complexes and you'll be fine. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
347
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:44:00 -
[264] - Quote
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. |
Samroski
Games Inc.
64
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:44:00 -
[265] - Quote
They did it last summer and they're trying their best to screwup customer relations again.
Instead of the logical solution (to make minor changes in the complexes so that AFKing is not possible), the brilliant minds at CCP have come up with this incomprehensible idea!
Pay attention CCP:
THE SOLUTION IS TO IMPROVE THE GAME/COMPLEXES SO THAT AFKing IS PROBLEMATIC. |
Maru Shana
Pyre of the Immortals
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:44:00 -
[266] - Quote
This thread reminds me of the Halo 2 forums on GameFAQs a long time ago. Or pretty much any forum where people could or would exploit an obvious glitch or oversight to their benefit. Then champion it as "by design" to justify their actions. Followed by accusing the devs of a witch hunt if they dared to do something to fix it.
"ZOMG You're fixing the BXR button glitch? But how will we play competitive Halo now? That was the best part of Halo 2! You can't just take that out of Halo 3! You're ruining everything by fixing an obvious flaw in the design!"
Humanity continues to disappoint me through its incessant justifications of entitlement and self-serving victim complexes. =_= |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
293
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:47:00 -
[267] - 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.
Nope. Wrong again. But you're used to that now. Nobody believes this player was a botter, myself included. However, as Sreegs clearly put it, the actions of this player and others like him "falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within." It's not hard to understand. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1004
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:48:00 -
[268] - 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... |
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:50:00 -
[269] - Quote
Maru Shana wrote:... Edit: And for the schmucks saying that CCP should just "fix the complexes", why don't you give an example? Not everything can be "fixed" to prevent certain behavior. Sometimes the method of exploitation is integral to the game, such as Sentry drone usage. You would indeed whine if they barred sentry drones or any other style of play from the complexes, wouldn't you?
There are in a lose-lose position. Unless you have an amazing idea that can somehow constitute a win for all. You don't have something like that, do you?
An idea I had was have the site simply detect if the player had made x amount of kills in the site in a time, and if they have, don't spawn any further. A hard cap on the spawning.
Of course, workarounds include flying neutral alts in and getting them to spawn the site, but the site could be gated off, with a failure to jump of "You are unable to get a lock on the target destination due to spacial interference. Suggest you try again in x hours". |
Kristen Andelare
Abacus Industries Group Aerodyne Collective
20
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:50:00 -
[270] - Quote
Kyle Frost wrote:Pak Narhoo wrote:Reading skill are not at 5 for a lot of posters here.
/me sad.... QFT TLDR: Everybody who is blaming CCP or whining about GÇ£the sandboxGÇ¥ GÇô get a f*****g clue! Solution to the problem GÇô revise COSMOS missions and complexes. They havenGÇÖt been touched since they were implemented, and that was how long ago GÇô 6-7 years? Increase the rewards from COSMOS missions GÇô most of the storyline modules you receive are worthless and way too expensive to build. At the same time, increase the difficulty of the COSMOS missions GÇô make the NPCs tougher, maybe give them Sleeper-like AI. Turn COSMOS missions into a real end-game PvE content. Long, idiot friendly version: I canGÇÖt believe I am going to agree with a goon and defend CCP, but I am still not at the point where I will call the white color black, just because I donGÇÖt like it. So here it goesGǪ Almost all legitimate (which do not include a third party automation software and will NOT get you banned) AFK activities in EVE are limited by game mechanics or by the EVE players themselves. For example - every afk miner has to empty his cargohold manually after a period of time (40 minutes or so), every afk mission runner has to manually move his ship to the next pocket after clearing the one he is currently in, afk ratting in 0.0 gets you killed and so on. The people that CCPGÇÖs message was addressed to, are not limited by game mechanics and they were exploiting this. So even though this was not made very clear in the original message, everyone with simple powers of deduction should have been able to reach this logical conclusion. For the special boys GÇô AFK MINING/MISSIONING IS NOT THE SAME AS AFK FARMING A COSMOS COMPLEX. I can think of at least 3 or 4 complexes in the Caldari and Amarr COSMOS constellations which can be farmed by utilizing the sentry drones tactic. I guess there are some complexes in the Gallente and Minmatar constellations as well. The reason why there are BS-sized rats with high bounties spawning in those places, is because they are part of lvl 3-4 COSMOS missions and should pose an appropriate challenge. The reason why the rats respawn inside the complex constantly, is so that player B can come in, run the plex, and get his mission item after player A has done so before him. Keep in mind, that some of those complexes are not there solely for the purpose of certain missions, but they also provide you with tools and materials for producing the storyline items. For the special boys GÇô THE COMPLEXES ARE SERVING THEIR PURPOSE JUST FINE. (HINT GÇô THEIR PURPOSE IS NOT TO PROVIDE YOU WITH FREE ISK 23/7) And now for all those wiseguys (like Jame Jarl Retief), saying this is CCPGÇÖs fault, they broke it, they should fix it, leave the AFK-ers alone, etc. THE COSMOS COMPLEXES ARE NOT BROKEN! They might be obsolete and in need of an update, but they are not broken. They served their purpose for a very long time. So before you start bitching, and whining, and pointing fingers again, please consider the following: 1. When COSMOS missions/complexes were first implemented 7 years ago, there were no passive tanked drone boats! The Gila and the Rattlesnake didnGÇÖt have drone and shield resist bonuses. The Ishtar was around, but back then there were no sentry drones. So NO, jackass GÇô I guess it didnGÇÖt occur to them that something like this could happen. 2. EVE is the largest, most diverse, player populated game universe. Creating and updating content for this universe is not exactly easy. If the devs could anticipate all the possible scenarios and how players would react in every given situation, they probably wouldnGÇÖt be bothering with EVE anymore GÇô they would be playing the stock market and winning millionsGǪ hey, Iceland probably wouldnGÇÖt have gone bankrupt. Could this issue have been looked at and fixed earlier GÇô yeah, probably. But CCP seems to be on the right track now, so how about we cut them some slack? And whoever suggested the GÇ£fixGÇ¥ with turning off drone automatic switching of targets GÇô thatGÇÖs a brilliant idea! As if drones are not stupid and irresponsive enough as it is, letGÇÖs make them even dumberGǪ genius! P.S. When I first visited the EVE forums 6 years ago, I was impressed with how mature and sensible people were. Today, itGÇÖs like I am looking at a WoW forum, only with less leet-speak (for which I guess I should be grateful). Whining and stupidity all aroundGǪ the EVE world is going to hell, just like the real one. Any suggestions on how to fix that?
This!
I know the exact complexes that CCP Sreegs is talking about. COMSMOS missions. I've run them, and spent half an hour to an hour in them, constantly shuttling back and forth to the various cans where the loot spawns, so that I can find the ONE piece of loot I need to move forward. Once, I never found it and gave up, and gave up on the mission. But I saw the potential to just sit in there and shoot things.
A suggestion, remove the bounties from the rats in those COSMOS missions, and instead give an appropriately larger bonus for completing the mission they are intended for, and a large time bonus as well. Problem solved, forever.
Constant reference to AFK mining is really, really dumb. You have to empty your cargohold, without a bot program, you are NOT doing that while AFK. That includes ice mining. the new Mack you can mine in for about 40 minutes while AFK, come back, and OMG, Interact with the GAME!!!. This exploit required no interaction from dropping the drones and turning on the remote reppers to the point where you collect the drones and log off. No bounties would equal no one wanting to try this exploit.
As sreegs said, being AFK for a reasonable period of time (if that's to put in a load of laundry, grab some food, hit the can, kiss the wife goodbye, is perfectly fine. Being AFK for up to 23 hours, no interaction, Not OK. |
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
347
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:51:00 -
[271] - Quote
Suqq Madiq wrote: Nope. Wrong again. But you're used to that now. Nobody believes this player was a botter, myself included. However, as Sreegs clearly put it, the actions of this player and others like him "falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within." It's not hard to understand.
I am gratified you've now come to understand the basic fact this player was not botting.
Now that we've nailed down the facts of the case, we are discussing the interpretation and actions placed on those facts - the thin pretext by which these actions are being justified as being caught by the botting system and handled by Team Security as bots instead of properly handled by the GM team. In this case since I am arguing Sreegs was wrong, it is pointless to simply repeat his statements I disagree with. |
Feris
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:51:00 -
[272] - Quote
Pakokkie wrote:Poor game design attracts poor use. CCP should be permabanned for this.
CCP did it again. Oh come on ccp. Use your keyboard and jump out of your hammock. How hard can it be to reprogram something that lame. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
347
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:53:00 -
[273] - Quote
War Kitten wrote: 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.
It's very correct to remove the botting sanctions against these players. That should have been done immediately, the botting detection fixed, and the issue of if this was proper player behavior punted to the GM team to determine and deal with. Team Security shouldn't be determining legitimate and non-legitimate gameplay when it doesn't involve things directly in their area of expertise: RMT, bots, hacks, and macros.
If the GMs decided this was inappropriate they have all the tools they need to handle it. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1004
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 18:53:00 -
[274] - 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... |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
293
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:05:00 -
[275] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Suqq Madiq wrote: Nope. Wrong again. But you're used to that now. Nobody believes this player was a botter, myself included. However, as Sreegs clearly put it, the actions of this player and others like him "falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within." It's not hard to understand.
I am gratified you've now come to understand the basic fact this player was not botting. Now that we've nailed down the facts of the case, we are discussing the interpretation and actions placed on those facts - the thin pretext by which these actions are being justified as being caught by the botting system and handled by Team Security as bots instead of properly handled by the GM team. In this case since I am arguing Sreegs was wrong, it is pointless to simply repeat his statements I disagree with.
You seem very upset by the fact that the security team is handling these NearBots (in response to your own made-up word NotBots), which are close enough to botting to raise enough red flags to cause a well-deserved reaction from CCP. You can argue semantics all day long, but CCP GMs/Devs/whoever (it's irrelevant who handles it) determined that this activity "falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within". Clearly you don't agree with this philosophy, which makes me question why you believe that farming massive loads of ISK while 100% AFK is ok when it clearly is not and the people who engage in such actions should, after being appropriately warned (they have been now), should be banned. |
Avel Rinah
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:06:00 -
[276] - Quote
I think you're all missing the point--LAZYTOWN LIVES |
Cifese
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:06:00 -
[277] - Quote
SmashTech wrote:Hey Sreegs, answer me this
How much money is "too much money"?
Give me a concrete answer, not just "a lot." Bullshit rules are vague. Good ones are not.
Let me rephrase that in a way that will explain why he won't tell you:
SmashTech wrote:Hey Sreegs, answer me this
How much money is "too much money"?
Give me a concrete answer, not just "a lot." I want to make sure I limit my botting to be under than mark |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
349
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:06:00 -
[278] - Quote
Suqq Madiq wrote: but CCP GMs/Devs/whoever (it's irrelevant who handles it) .
It is not; and it is your failure to understand this that causes our disagreement. I have, unfortunately, already explained this part at length so I won't bore people by repeating it. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
349
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:08:00 -
[279] - Quote
Cifese wrote: Let me rephrase that in a way that will explain why he won't tell you:
Actually, the previous rule was abundantly clear and easily applied: "any use of a bot or macro makes it botting". Now, if legitimate gameplay is botting if it exceeds certain isk thresholds, suddenly we don't have an abundantly clear and easily applied rule. |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
293
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:08:00 -
[280] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Suqq Madiq wrote: but CCP GMs/Devs/whoever (it's irrelevant who handles it) .
It is not; and it is your failure to understand this that causes our disagreement. I have, unfortunately, already explained this part at length so I won't bore people by repeating it.
Good. Because your explanation holds no weight and it would do nothing but belabor the process of you moving on. |
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
349
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:09:00 -
[281] - Quote
War Kitten wrote: 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.
The individual mistaken punishment was corrected: the algorithm has not been and the incorrect handling of the issue has not been. That means this will continue to be an issue in the future. |
Rakamy
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:09:00 -
[282] - Quote
Kristen Andelare wrote:
This!
I know the exact complexes that CCP Sreegs is talking about. COMSMOS missions. I've run them, and spent half an hour to an hour in them, constantly shuttling back and forth to the various cans where the loot spawns, so that I can find the ONE piece of loot I need to move forward. Once, I never found it and gave up, and gave up on the mission. But I saw the potential to just sit in there and shoot things.
A suggestion, remove the bounties from the rats in those COSMOS missions, and instead give an appropriately larger bonus for completing the mission they are intended for, and a large time bonus as well. Problem solved, forever.
Constant reference to AFK mining is really, really dumb. You have to empty your cargohold, without a bot program, you are NOT doing that while AFK. That includes ice mining. the new Mack you can mine in for about 40 minutes while AFK, come back, and OMG, Interact with the GAME!!!. This exploit required no interaction from dropping the drones and turning on the remote reppers to the point where you collect the drones and log off. No bounties would equal no one wanting to try this exploit.
As sreegs said, being AFK for a reasonable period of time (if that's to put in a load of laundry, grab some food, hit the can, kiss the wife goodbye, is perfectly fine. Being AFK for up to 23 hours, no interaction, Not OK.
Exactly and I fail to see how so many people fail to understand what CCP are talking about.....they are not after the ppl that are afk for 20min what ccp are doing are going after the AFK plexers who are AFK for 20hrs. who rake in isk and absolutely do nothing for it in terms of game interaction.
It has nothing to do with AFK mining or AFK missioning (unless your going to sit there and peck at rats for 20hrs) and the majority of eve understand this and are not paranoid or doing just what CCP are trying to cut down on like 90% of the people who have posed before me.
Instead of posing an idiotic comments learn the facts about who/what CCP are after in this new "program". You can sill pop your drones from your Domi or Ishtar go do what ever it is you have to then come back....because once a mission is cleared then it wont respawn till after DT and you have to come back to turn it in to set up another. The same with mining you still have to come back time to time to empty your cargo (unless your using a bot which is against the EULA anyway)
I fail to see how so many people cant understand that...... |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
293
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:10:00 -
[283] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Cifese wrote: Let me rephrase that in a way that will explain why he won't tell you:
Actually, the previous rule was abundantly clear and easily applied: "any use of a bot or macro makes it botting". Now, if legitimate gameplay is botting if it exceeds certain isk thresholds, suddenly we don't have an abundantly clear and easily applied rule.
Until that "legitimate gameplay" is ruled otherwise, as is the case here, and that "legitimate gameplay" is forced out. At this point, nobody will be banned or otherwise sanctioned who isn't in clear violation of the rules. |
Brokers Clone
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:10:00 -
[284] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Brokers Clone wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Brokers Clone wrote:...Stuff... Wait Watch rats spawn See drones kill rats... get bounty etc...etc...etc... Except that he stated mining then used ratting as an example, which would certainly still be detected and fall into the same category. WOW. Dude, I am beginning to think that this is an issue that is going to need CSM input.. I mean.... there are LOTS of cases where Rats spawn.... and lots of people sit and wait (at PC or away) There are mining ships that mine all day long, unattended (with alts or team members lugging away can contents from time to time) If ANY of this, NON-BOTTING, Activity is going to change, Fine BUT YOU NEED TO SAY SO IN 70 point Font, Everywhere And I think you might want to ring the CSM And none of them fall within this category. Feel free to alert the CSM.
So, when I mentioned ratting, in a belt, while mining, it WAS in the same category as bannable stuffs But when I mentioned the same thing (are LOTS of cases where Rats spawn.... and lots of people sit and wait (at PC or away)) you said it did NOT fall into the bad pool...
And I am still a wee bit confused.
But hey, I am just a clone of the Broker... what do I know
|
Kiyarii Oskold
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:11:00 -
[285] - Quote
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: There's a COSMOS complex in the Aphi system called "The Labyrinth". It is a maze of 9 rooms. In each room, there are four gates, and a special battleship and cruiser that spawn over and over relatively rapidly.
You can sit there and manually farm them, but this ISK is pretty bad. Works out to about 5 mil ISK/hour for each room. At first glance, the rooms do not seem AFK farm-able via sentry drones, for two reasons:
#1, the battleships do enough DPS to kill the sentry drones, even with a large remote repairer aimed at each drone.
#2, sentry drones can't track the cruisers, even with multiple drone tracking mods.
These problems combined to create a situation where after a few spawns, the sentry drones would invariably get caught firing at a cruiser, while the battleship would move out of range. However, if these problems could be solved, I realized that farming the rooms 23/7 with a fleet of AFK dominixes could yield about 24 billion ISK per month, without breaking the EULA. (24 billion AFTER paying to PLEX the necessary accounts).
~5 mil ISK/hour * 9 rooms * 23 hours * 28 days = ~29 bil/month
I decided this was something I wanted to try. I quickly solved the problems I mentioned earlier via trial-and-error.
#1, I came up with a domi fit that was basically 5 large RRs, all omnidirectional tracking links, cap power relays and 1 local rep. Paper-thin tank, but just enough to keep the domi alive vs. the spawn DPS.
#2, I used a fleet booster to increase the amount of reps the RRs put out, solving the problem of the spawn killing sentry drones.
#3 (THIS IS THE IMPORTANT ONE) I dropped the drones in two groups, so one group of sentry drones could always hit a cruiser orbiting the other group. Getting the drones to stay apart was a challenge. Anyone who has used sentry drones knows that they invariably end up at 0 on your ship. That is because sentry drones actually move. They move at 1 m/s towards their current target, and 1 m/s towards you if they are not firing. By dropping three drones, then setting the dominix to "keep at range" or about 7km from one, then dropping the other set, it was possible to keep about 7km distance between the two drone sets that would not close. This spacing allowed the drones to successfully kill the cruiser rats.
With these problems solved, I started farming a few rooms with a few accounts. The ISK was great. However, after a few weeks, I got really sick of flying the ships into place every morning (I always get up around the end of downtime), even though I was making bank.
Another emergent problem was that people had noticed what I was doing and started copying me. People had started to scan my ship and copy my setup. So I was faced with two new problems:
#1: competition
#2: lack of a desire to set up my fleet every day
I solved these problems together. I decided that rather than farm the rooms myself, I would recruit other people to farm and I would be the overlord of the operation. With a combination of suicide ganking and denial tactics, I would push out the competition. I would use these same tactics to keep my farmers from rebelling against me.
First, I recruited some people. I told them up front that I would be running what amounted to a protection racket. They would farm and pay me a percentage. If they got out of line, I promised I would park a drake AFK in their rooms, which would eventually get aggro and prevent them from AFK farming. I also told them that they would each be required to help me block others from farming if I requested their help. Each room generated about 3.2 bil/month. I would take a 33% cut.
This might seem silly, but for these people, all the incentives were in place for their cooperation. A few people tried to cut me out, and I either blocked them from AFK farming myself, or had other farmers do it. One of my mates referred to this tactic as GÇ£pissing in the potGÇ¥. If anyone tried to farm without giving me a percentage, I would make sure no one got any isk. There were a few people who tried to keep farming despite my blocking tactics. I started suicide ganking these people with torp ravens and killing their AFK pods with suicide destroyers. It was easy; the farming setups had almost no tank, and Aphi is a 0.5 sec status system. (This was before the insurance change.) Getting into the Labyrinth required a rare and expensive re-usable key. I bought them up. After being ganked, many people found that they could not get back in.
Within a month, I had either driven off or recruited all the competition into my organization. I had farmers in all 9 rooms farming 23/7. Each one paid me a 33% tax rate. For the next year, I collected about 9.6 bil/month and did virtually nothing other than suicide gank a few people and settle occasional disputes between my farmers. Occasionally, haters who knew what I was up to wardecGÇÖd my corps, but that was easy to avoid with corp-jumping.
The best part was that this was all done within the scope of what was allowed. It was a goal of mine to not violate the EULA in any way. Unfortunately for me, eventually a lazy GM mistook my AFK farmers for botters and banned them all. After a lengthy petition process where I was forced to explain all these details, I was able to get the bans reversed, but was informed that what I had done would no longer be allowed, and that the devs would be implementing changes to prevent it from happening in the future.
TL;DR:
I got rich and forced CCP to change their bad game design |
Marconus Orion
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
404
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:11:00 -
[286] - Quote
Time to bring sleeper A.I. into the rest of NPC spawns... |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
349
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:13:00 -
[287] - Quote
Suqq Madiq wrote:Until that "legitimate gameplay" is ruled otherwise, as is the case here, and that "legitimate gameplay" is forced out. At this point, nobody will be banned or otherwise sanctioned who isn't in clear violation of the rules. Of course! And at that point, we can get the GMs involved to craft and enforce good rules. The rules suggested by Sreegs keep, you know, not working. |
Cifese
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:14:00 -
[288] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Cifese wrote: Let me rephrase that in a way that will explain why he won't tell you:
Actually, the previous rule was abundantly clear and easily applied: "any use of a bot or macro makes it botting". Now, if legitimate gameplay is botting if it exceeds certain isk thresholds, suddenly we don't have an abundantly clear and easily applied rule.
Don't be an ass.
If they tell you (or anyone) what the actual ISK level over 23.5 hours is that is a flag, people will just set their bots to stop below that level. Then it's one less tool in the box to stop botting.
Your earlier arguments about how GMs should be involved in this decision was at least a good one, until Sreegs said they were. And the EULA supports the actions CCP is taking. Any 23.5 hr activity that requires absolutely no interaction and carries virtually no risk should be discouraged, and by warning people that it will get them banned, it discourages the activity.
I hate grinding for isk as much as the next guy, and wish it were more fun. But that's not an excuse to do it. Get by with less ISK, or get ISK in other ways. Botting isn't a good answer, and NotBotting isn't any better.
Interact with the game and/or the other players to get your isk. |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
293
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:15:00 -
[289] - Quote
Marconus Orion wrote:Time to bring sleeper A.I. into the rest of NPC spawns...
Sleeper AI would do nothing to solve the issue. Keep misunderstanding this basic concept as it's highly amusing. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
349
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:20:00 -
[290] - Quote
Cifese wrote: If they tell you (or anyone) what the actual ISK level over 23.5 hours is that is a flag, people will just set their bots to stop below that level. Then it's one less tool in the box to stop botting.
We wouldn't be having this discussion if Sreegs hadn't said that afk moneymaking that did not involve a bot was fine as long as it did not exceed a certain threshold. If Team Security wasn't trying to enforce their own newly-created rules via the bot detection system we wouldn't need to ask questions about what is and is not legal that involve bot-detection info. |
|
alittlebirdy
All Hail The Liopleurodon
49
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:26:00 -
[291] - Quote
If that is automated playing the CCP needs to remove eve... as it is NOTHING but using EVE to play... eve then is it's own bot that must be banned...
Someone is just letting the power get to his head.
Rather than the last **** patch we just got (wtf is the point of locking the local list? anyone? the worthless pop ups over mods, etc) Why not FIX this... rather than "oh do it and be banned." |
Shi Xia
The Imperial Fedaykin
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:29:00 -
[292] - Quote
This is what makes this game so bad-ass. Don't slap the smart kids for being smart. Use what they've done and learn from it.
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: There's a COSMOS complex in the Aphi system called "The Labyrinth". It is a maze of 9 rooms. In each room, there are four gates, and a special battleship and cruiser that spawn over and over relatively rapidly.
You can sit there and manually farm them, but this ISK is pretty bad. Works out to about 5 mil ISK/hour for each room. At first glance, the rooms do not seem AFK farm-able via sentry drones, for two reasons:
#1, the battleships do enough DPS to kill the sentry drones, even with a large remote repairer aimed at each drone.
#2, sentry drones can't track the cruisers, even with multiple drone tracking mods.
These problems combined to create a situation where after a few spawns, the sentry drones would invariably get caught firing at a cruiser, while the battleship would move out of range. However, if these problems could be solved, I realized that farming the rooms 23/7 with a fleet of AFK dominixes could yield about 24 billion ISK per month, without breaking the EULA. (24 billion AFTER paying to PLEX the necessary accounts).
~5 mil ISK/hour * 9 rooms * 23 hours * 28 days = ~29 bil/month
I decided this was something I wanted to try. I quickly solved the problems I mentioned earlier via trial-and-error.
#1, I came up with a domi fit that was basically 5 large RRs, all omnidirectional tracking links, cap power relays and 1 local rep. Paper-thin tank, but just enough to keep the domi alive vs. the spawn DPS.
#2, I used a fleet booster to increase the amount of reps the RRs put out, solving the problem of the spawn killing sentry drones.
#3 (THIS IS THE IMPORTANT ONE) I dropped the drones in two groups, so one group of sentry drones could always hit a cruiser orbiting the other group. Getting the drones to stay apart was a challenge. Anyone who has used sentry drones knows that they invariably end up at 0 on your ship. That is because sentry drones actually move. They move at 1 m/s towards their current target, and 1 m/s towards you if they are not firing. By dropping three drones, then setting the dominix to "keep at range" or about 7km from one, then dropping the other set, it was possible to keep about 7km distance between the two drone sets that would not close. This spacing allowed the drones to successfully kill the cruiser rats.
With these problems solved, I started farming a few rooms with a few accounts. The ISK was great. However, after a few weeks, I got really sick of flying the ships into place every morning (I always get up around the end of downtime), even though I was making bank.
Another emergent problem was that people had noticed what I was doing and started copying me. People had started to scan my ship and copy my setup. So I was faced with two new problems:
#1: competition
#2: lack of a desire to set up my fleet every day
I solved these problems together. I decided that rather than farm the rooms myself, I would recruit other people to farm and I would be the overlord of the operation. With a combination of suicide ganking and denial tactics, I would push out the competition. I would use these same tactics to keep my farmers from rebelling against me.
First, I recruited some people. I told them up front that I would be running what amounted to a protection racket. They would farm and pay me a percentage. If they got out of line, I promised I would park a drake AFK in their rooms, which would eventually get aggro and prevent them from AFK farming. I also told them that they would each be required to help me block others from farming if I requested their help. Each room generated about 3.2 bil/month. I would take a 33% cut.
This might seem silly, but for these people, all the incentives were in place for their cooperation. A few people tried to cut me out, and I either blocked them from AFK farming myself, or had other farmers do it. One of my mates referred to this tactic as GÇ£pissing in the potGÇ¥. If anyone tried to farm without giving me a percentage, I would make sure no one got any isk. There were a few people who tried to keep farming despite my blocking tactics. I started suicide ganking these people with torp ravens and killing their AFK pods with suicide destroyers. It was easy; the farming setups had almost no tank, and Aphi is a 0.5 sec status system. (This was before the insurance change.) Getting into the Labyrinth required a rare and expensive re-usable key. I bought them up. After being ganked, many people found that they could not get back in.
Within a month, I had either driven off or recruited all the competition into my organization. I had farmers in all 9 rooms farming 23/7. Each one paid me a 33% tax rate. For the next year, I collected about 9.6 bil/month and did virtually nothing other than suicide gank a few people and settle occasional disputes between my farmers. Occasionally, haters who knew what I was up to wardecGÇÖd my corps, but that was easy to avoid with corp-jumping.
The best part was that this was all done within the scope of what was allowed. It was a goal of mine to not violate the EULA in any way. Unfortunately for me, eventually a lazy GM mistook my AFK farmers for botters and banned them all. After a lengthy petition process where I was forced to explain all these details, I was able to get the bans reversed, but was informed that what I had done would no longer be allowed, and that the devs would be implementing changes to prevent it from happening in the future.
TL;DR:
I got rich and forced CCP to change their bad game design
|
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
192
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:30:00 -
[293] - Quote
Its alot easier to not get called on your often wrong bullshit if you can't be constrained by any sort of rules This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
fofofo |
Psyise
House of Bone
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:30:00 -
[294] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Jame Jarl Retief wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Mistakes happen in development. Developers have to correct them. Sometimes, the mistakes are abused and players should be policed as to not abuse those mistakes as they are not intended to be there in the first place. They should have reverted the change, or disabled plexes until it was fixed............. The COSMOS sites were added years ago, its not a recent change. Disabling them would punish those players who do them legitimately. Why should those players suffer? Better to just tell those few who do the afk thing to stop until ccp gets time to change how fixed site complexes work.
I can agree with your sentiment but this is not a new issue to CCP. Obviously they have known about it for a while and have developed a system in order to catch people afk'ing while sentry drones mop up in these respawn instances. They are just now warning people of whats being implemented so why didn't they spend the time working on a solution for these COSMOS complex's that respawn mobs instead of coming up with an automated solution to catch people going AFK for extended period of times.
Better yet, what % of time is it ok to be AFK? I am frequently AFK while mining and doing other stuff around the house but am regularly logged in for 7-12+ hours at a time. I frequently leave myself logged in while I eat dinner, do laundry etc. so I am not away for hours at a time.
Obviously I am not making money during all of this period but I do make some money while being away.
Come one, this is eve. I need numbers please. =p |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
351
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:33:00 -
[295] - 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. This is even more brilliant than I'd expected, I like this writeup. Thanks! |
DoLoc Two
Grim Determination Clockworks Inc. Nulli Tertius
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:34:00 -
[296] - Quote
thanks for deleting my previous post... i guess me playing in your sandbox is too much like a bot so you write a bot program to get rid of bots and non-bots (Us, your paying clients).
fix the program without penalizing the legal players should be the goal.
from the posting so far you're efforts are failing...
now back to my drone mining orca... |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1815
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:38:00 -
[297] - Quote
"EVE is a game and games are designed to be played. I feel that people who put time and effort into eve should be rewarded more than people who put minimal effort into eve"
That's the only sentence I could read in that turtle sluggish website. And it's terrible. Because it is WoW "grind grind grind those mobs for phat money" material.
I earn tons of money without even logging in. I chose to play better instead of playing harder and a functional MMO should let me do that. Period. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:38:00 -
[298] - Quote
Shi Xia wrote:Screegs,
Don't be so lame, and effing lazy. Penalizing us for using the mechanics that were designed by the devs is a lazy. The players of Eve are smart, and we will use every little mechanic to our advantage. You should be thankful that we are so industrious. It's what separates this game from the rest (for me). Our nature should not bring us under fire. Rather, maybe you should fix the mechanics that make this 'exploit' possible. (Seems to me anyone running low sec/nul sec plexes afk is also under risk of being scanned down and popped.)
Why should the players, who pay your salary have to be penalized for CCP's lack of insight and forethought? At the very least (I believe someone already mentioned) disable the plexes that are providing us with this opportunity that has been created until said problem has been fixed--ON YOUR END.
Let us PAYING subscribers have fun, and get off our backs.
Did it ever occur to you that CCP might need help from the players every now and then, in order to keep the game balanced and GÇ£cleanGÇ¥?
When you stumble upon a flaw in the game mechanics, what do you do? A. Report it and move on. B. Exploit it to your benefit as much as you can and then cry when the devs threaten to put an end to it.
Judging by posts in this thread, the answer to that one seems obvious, doesnGÇÖt it? Like I said, EVE is a huge game GÇô the devs canGÇÖt be aware of absolutely everything that goes on in it the entire time. And even if they are aware of a certain problem, the solution is not always simple and easy to implement. (With that said, I really like KristenGÇÖs idea about removing bounties GÇô that just might do the trick and seems simple enough)
Also, I believe that most people who play EVE are intelligent enough to know, when they are taking advantage of a flawed game mechanic. SoGǪ Gǣbeing industrious and playing the game to the fullestGǥ is a cheap, lame excuse! The people who engage in such AFK farming are fully aware of what they are doing.
Simple example, starring the beloved SANDBOX. You need somebody to police and clean the damn thing. Cause every now and then, a kid decides to take a dump in the middle of the sandbox. And what do the other kids do? Well sadly, at least half of them go and take a dump right next to the first one. You wanna try and guess how long any kid will enjoy playing in a full of **** sandbox? Somebody has to take care of the mess. Now looking at your post, you are saying that a kid who takes a dump in the sandbox should get a pat on the back, instead of being punished and forced out of the sandbox GÇô is that about right?
Oh and Shi GÇô nice ninja edit thereGǪ
P.S. Oh yeah, another glorious idea - disable the plexes until a fix has been developed. Let's deny COSMOS missions to all the players interested, because some "industrious" guys have decided to take advantage of a flaw in the system. How do you guys come up with this? Let the gun do the talking! |
Vrykolakasis
Trinity Operations Aurora Irae
52
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:39:00 -
[299] - Quote
I really love Screegs' hostile tone in the vast majority of his replies in this topic.
Never mind; I don't. I love hostility inside the game. To be aggressively hostile, condescending, and unprofessional to your customers in real life (or, well, a forum; still real interaction) is not an admirable character trait.
As per the real issue: It's a bit brute-force to leave a game mechanic, tell a small portion of players (people who actively pay attention to stuff out-of-game) that it's not allowed, and get out the ban-hammer. You could, rapidly and with very little effort, reprogram the static sites to run like normal sites, despawn after they were run, and instantly respawn in the same system. You'd have "static" complexes in the same sense that some W-Space systems have "static" wormholes, and no one could be afk for very long. You could avoid all of the angry people by simply changing the mechanic, quickly and correctly, and keeping the ban-hammer stored away entirely.
Whatever you change, call it a patch, not a freaking expansion. The last two "expansions" were just a combination of fixing broken stuff and breaking working stuff.
|
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
192
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:41:00 -
[300] - Quote
You would think with all the rage in the thread that someone actually is banned over this |
|
Psyise
House of Bone
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:41:00 -
[301] - Quote
Rakamy wrote:Kristen Andelare wrote:
This!
I know the exact complexes that CCP Sreegs is talking about. COMSMOS missions. I've run them, and spent half an hour to an hour in them, constantly shuttling back and forth to the various cans where the loot spawns, so that I can find the ONE piece of loot I need to move forward. Once, I never found it and gave up, and gave up on the mission. But I saw the potential to just sit in there and shoot things.
A suggestion, remove the bounties from the rats in those COSMOS missions, and instead give an appropriately larger bonus for completing the mission they are intended for, and a large time bonus as well. Problem solved, forever.
Constant reference to AFK mining is really, really dumb. You have to empty your cargohold, without a bot program, you are NOT doing that while AFK. That includes ice mining. the new Mack you can mine in for about 40 minutes while AFK, come back, and OMG, Interact with the GAME!!!. This exploit required no interaction from dropping the drones and turning on the remote reppers to the point where you collect the drones and log off. No bounties would equal no one wanting to try this exploit.
As sreegs said, being AFK for a reasonable period of time (if that's to put in a load of laundry, grab some food, hit the can, kiss the wife goodbye, is perfectly fine. Being AFK for up to 23 hours, no interaction, Not OK.
Exactly and I fail to see how so many people fail to understand what CCP are talking about.....they are not after the ppl that are afk for 20min what ccp are doing are going after the AFK plexers who are AFK for 20hrs. who rake in isk and absolutely do nothing for it in terms of game interaction. It has nothing to do with AFK mining or AFK missioning (unless your going to sit there and peck at rats for 20hrs ) and the majority of eve understand this and are not paranoid or doing just what CCP are trying to cut down on like 90% of the people who have posed before me. Instead of posing an idiotic comments learn the facts about who/what CCP are after in this new "program". You can sill pop your drones from your Domi or Ishtar go do what ever it is you have to then come back....because once a mission is cleared then it wont respawn till after DT and you have to come back to turn it in to set up another. The same with mining you still have to come back time to time to empty your cargo (unless your using a bot which is against the EULA anyway) I fail to see how so many people cant understand that......
A lot of us do understand that. Your missing the point as well. As players we are being told "your doing it wrong" by playing the game the way CCP has designed it. People have found creative ways to play the game in a manner which CCP does not agree with. I don't believe players should be punished for this, I think they should change the game to make it impossible to AFK these complexes.
I just don't get CCP sometimes. It's ok to scam newbies and do other stuff that would never be allowed in other games but if you setup drones and go AFK in a COSMOS complex your going to be punished?
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? |
El Geo
Pathfinders.
50
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:48:00 -
[302] - Quote
while you're at it make those static ded 1/10 and 2/10's into constellation anomalies (anyone can find them) so they respawn instead of just allowing players to sit in the last room farming them path-+find-+er (pthfndr, p+ñth-)n.1. One that discovers a new course or way, especially through or into unexplored regions. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
905
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:49:00 -
[303] - Quote
SmashTech wrote:can someone point out for me where the automatic keystroke and mouseclick generation parts are
because I must have missed them
That's because this falls under the bolded part:
3.You may not use macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1815
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:51:00 -
[304] - Quote
Kristen Andelare wrote:
I know the exact complexes that CCP Sreegs is talking about. COMSMOS missions. I've run them, and spent half an hour to an hour in them, constantly shuttling back and forth to the various cans where the loot spawns, so that I can find the ONE piece of loot I need to move forward. Once, I never found it and gave up, and gave up on the mission. But I saw the potential to just sit in there and shoot things.
Too bad it's not just COSMOS missions, there are other, recent PvE additions that exhibit the same identical issue.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1005
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:57:00 -
[305] - 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... |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
905
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 19:59:00 -
[306] - Quote
I wonder if this would fix the complexes:
When you kill a NPC you get the bounty for that NPC and a flag is set. When that same NPC spawns again, your killing it does not generate another bounty, as the flag is set. To reset the flag you got to leave and re-enter that room of the complex. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Psyise
House of Bone
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 20:03:00 -
[307] - Quote
Kyle Frost wrote:Shi Xia wrote:Screegs,
Don't be so lame, and effing lazy. Penalizing us for using the mechanics that were designed by the devs is a lazy. The players of Eve are smart, and we will use every little mechanic to our advantage. You should be thankful that we are so industrious. It's what separates this game from the rest (for me). Our nature should not bring us under fire. Rather, maybe you should fix the mechanics that make this 'exploit' possible. (Seems to me anyone running low sec/nul sec plexes afk is also under risk of being scanned down and popped.)
Why should the players, who pay your salary have to be penalized for CCP's lack of insight and forethought? At the very least (I believe someone already mentioned) disable the plexes that are providing us with this opportunity that has been created until said problem has been fixed--ON YOUR END.
Let us PAYING subscribers have fun, and get off our backs. Did it ever occur to you that CCP might need help from the players every now and then, in order to keep the game balanced and GÇ£cleanGÇ¥? When you stumble upon a flaw in the game mechanics, what do you do? A. Report it and move on. B. Exploit it to your benefit as much as you can and then cry when the devs threaten to put an end to it. Judging by posts in this thread, the answer to that one seems obvious, doesnGÇÖt it? Like I said, EVE is a huge game GÇô the devs canGÇÖt be aware of absolutely everything that goes on in it the entire time. And even if they are aware of a certain problem, the solution is not always simple and easy to implement. (With that said, I really like KristenGÇÖs idea about removing bounties GÇô that just might do the trick and seems simple enough) Also, I believe that most people who play EVE are intelligent enough to know, when they are taking advantage of a flawed game mechanic. SoGǪ GÇ£being industrious and playing the game to the fullestGÇ¥ is a cheap, lame excuse! The people who engage in such AFK farming are fully aware of what they are doing. Simple example, starring the beloved SANDBOX. You need somebody to police and clean the damn thing. Cause every now and then, a kid decides to take a dump in the middle of the sandbox. And what do the other kids do? Well sadly, at least half of them go and take a dump right next to the first one. You wanna try and guess how long any kid will enjoy playing in a full of **** sandbox? Somebody has to take care of the mess. Now looking at your post, you are saying that a kid who takes a dump in the sandbox should get a pat on the back, instead of being punished and forced out of the sandbox GÇô is that about right? Oh and Shi GÇô nice ninja edit thereGǪ P.S. Oh yeah, another glorious idea - disable the plexes until a fix has been developed. Let's deny COSMOS missions to all the players interested, because some "industrious" guys have decided to take advantage of a flaw in the system. How do you guys come up with this?
CCP does get my help in the form of a 45$ check every month. =p
Obviously it has been reported or else they would not have developed a system to catch people. Playing the game the way it was designed is not exploiting it. These complexes were intentionally designed this way. Just because someone finally realized they could tank these complexes and use drones for easy isk does not make it an exploit.
Yes, the game mechanic may be flawed, but it is their flaw, why would they punish us for their mistake?
Get off your horse man ... Just ... get off your horse. =p
There a million ways to solve this problem without turning off the COSMOS missions. Pick one, instead of wasting time developing systems to catch players abiding by the rules. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1005
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 20:05:00 -
[308] - 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... |
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 20:09:00 -
[309] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:You would think with all the rage in the thread that someone actually is banned over this Now that's part of the problem, isn't it?
The Monkeysphere finds a way to hide his ass in local chat and shares it with his buddies (the local chat thing, not his ass... i think). He gets banned, but then CCP lifts his ban cause he tells them how he did it.
This guy comes up with a way to AFK farm a plex and even develops a master plan for dealing with the other players when they get on his way. (assuming his story is real) He gets his accounts banned. Then he explains to CCP what he was actually doing and how, and they lift the ban.
You think if CCP made any of those bans stick, maybe the next guy thinks twice before he goes all "industrious" on the game flaw that he finds? Curious, isn't it? Let the gun do the talking! |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
169
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 20:29:00 -
[310] - Quote
those plexs have been around for a pretty long time, surprised ccp is just saying something now. although ganking people in there is pretty fun, http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=6234153 |
|
Emperor Salazar
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
632
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 20:36:00 -
[311] - Quote
Why are there 16 pages here? |
Celfea Dur
The Flying Tigers Intrepid Crossing
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 20:54:00 -
[312] - Quote
As a --VERY-- casual gamer, I discovered years ago that a ratting battleship can sit in a belt for HOURS and HOURS and HOURS...and kill the rats as they respawn in the belt.
I'm self-employed and work from home. It's quite often that I may have my laptop sitting next to me for hours at a time with a battleship in a belt, waiting for rats to spawn...drones orbiting...while I conduct my real-life business.
I have had players send me fleet invites or convos to try to get a response from me. One time back in my early days, a GM "poked" me with a question to determine if I was AFK or not. It's the only time I have ever seen a GM in-game!
It would seem to me that many forms of casual play styles that allow for AFK play is not only very popular within the EVE community but as evidenced by the outcry of responses to this news item it would appear to affect a large number of otherwise active play styles as well.
How many pilots play active on one client while AFK activities are running on a secondary client?
And even though Screegs assures us that if we have not been informed that our gameplay is a bad thing then we are OK, but obviously such a notification could come at any time. It would appear that the only thing between our passive game play style is the amount of isk which we are able to generate while doing it.
I believe that is the crux of the concern for the players and is the justification for every negative post on this thread.
I agree with the player base that finds concern in this action and I too question just where the line is drawn between normal gameplay and exploitation --
- Is it expressed in hours of game play or isk per hour?
- Is it limited to a certain region or security level?
- What about a certain ship type? Can a hulk not make the same amount of isk per hour passively drone ratting as a battleship can in the same belt? Obviously both can mine ore in the process.
- Will the restrictions only apply to complexes, anomalies and deadspace or will it apply to belts as well?
HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO: If I place one client in a belt with a ratting battleship. And I place a second client in the same belt with a mining ship. Then I use a third client to run a hauler to handle the ore.
I can basicly AFK mine and rat at the same time while conducting other tasks for work, or read a book, or watch Netflix, or surf whatever....I can even leave the house and go grab a bite to eat!
But obviously two of my clients are actively being "played" by managing cargo and hauling ore. The first client, the battleship, however, is just sitting there...drones out...providing security. When rats spawn, I could easily warp off the mining ship and the hauler and let the battleship take the aggro, then come back.
You might say that does not qualify as botting because I am actively playing the game. I would agree. But some inhuman computer code might determine that one of my clients is botting because the battleship never moves or responds. And out there somewhere is a line in the sand that makes the difference between that being normal game play and an exploit...and if I cross that line adios muchachos?
That's no where even hardly close to promoting sandbox game play.
And in my opinion, if a player sets a ship in a situation where it can passively kill rats all day long without affecting someone else's game play pleasure then BRAVO for him! List his name on the big screen in my captain's quarters as a suspected botting pilot and tell me what constellation he is in. Let me go ruin his day instead of you ruining all of ours!
Can I get a *AMEN*? |
Shi Xia
The Imperial Fedaykin
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 20:56:00 -
[313] - Quote
Psyise wrote:Kyle Frost wrote:Shi Xia wrote:stuff I wrote stuff Kyle Frost wrote CCP does get my help in the form of a 45$ check every month. =p Obviously it has been reported or else they would not have developed a system to catch people. Playing the game the way it was designed is not exploiting it. These complexes were intentionally designed this way. Just because someone finally realized they could tank these complexes and use drones for easy isk does not make it an exploit. Yes, the game mechanic may be flawed, but it is their flaw, why would they punish us for their mistake? Get off your horse man ... Just ... get off your horse. =p There a million ways to solve this problem without turning off the COSMOS missions. Pick one, instead of wasting time developing systems to catch players abiding by the rules.
Well said Psyise.
Okay Kyle. TEMPORARILY disabling the broken COSMOS -- not the best idea. My point: We as paying customers shouldn't be penalized for utilizing bad design. I think yo umay have said similar words in some of your other dribblings. In regards to the way this was presented to the players: don't come at us with some half assed explanation throwing a band-aid at the solution!
I hardly see this as a 'turd' in the sandbox. It's been reported... is being dealt with. Apparently CCP lifted bans/made good. So this guy and his ability to use the current (at the time) EULA to his advantage brought light to the issue. Seems like a relatively organic process to me.
|
kyofu
SHAD0WMIST
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 20:56:00 -
[314] - Quote
Sreegs, I have a question. You stated logging in at downtime, placing drones, going afk until next DT is unacceptable. I get that. I get that this was posted to warn a specific subset of players who engage in the most extreme form of this behaviour and essentially farm PVE bounties 23/7 while afk, making a substantial amount of ISK. ; What I am confused about is where the dividing line is. This exploit has no red flag: there is no third party software, no single complex it is being applied to, there is no one factor to say "because this was used, this behaviour is exploitative" so where is the dividing line between acceptable and unacceptable?
For example, what if I log on 5 hours after downtime and log off 2 hour before, but other than that my behaviour is identical and I am AFK, or seem afk? (so 16 hrs a day, 5 days a week)
What if I am engaging in the same behaviour except that I am not AFK, I assume an interface command every once in awhile will make me safe?
What if I am on an alt that is looting wrecks?
You said a shower and feeding yourself is fine, but what if I am going to a restaurant? What if something unexpected arises and I simply forget to log off all night? Must this happen several times in a row, or perhaps a certain number of times over the course of a week/month before I have to worry? I know I've had people show up at the door just as I get out of the shower and forgotten to log off...
Is there some trivial magic number where the detection algorithm rolls over and says yup, its been 15 hours, 37 minutes and 12 seconds, its DEFINITELY a bot, *FLAG*.
I don't necessarily need answers to these specific hypotheticals, as they are meant to be demonstrative. Just a general explanation of even the grey area when we should start to worry that the risk of being flagged exists, as the detection algorithm is obviously more sophisticated than if afk farming for > 22 hours a day for 7 days a week, *FLAG*
I worry this post will come off as though I am preparing for future rule lawyering, or a way to utilize this exploit without getting flagged, but what I am actually trying to do is distinguish where my legitimate behaviour may not be considered legitimate. A lot of the confusion and questions I read is because while you only give one specific example of this behaviour, there is a lot of grey area where this overlaps legitimate behaviour that is worrying. A half hour of this behaviour is allowable, 23 hours is not. What about 5 hours? 10? 15?
I am actually just finishing getting skills for an ishtar exactly for playing in this way. I play a lot at work, and as such I need to be able to afk very abruptly for unknowable lengths of times when customers come in or situations arise. I don't want to be otherwise occupied with a customer while my brain is staring at the clock thinking oh ****, how long to I have before I risk getting banned? Maybe I can distract them and get back to the computer and loot something... |
Rented
Hunter Heavy Industries
26
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 20:58:00 -
[315] - Quote
I find it disappointing Sreegs and other CCP folks have to deal with so much whine from nigh-braindamaged people who apparently can't read properly.
1. Obvious abuse. 2. Now stating obvious abuse is indeed obvious abuse. 3. Now punishing obvious abuse. 4. Soon to be fixing obvious abuse. 5. Where problem?
This is why we can't have nice things. People always blame CCP for not listening to the players, but honestly 95% of the things players say is moronic. |
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 21:00:00 -
[316] - Quote
Psyise wrote:CCP does get my help in the form of a 45$ check every month. =p
Obviously it has been reported or else they would not have developed a system to catch people. Playing the game the way it was designed is not exploiting it. These complexes were intentionally designed this way. Just because someone finally realized they could tank these complexes and use drones for easy isk does not make it an exploit.
Yes, the game mechanic may be flawed, but it is their flaw, why would they punish us for their mistake?
Get off your horse man ... Just ... get off your horse. =p
There a million ways to solve this problem without turning off the COSMOS missions. Pick one, instead of wasting time developing systems to catch players abiding by the rules.
Holy dogshit, people just don't feel like reading or thinking today, do they? Must be nice...
Easy isk is not the problem. Easy isk with 1% game interaction is the problem. You know how even in the simple hack-and-slash games, the juicy loot drops from the big, bad boss who is hard to kill? The reward should be proportional to the risk, in order to keep things interesting. Where is the... nah, forget it, lost cause.
As another poster already pointed out, the system CCP developed was designed to catch bots. The fact that it detected this guy's characters as such means a lot. Well maybe not to you but...
And a horse? What horse? For better or worse, i am down in the sandbox with the rest of you lot. You think I would bother posting otherwise?
However, i am running out of examples to give you people. I mean... I don't think I can simplify it any further. Ok, last try:
You know how in some hotels they leave free maps in the lobby so that tourists can find their way around? If you wanted to, you can just grab all the maps and take off. But that's not a very nice thing to do, is it? It can damage the experience of the other tourists. Would you take all the maps anyway? Is it the hotel's fault for not keeping the maps at a secure location?
Seeing that you don't feel like thinking today and you may not understand how the above relates to the issue in question, let me clarify - by AFK farming a COSMOS plex, you can effectively deny other players access to the said plex and the missions associated with it. This plex was not meant to be an isk farm, just like the maps were not meant to be taken all by a single individual. The fact that you can get away with doing it (taking all the maps or AFK farming the plex) does not make it right.
Pffff.... I feel exhausted. I bet that's how teachers in the elementary school feel.
Let the gun do the talking! |
Server Marcune
Marcune
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 21:18:00 -
[317] - Quote
I have been reading 11 pages of reply and comments of everyone that is assuming there way of handeling trade/mining/ratting/plex/anom etc etc could get them banned for (ab)using it.
When i started to read the post when logging in to the game i was like wtf .. that dude is pissed about something. I started reading and i noticed that his message is not clear enough to understand. The news item does not come over proffesional but more as a flame and dictator
The communication is the problem of the confusion, mass hysteria only works for weak people.
CCP Sreegs,
You should change the whole message its consfusing and it sounds to me like you are geting personal too. I had to read 11 pages just to understand what was going on.
I advise you to bring a better news item instead of the one you are using now. This would prevent 16pages of garbage and confusion and hysteria and you would be able to filter out the real qst that are asked regarding to the news item.
That's all. |
Claire Voyant
136
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 21:30:00 -
[318] - Quote
I think people are missing the point that there is no actually bot detection involved. The lazy way to do it is data mining to find the characters earning the most isk per day from bounties and rewards (probably weighted by security level.) Then from that pool you follow them for suspicious activity and ban them. Someone decided that if you were earning that much while AFKing in a complex it was bannable and when it was petitioned by the player CCP upheld the ban. |
Shinobi-san
TOP GUN AIR Gypsy Band
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 21:33:00 -
[319] - Quote
No, this is just too much. This is telling people how they can and cannot play the game they paid for. I left my previous MMOG exactly because of this. This is so-called "chinese" direction (one aspect of it), and this server clearly is heading there - I can see this during last twelve months.
Do I want to play the game in which I can be banned even if I don't use 3rd party hacks, and use only game mechanics carefully designed by admins? NO. Do I think admins should dictate how many hours a day and where I use "my" sentry drones? NO. Wouldn't it be better if game mechanics was changed instead, changed the way that suits administration views? Yes. Do I think posting articles and warnings such as this, and not directly changing game mechanics instead, is the right thing to do? NO.
Will I buy more game time for my two accounts? Of course not! Paying for playing to relax while someone is telling you that you should relax only in particular ways/hours (while they designed it so other ways are possible) seems inappropriate.
CCP showed us the door. I can see the way out pretty clearly. I will go now. Bye.
p.s. and I don't even have rattlesnake/ishtar/sentries... |
Marconus Orion
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
405
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 21:37:00 -
[320] - Quote
Suqq Madiq wrote:Marconus Orion wrote:Time to bring sleeper A.I. into the rest of NPC spawns... Sleeper AI would do nothing to solve the issue. Keep misunderstanding this basic concept as it's highly amusing. Oh I understand the concept. I'm just stating we need sleeper AI for NPCs. |
|
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 21:40:00 -
[321] - Quote
Can I have your stuff? I can put it to good use, I promise.
Seriously though, I believe you are completely blowing this out of proportion, but if you seriously want to ragequit over this, then it's your loss.
Marconus Orion wrote:Suqq Madiq wrote:Marconus Orion wrote:Time to bring sleeper A.I. into the rest of NPC spawns... Sleeper AI would do nothing to solve the issue. Keep misunderstanding this basic concept as it's highly amusing. Oh I understand the concept. I'm just stating we need sleeper AI for NPCs.
An upgrade on Sleeper AI would certainly mix things up if it was randomly allocated to random spawns in boring sites.
*Yawn* Here's wave 4 of.. wait, the bloody things are switching targets? They're .. oh crap. QUICK EVERYONE! WAKE UP! WE HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT THE NPC SPAWNS ARE DOING! |
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 21:44:00 -
[322] - Quote
Shinobi-san wrote:No, this is just too much. This is telling people how they can and cannot play the game they paid for. I left my previous MMOG exactly because of this. This is so-called "chinese" direction (one aspect of it), and this server clearly is heading there - I can see this during last twelve months.
Do I want to play the game in which I can be banned even if I don't use 3rd party hacks, and use only game mechanics carefully designed by admins? NO. Do I think admins should dictate how many hours a day and where I use "my" sentry drones? NO. Wouldn't it be better if game mechanics was changed instead, changed the way that suits administration views? Yes. Do I think posting articles and warnings such as this, and not directly changing game mechanics instead, is the right thing to do? NO.
Will I buy more game time for my two accounts? Of course not! Paying for playing to relax while someone is telling you that you should relax only in particular ways/hours (while they designed it so other ways are possible) seems inappropriate.
CCP showed us the door. I can see the way out pretty clearly. I will go now. Bye.
p.s. and I don't even have rattlesnake/ishtar/sentries...
Can i have your... damn it! You beat me to it... Let the gun do the talking! |
Shinobi-san
TOP GUN AIR Gypsy Band
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 21:50:00 -
[323] - Quote
My corp will have it, sorry stranger.
Quote: you are completely blowing this out of proportion No I don't think so. Today I saw CCP is appealing to fear of being banned, while all they had to do is to change some little game mechanics (but we all know they're lazy, right?)
I do not want any fear or bans (even while they're not for me) in paid game I play to relax. I see too many fear-driven people in reality already, too many of them...
Quote:if you seriously want to ragequit over this This is not rage, you misunderstood. I am perfectly calm. Also I'm perfectly serious.
Dictating rules with fear and not game mechanics is the thing I'll not pay for - simply because I do not need that ****. lol? I loose nothing and gain more time to do more interesting things (and relax in more unobtrusive ways). It is win-win situation.
How come can't you see the door? ;-) |
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 22:03:00 -
[324] - Quote
Shinobi-san wrote:My corp will have it, sorry stranger.
Good to know it'll go to a good use then :)
Shinobi-san wrote:No I don't think so. Today I saw CCP is appealing to fear of being banned, while all they had to do is to change some little game mechanics (but we all know they're lazy, right?)
I do not want any fear or bans (even while they're not for me) in paid game I play to relax. I see too many fear-driven people in reality already, too many of them...
The game mechanics in question, from what I understand from previous posts here, are buried in garbage that's the same grade of code as POS'. They're wary as **** about messing with that, for concern of what breaks; so instead of leaving it stagnating for months, they have addressed it now.
Shinobi-san wrote:This is not rage, you misunderstood. I am perfectly calm. Also I'm perfectly serious.
Dictating rules with fear and not game mechanics is the thing I'll not pay for - simply because I do not need that ****.
So you quit during the gold ammo rage as well, and during the Unholy Rage bannings?
"Fear" has been a well used tool for a long time, for the banning of players that exploit, and where the game mechanics can fail, despite a good effort to enforce them. ( The Concord boomerang exploit for example ).
We are dealing with a playerbase that thrives on the edge of legit gameplay sometimes, that will work every possible edge they can into a fight, or into their enviroment.
Shinobi-san wrote:lol? I loose nothing and gain more time to do more interesting things (and relax in more unobtrusive ways). It is win-win situation.
How come can't you see the door? ;-) I see a door that isn't for me.
In honesty it sounds like you're looking for a way out anyway, so prehaps the break might do you some good. You might come back, you might not. I'm glad you're seeing it positively though.
|
Welfare Scrub
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 22:04:00 -
[325] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: Anyone who was performing the activity I'm referring to in the news item has most likely already been banned for doing so. Another item about the belt ratting bit is that in the scenario you paint the amount of income gained is basically nothing. In the scenario we're specifically discussing in this thread you are making a lot more money. By a factor of a whole bunch.
So to clarify this is OK for belt ratting but not ok for COSMOS?
|
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 22:08:00 -
[326] - Quote
Shinobi-san wrote: I do not want any fear or bans (even while they're not for me) in paid game I play to relax.
This is not rage, you misunderstood. I am perfectly calm. Also I'm perfectly serious.
Dictating rules with fear and not game mechanics is the thing I'll not pay for - simply because I do not need that ****.
I call bullshit! As if this thread didn't have enough already...
You look as serious as a chimp with a clown nose and a water pistol. You are not gonna quit, you are gonna keep donating your $$ like a good little minion... although i suspect you are paying for your gametime with ISK.
No fear or bans in a paid game... You think because you pay for the game that allows you to prevent other people from playing? They are paying customers too, aren't they? Furthermore, if you honestly experienced FEAR after reading CCP's announcement, then your problems run deeper than game mechanics...
Last but not least - CCP does not use fear to dictate rules. Compared to other companies, CCP are a bunch of kind-hearted softies. I think icelanders don't know how to be scary. I mean, look what happens when they try to act tough, or even joke and pose as tough. Read my earlier posts - CCP lifts bans for cooperation and good behavior... what kind of fear tactic is that?! Let the gun do the talking! |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
293
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 22:13:00 -
[327] - Quote
Emperor Salazar wrote:Why are there 16 pages here?
Goons. |
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 22:14:00 -
[328] - Quote
Welfare Scrub wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: Anyone who was performing the activity I'm referring to in the news item has most likely already been banned for doing so. Another item about the belt ratting bit is that in the scenario you paint the amount of income gained is basically nothing. In the scenario we're specifically discussing in this thread you are making a lot more money. By a factor of a whole bunch.
So to clarify this is OK for belt ratting but not ok for COSMOS?
Yep. You can belt-rat until you fall asleep at your keyboard and suffer a horribly embarrassing lossmail whilst you drool and type "fvdusvf fe bauvfbref/v rkea" in local as you roll on the keys when your sleep-deprived mind tried processing the alarm sounds..
But if you behave like a bot, expect scrutiny.
Suqq Madiq wrote:Emperor Salazar wrote:Why are there 16 pages here? Goons.
I resent that remark! |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
169
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 22:14:00 -
[329] - Quote
kyofu wrote:Sreegs, I have a question. You stated logging in at downtime, placing drones, going afk until next DT is unacceptable. I get that. I get that this was posted to warn a specific subset of players who engage in the most extreme form of this behaviour and essentially farm PVE bounties 23/7 while afk, making a substantial amount of ISK. ; What I am confused about is where the dividing line is. This exploit has no red flag: there is no third party software, no single complex it is being applied to, there is no one factor to say "because this was used, this behaviour is exploitative" so where is the dividing line between acceptable and unacceptable?
For example, what if I log on 5 hours after downtime and log off 2 hour before, but other than that my behaviour is identical and I am AFK, or seem afk? (so 16 hrs a day, 5 days a week)
What if I am engaging in the same behaviour except that I am not AFK, I assume an interface command every once in awhile will make me safe?
What if I am on an alt that is looting wrecks?
You said a shower and feeding yourself is fine, but what if I am going to a restaurant? What if something unexpected arises and I simply forget to log off all night? Must this happen several times in a row, or perhaps a certain number of times over the course of a week/month before I have to worry? I know I've had people show up at the door just as I get out of the shower and forgotten to log off...
Is there some trivial magic number where the detection algorithm rolls over and says yup, its been 15 hours, 37 minutes and 12 seconds, its DEFINITELY a bot, *FLAG*.
I don't necessarily need answers to these specific hypotheticals, as they are meant to be demonstrative. Just a general explanation of even the grey area when we should start to worry that the risk of being flagged exists, as the detection algorithm is obviously more sophisticated than if afk farming for > 22 hours a day for 7 days a week, *FLAG*
I worry this post will come off as though I am preparing for future rule lawyering, or a way to utilize this exploit without getting flagged, but what I am actually trying to do is distinguish where my legitimate behaviour may not be considered legitimate. A lot of the confusion and questions I read is because while you only give one specific example of this behaviour, there is a lot of grey area where this overlaps legitimate behaviour that is worrying. A half hour of this behaviour is allowable, 23 hours is not. What about 5 hours? 10? 15?
I am actually just finishing getting skills for an ishtar exactly for playing in this way. I play a lot at work, and as such I need to be able to afk very abruptly for unknowable lengths of times when customers come in or situations arise. I don't want to be otherwise occupied with a customer while my brain is staring at the clock thinking oh ****, how long to I have before I risk getting banned? Maybe I can distract them and get back to the computer and loot something...
so you go afk to take a shower, are you making 10-20mil/hour when in the shower? and going out and forgetting to log out are you still making 10-20mil/hour? If I'm in a drone boat and I go afk my income is going to stop in the next 20 mins because everything in the room will be dead
|
Shinobi-san
TOP GUN AIR Gypsy Band
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 22:22:00 -
[330] - Quote
Tyke Orlieveit wrote:The game mechanics in question, from what I understand from previous posts here, are buried in garbage that's the same grade of code as POS'. They're wary as **** about messing with that, for concern of what breaks I kinda pay them for their devs to do their job, right? And the fact they do not do it right doesn't seem right for me.Quote:they have addressed it now. How come? The mechanics are still in place, unaddressed. They just added more fear.Quote:"Fear" has been a well used tool for a long time, for the banning of players that exploit, and where the game mechanics can fail I do not want to see this "tool" to be used where I try to relax.
Exploits should be dealt with careful design of protocols and software. Proper mechanics can not fail - believe me, I know what I say. I am security expert and I know this stuff. I know how to design code that does exactly what is written in specification (and this can be proved mathematically). Also I know how to write good specs and protocols :-)
Quote:We are dealing with a playerbase that thrives on the edge this is exactly what makes it interesting. But now this edge will be lost, albeit partially, bit by bit. This is not interesting, so I'll quit.
Quote:In honesty it sounds like you're looking for a way out anyway No, I was not motivated to quit before I saw this clear sign of chinese server. I like freedom, a freedom to do what game allows me to. Now they showed they're taking this freedom from us. So I am not motivated to stay anymore.
All of this is happened before, and will happen again.
Yes, I think in one or two years I'll ask a friend of mine in what direction CCP will drive this server. Depending of his answer I might check it out again. But there is one problem. He quit because of recent patches and the factual death of solo pvp. He's in WoW now, but I think he'll be back, so he should know....
p.s. golden ammo? unholy rage? I do not know what you're talking about.
|
|
Shinobi-san
TOP GUN AIR Gypsy Band
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 22:27:00 -
[331] - Quote
Kyle Frost wrote:You are not gonna quit, you are gonna keep donating your $$ like a good little minion.. oh, I see you're talking for yourself, buddy? :-DQuote:You think because you pay for the game that allows you to prevent other people from playing? They are paying customers too, aren't they? Please re-read my previous post carefully.Quote:what kind of fear tactic is that?! business tactic? Or trying to keep good face with bad game?
|
Subrahmaya Chandrasekhar
The Three Musketeers
15
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 22:32:00 -
[332] - Quote
Well, I hope this news post nightmare will be handled internally at CCP with appropriate administrative action, so that it does not occur again. As just another customer, I know I was T'd off and invested many hours of my time reading through all these posts. The story behind it, of course, was a truly amazing tour-de-force of ingenuity on the part of one man. O7 Independent thinking is not encouraged in a professional Army. It is a form of mutiny. Obedience is the supreme virtueBritish Prime Minister Lloyd George, in his 'War Memoirs'-á |
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions Solid Foundation
177
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 22:40:00 -
[333] - Quote
This hasty patch has the potential to bring an amazing argument up.
If this algorithm based purely on being AFK for long stretches of time then it will also flag AFK cloakers.
It will start with someone complaining in a petition or on the forums, "Hey my cyno alt was cloaked up in Fountain for the last 3 weeks straight and now my account got flagged for cheating!"
Then someone will point out, "Well if leaving the game on continually to get something done is an exploit what s the difference between AFK ratting, and AFK pvp."
And then the most ridiculous flame war on the Eve forums will begin! I honestly think PoCo based sov is a good idea https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1417544 |
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 22:45:00 -
[334] - Quote
Shinobi-san wrote:I kinda pay them for their devs to do their job, right? And the fact they do not do it right doesn't seem right for me.
You counter this with the comment below, referring to you being a security expert.
Shinobi-san wrote:How come? The mechanics are still in place, unaddressed. They just added more fear.
Shinobi-san wrote:I do not want to see this "tool" to be used where I try to relax.
By both quotes above, You seem very focused on this "Fear" aspect within a digital environment. Please elaborate.
Shinobi-san wrote:Exploits should be dealt with careful design of protocols and software. Proper mechanics can not fail - believe me, I know what I say. I am security expert and I know this stuff. I know how to design code that does exactly what is written in specification (and this can be proved mathematically). Also I know how to write good specs and protocols :-)
I'm not even going to begin with pointing out what it wrong with what you have said.
I would be confident enough to say that no 'Security Expert' would ever make such a statement about a legacy bit of software, created in 2003, that has gone through many gradual and significant changes, and has been hosted on so many different bits of hardware, and that is being re-written and adapted to a more modern environment as time passes, that the code is bulletproof as it changes.
"I know how to design code that does exactly what is written in specification" - Specification means jack **** when exposed to the real world, beyond a good guide and a hope it holds. If it was that simple, that pure, we wouldn't have to worry about a lot of exploits that are out there, and I'm sure a lot of actual experts out there would call you on exactly the same thing. Theory is a wonderful thing.
In fact, I'm bored. I'm calling you out on this. Cite your code. Cite your specs / protocols you have drafted and written yourself, put them to the community's scruitiny.
[TBC]
|
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 22:47:00 -
[335] - Quote
Shinobi-san wrote:this is exactly what makes it interesting. But now this edge will be lost, albeit partially, bit by bit. This is not interesting, so I'll quit.
So you're moving on from boredom.
Shinobi-san wrote:No, I was not motivated to quit before I saw this clear sign of chinese server. I like freedom, a freedom to do what game allows me to. Now they showed they're taking this freedom from us. So I am not motivated to stay anymore.
All of this is happened before, and will happen again.
Yes, I think in one or two years I'll ask a friend of mine in what direction CCP will drive this server. Depending of his answer I might check it out again. But there is one problem. He quit because of recent patches and the factual death of solo pvp. He's in WoW now, but I think he'll be back, so he should know....
p.s. golden ammo? unholy rage? I do not know what you're talking about.
So, it's racially motivated rather than anything else.
And if your freind has gone to WoW for an improvement in gameplay, I'm not certain EVE is for them.
If you don't recall the NEX store anger for "Pay to win", also known as the Golden ammo issue, and the Unholy Rage bannings, ( Linked here as I'm nice http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=687 ), then I'm very surprised.
Unholy rage was used as a "fear" tool to worry botters for a long time, until they recently turned it into a more frequent event rather than a massive banhammer orgy. |
Andy Landen
Born Crazy Kadeshians
57
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 22:55:00 -
[336] - Quote
If I am understanding all these posts, it seems like CCP is pointing at doing a particular COSMOS mission (which I don't know about) and any others (which they don't know about) which allow 24/7 AFK ISK through respawns (how much time between them anyway?). Farming this and similar missions actively 24/7 is okay, but AFK is not, and somehow they have figured out a way to tell if you are AFK or not ... [pilot's webcam comes on covertly and CCP looks at an empty chair for more than 20 minutes] Guess he is AFK farming. OR [CCP looks and sees the pilot actively enjoying himself or herself] Oops. Didn't want to see that ..
PS: By third party software, is CCP including self-recorded mouse and key strokes using AutoHotkey or other similar software for playback? |
Allataria
Martyr's Vengence Test Alliance Please Ignore
32
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 23:01:00 -
[337] - Quote
And yet the multiboxing of miners continues to be allowed by CCP. They are doing the exact same thing with going afk from multiple instances of the game. How is this considered fair play? Why arent multibox miners being banned? Its a third program running behind the client playing the game for them! |
Shinobi-san
TOP GUN AIR Gypsy Band
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 23:02:00 -
[338] - Quote
Quote:You counter this with the comment below, referring to you being a security expert. Excuse me?Quote:legacy bit of software, created in 2003, that has gone through many gradual and significant changes, and has been hosted on so many different bits of hardware, and that is being re-written and adapted to a more modern environment as time passes, that the code is bulletproof First, I was talking mainly in context of game mechanics. Second, the only thing among those you mentioned, which can not be easily fixed now-a-days, is the hardware. All other aspects are doable.Quote:If it was that simple, that pure, we wouldn't have to worry about a lot of exploits that are out there Oh, seems like you've been spoiled by buggy winblows, my friend... Too bad.Quote:Cite your code. Cite your specs / protocols you have drafted and written yourself, put them to the community's scruitiny. Sorry, but this is impossible because I signed an NDA. Instead I'll recommend reading this paper: [url]http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~kleing/papers/cacm10.pdf[/url] It will show you how those things are done. |
Matius Toskavich
State War Academy Caldari State
22
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 23:19:00 -
[339] - Quote
Mmmm Juicy tears...
Risk free, easy mode, afk ISK etc etc you have all heard it before and said it yourselves. |
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 23:21:00 -
[340] - Quote
Shinobi-san wrote:Excuse me? Quote:Yes? Shinobi-san wrote:First, I was talking mainly in context of game mechanics. Second, the only thing among those you mentioned, which can not be easily fixed now-a-days, is the hardware. All other aspects are doable. What, instantly? Whilst providing new content. Sure. In fact, If you're that good, http://www.ccpgames.com/en/jobs might appreciate you Shinobi-san wrote:Oh, seems like you've been spoiled by buggy winblows, my friend... Too bad. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/02/leap_second_crashes_airlines/Every OS, and all code, will break. Nothing is perfect.
"seL4: formal verification of an operating-system kernel" by Gerwin Klein
Wait.
Operating system kernel.. I'm going to be really lazy and link back to http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/02/leap_second_crashes_airlines/
Could you be be a little more specific in your point, and why you're linking someone else's pdf, except for claiming "NDA". |
|
Shinobi-san
TOP GUN AIR Gypsy Band
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 23:30:00 -
[341] - Quote
Tyke Orlieveit wrote:What, instantly? Whilst providing new content. Now you're too referring to "the door" they showed us, right? ;-) No I don't think i needed _that_ content. Did you?
Quote:http://www.ccpgames.com/en/jobs might appreciate you You're kidding, right? I doubt they'll be able to pay my rates, besides last years I'm consulting one of major internet players, so no need to change anything yet :-)
Quote:Every OS, and all code, will break. Nothing is perfect. You're kinda wrong. Some mathematical statements are just these - "perfect" statements.[/quote]
Quote:Wait. Operating system kernel.. I'm going to be really lazy Yes, ignorance is like this - disguises itself as laziness at times. And yes, even kernels, my friend, and even hypervisors and stuff. |
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 23:33:00 -
[342] - Quote
Shinobi-san wrote:First, we were talking mainly in context of game mechanics, no? Second, the only thing among those you mentioned, which can not be easily fixed now-a-days (from the cost PoV), is the hardware. All other aspects are doable. Oh, seems like you've been spoiled by buggy winblows, my friend... Too bad Sorry, but this is impossible because I signed an NDA. Instead I'll refer you to this paper and maybe also this longer and wider one.
CCP has dealt with this issue with professionalism and they have used all the right tools for dealing with the offenders and also for addressing the players concerns shown on the forums or elsewhere.
I can state this with certainty and confidence, because I am in-fact a respected expert in the field of online gaming, online marketing, and PR. I am highly educated, I have years of experience, and I have worked for some of the best companies in the business. Believe me, I know what I say! (I am currently working on the Drive Through in Burger King, but thatGÇÖs beside the point)
Unfortunately, I can not share any of my experience or my extensive knowledge on this matter with you, because I have signed an NDA. Instead, I will refer you to this paper
Let the gun do the talking! |
Shinobi-san
TOP GUN AIR Gypsy Band
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 23:39:00 -
[343] - Quote
Now I clearly see you're kidding :-) Linux servers LINUX SERVERS
L I N U X
just-for-fun UNIX-wannabe project driven by Brownian motion, w/no universal specs or directions, one chief dictator who even can not review all the code he approves... Good joke.
|
Stauffenberg Jettingen
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 00:48:00 -
[344] - Quote
Ok, so EVE creates a game and wants to punish people for following the rules of the game. Sounds marxist. As the old saying goes...DON'T BLAME THE PLAYER, BLAME THE GAME!!!
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1687
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 01:21:00 -
[345] - Quote
Stauffenberg Jettingen wrote:Ok, so EVE creates a game and wants to punish people for following the rules of the game. Sounds marxist. As the old saying goes...DON'T BLAME THE PLAYER, BLAME THE GAME!!!
man are you one of those people that applies the "marxist" label to anything you don't like
laffo EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Stauffenberg Jettingen
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 01:32:00 -
[346] - Quote
oh really? what other 'things' have i referred to as being marxist?
|
Ghost Frog
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 02:01:00 -
[347] - 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? why are you making it look as if this is my quote? |
Udonor
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
22
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 02:45:00 -
[348] - Quote
The truth is we don't trust automated bans.
And we know CCP doesn't have the manpower to continuously monitor this issue fairly.
Plus BANS are unnecessary and more complex software than a generic "fix" to the complexes.
Please just kick out loiters (room and complex timers) after reasonable time (entry gate starts timer). Maybe supplement gate passcards with daily (DT) ticketing/timestamp system to limit how frequently in a day a given toon can farm a site.
Remember players can tolerate faults in an AUTO-KICK or AUTO-LIMIT system. They jsut report complex is bugged and find something else to do.
But possible mistakes in automated BAN software is NOT player friendly. |
daddi0
Brooklyn Tax Dodgers
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 02:53:00 -
[349] - Quote
As a professional software developer I find this entire discussion somewhat frightening from both the consumer and the vendor points of view. My concerns are as follows:
- This is NOT activity that is banned by the EULA. It does NOT provide ANYTHING not otherwise obtainable, and NOT any any increase in speed.
- IT is unenforceable. Without changes that would effectively fix the proble, YOU CANNOT tell whether I am present or not.
- It seems to assume guilt, not innocence, arbitrated by means of the anti-bot mechanisms.
- In the middle of my one-year subscription, the vendor is changing the use and purpose of the item they have sold me.
- A specific case, but that encompasses MANY similar situations has just been deemed "illegal" within the realm of the game. How soon will the others follow. At what speed/value do they become exploits rather than fringe game circumstances?
Here is a concrete example of why this choice is the wrong one.
Its Friday morning, and I choose to telecompute from home. I start EVE right after DT on one screen and perform the now proscribed behavior. On another screen/computer/etc I go about my work, while keeping an eye on my "AFK" ISK farming. As long as nothing goes wrong, I do NOTHING, since nothing is needed. I have lunch, go to the bathroom, answer the phone, etc, NONE of which is prohibited, otherwise the game would be immeditately unplayable. Since its Friday, and I don't need to work tomorrow I can stay up all night, until the next DT, and watch Netflix, or DVD's, or do some outside contract work. At all times I am both present in EVE, yet AFK according to the bot logic. I gaining nothing not otherwise attainable, nor at an accelerated rate, and am not using a bot. I am however, completely uninvolved MECHANICALLY and have just run for 23 hours straight. I don't know about anyone else, but 23 hours certainly WOULD NOT be the longest I've ever been awake or involved in a single activity. Yet this is exactly the behavior that seems to be in question.
The questions remain: 1 How can you tell whether I'm AFK or not. If you can, you've probaly fixed the problem. By the way, even the little kids game, RUNESCAPE, was designed to detect AFK behavior. 2. Having established a certain behavior as illegal (its too bot-like), when will it be extended to similar situations. WHAT exactly is the threshold? How fast, how profitable, etc ???
This seems like a bad idea on all counts. Just change/fix the specific cases to make the practice less attractive. Announce that SOME change is on the way, and then make the changes and let the practitioners suffer the consequences. |
Hrett
Justified Chaos
145
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 02:58:00 -
[350] - Quote
I haven't read all 18 pages, but does this pronouncement cover afk, gunless t1 frigs running FW complexes?
If it doesnt, it should. I'm probably typing on an iPad, which means the auto-correct is silly and fixing typos is a pain. I ain't fixing them. |
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
173
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 03:09:00 -
[351] - Quote
Wolodymyr wrote:This hasty patch has the potential to bring an amazing argument up.
If this algorithm based purely on being AFK for long stretches of time then it will also flag AFK cloakers.
It will start with someone complaining in a petition or on the forums, "Hey my cyno alt was cloaked up in Fountain for the last 3 weeks straight and now my account got flagged for cheating!"
Then someone will point out, "Well if leaving the game on continually to get something done is an exploit what s the difference between AFK ratting, and AFK pvp."
And then the most ridiculous flame war on the Eve forums will begin!
except afk cloakers aren't generating 10-20mil isk/hour off of bounties. |
Psyise
House of Bone
4
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 03:09:00 -
[352] - Quote
Shinobi-san wrote:Oh, seems like you've been spoiled by buggy winblows, my friend... Too bad.
Quote:"seL4: formal verification of an operating-system kernel" by Gerwin Klein Wait. Operating system kernel.. I'm going to be really lazy and link back to http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/02/leap_second_crashes_airlines/Could you be be a little more specific in your point, and why you're linking someone else's pdf, except for claiming "NDA". Also, I'm not re-editing time after time after time when you keep changing your original post.
Not to rain on your parade but the bug was not in the linux kernel, the bug was in java which is a cross platform development libray and run time environment. It just happens a lot of software runs on java.
Linux is the most solid os you can get. =p |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
173
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 03:15:00 -
[353] - Quote
Allataria wrote:And yet the multiboxing of miners continues to be allowed by CCP. They are doing the exact same thing with going afk from multiple instances of the game. How is this considered fair play? Why arent multibox miners being banned? Its a third program running behind the client playing the game for them!
miners have to interact with the client every few mins or else their income drops, roids pop pretty frequently, and cargo bays get full. when afk in the disputed cosmos plex you don't have to do ANYTHING besides a few mins of set up. |
Psyise
House of Bone
4
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 03:24:00 -
[354] - Quote
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:Allataria wrote:And yet the multiboxing of miners continues to be allowed by CCP. They are doing the exact same thing with going afk from multiple instances of the game. How is this considered fair play? Why arent multibox miners being banned? Its a third program running behind the client playing the game for them! miners have to interact with the client every few mins or else their income drops, roids pop pretty frequently, and cargo bays get full. when afk in the disputed cosmos plex you don't have to do ANYTHING besides a few mins of set up.
Exactly, I still have to push a button every 5 minutes. =p
Suddenly I feel like I'm trapped on an island. lol.
Leave the miners alooooooooone. |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
173
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 03:37:00 -
[355] - Quote
I would say setting a drone boat up in a manner that it doesn't require any interaction for 23hours (tbh eternally if it weren't for downtime, and/or connection issues) is in direct conflict with the EULA 6-A-3 "patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of ... currency, ... at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play." if you run a 23 hour marathon every now and then I'd think you would be okay, and if not that should be something that should be easy to fight. |
Claire Voyant
136
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 04:18:00 -
[356] - Quote
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:I would say setting a drone boat up in a manner that it doesn't require any interaction for 23hours (tbh eternally if it weren't for downtime, and/or connection issues) is in direct conflict with the EULA 6-A-3 "patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of ... currency, ... at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play." if you run a 23 hour marathon every now and then I'd think you would be okay, and if not that should be something that should be easy to fight.
I'm not sure it's an accelerated rate. Seems that it would be a lower amount of isk when compared with ordinary play, at least per hour because you are not looting. It's just higher isk per effort but a lot of us would be in trouble if they started banning for that. |
daddi0
Brooklyn Tax Dodgers
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 04:19:00 -
[357] - Quote
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:I would say setting a drone boat up in a manner that it doesn't require any interaction for 23hours (tbh eternally if it weren't for downtime, and/or connection issues) is in direct conflict with the EULA 6-A-3 "patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of ... currency, ... at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play." if you run a 23 hour marathon every now and then I'd think you would be okay, and if not that should be something that should be easy to fight.
Three problems
- What's an accelerated rate versus:
- GO in with guns blazing
- Kill everything
- Wait until NPC's respawn (quick: make lunch, go pee, etc)
- repeat
They both result in the same ISK/time
- Who/What decides who is doing a keyboard marathon and who is AFK. How long is a "marathon"? The problem with setting these limits is that its actually EASIER for the bots to observe and avoid them than human players.
- What is the next similar long known behavior to be targeted as being an exploit.
Without requiring some sort of interaction, if the circumstances do not require any action, HOW can you tell who is AFK and who is present but just not interacting. Once you generate an event that requires interaction, you've solved the problem. Inaction = AFK, response = present and aware. Example, Genii offers you a gift, if you don't accept or reject, Genii teleports you someplace else, possibly hostile.
If you think outside "normal" mechanics, there are many possibilites. For instance, rather than "fixing" complex, fragile code, perhaps a security modifier could be applied to the complex. Minus 1 after each respawn, Plus one every x hours or so; back to normal if the complex is empty. Let the gankers punish the offenders once security gets low enough; if the wrecks are valuable enough, even the ninja looters might get interested. Substitute COSMOSaggedon for HULKaggedon. CCP doesn't actually have to fix/solve the problem completely, just make it less profitable to continue the practice. |
Missilequeen
New Republic The Initiative.
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 04:23:00 -
[358] - Quote
[quote=Pisov viet] 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.
and whats with the ppl staying in the last room of that complex waiting for the structure that drops factionloot.....you can tank the frigs with a midskilled t1 frig....orbiting with AB and going afk till the structure respawns....i have seen this many times...thats not how it should be... |
4LeafClover
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 04:25:00 -
[359] - Quote
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:Wolodymyr wrote:This hasty patch has the potential to bring an amazing argument up.
If this algorithm based purely on being AFK for long stretches of time then it will also flag AFK cloakers.
It will start with someone complaining in a petition or on the forums, "Hey my cyno alt was cloaked up in Fountain for the last 3 weeks straight and now my account got flagged for cheating!"
Then someone will point out, "Well if leaving the game on continually to get something done is an exploit what s the difference between AFK ratting, and AFK pvp."
And then the most ridiculous flame war on the Eve forums will begin! except afk cloakers aren't generating 10-20mil isk/hour off of bounties.
I have one question I would like CCP to answer:
Is isk generation CCP's concern? or afk playing of their game?
Because there are plenty of ways for AFK isk generation in EVE. Datacore research, listing things on the market, or other market manipulations, loyalty points, courier missions, and mining to name a few. I think that warping to and deploying drones take as much if not more effort than most of those other isk methods listed. So where are you drawing the line here? Where is the threshold for AFK isk generation?
If AFK playing of the game is the issue, then why are you stopping with just afk ratting? The guy that parks a hostile cloak alt in a system and disrupts other players experience is also having an effect on the game. Why is that pilot OK and the one sitting uncloaked in an anmaly afk is not ok? There really is no distinction.
What this looks like is CCP is now trying to control how their players play the game. I would ask that you refrain from taking that approach. That is the unique item that draws many people to play this game. It is unique. That is the "sandbox" as CCP has coined. You work on making the game. Let the players work on creating their experiences within that sandbox. If you find an anomaly that is not producing your desired results then change the anomaly, don't try to change the players. When you try to change the players you will ruin the aspect of this game that makes it great. I look forward to a response. |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
294
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 04:50:00 -
[360] - Quote
Wolodymyr wrote:This hasty patch has the potential to bring an amazing argument up.
What patch? There is no patch. Just an announcement about how CCP intends to deal with ONE very specific form of game play that they consider close enough to botting to be a detriment to the game.
Wolodymyr wrote:If this algorithm based purely on being AFK for long stretches of time then it will also flag AFK cloakers.
It isn't and it will not. AFK cloakers are not a problem as they generate no ISK and provide no tangible benefit to those who AFK cloak. There's a significant difference between being AFK cloaked in a system and AFK in a PLEX generating bounties 23/7. Protip: One of them resembles a bot.
Wolodymyr wrote:It will start with someone complaining in a petition or on the forums, "Hey my cyno alt was cloaked up in Fountain for the last 3 weeks straight and now my account got flagged for cheating!"
Then someone will point out, "Well if leaving the game on continually to get something done is an exploit what s the difference between AFK ratting, and AFK pvp."
It's the General Discussion of the EVE Forums, people will find a reason to whine and complain no matter what CCP does. That's no reason to do everything to stop bots and/or people who engage in game play which closely resembles botting. (According to CCPs definition of botting)
|
|
Sable Lowell
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
10
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 04:54:00 -
[361] - Quote
Octoven wrote:As I stated on the general forums topic on this subject, it seems pretty inappropriate and immature on sreegs part to make a news article about this when it is hardly an automated action. I can sit there and let the sentries do the same damn thing and I will be flagged because I am at my computer or not??
Bot mining is one thing and using an automated program is as well, but your drones only kill so much and then you have to warp to the next room, you dont continue to constantly generate money. It is a fixed amount and once it has been completed you just sit there waiting for someone to gank you or you come back.
Obviously you have completely failed at reading anything in this thread. |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
294
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 04:58:00 -
[362] - Quote
Sable Lowell wrote:Octoven wrote:As I stated on the general forums topic on this subject, it seems pretty inappropriate and immature on sreegs part to make a news article about this when it is hardly an automated action. I can sit there and let the sentries do the same damn thing and I will be flagged because I am at my computer or not??
Bot mining is one thing and using an automated program is as well, but your drones only kill so much and then you have to warp to the next room, you dont continue to constantly generate money. It is a fixed amount and once it has been completed you just sit there waiting for someone to gank you or you come back. Obviously you have completely failed at reading anything in this thread.
Dude, don't blame him. Reading is hard. Sperg posting tears is not. |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
175
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 04:58:00 -
[363] - Quote
4LeafClover wrote:Chainsaw Plankton wrote:Wolodymyr wrote:This hasty patch has the potential to bring an amazing argument up.
If this algorithm based purely on being AFK for long stretches of time then it will also flag AFK cloakers.
It will start with someone complaining in a petition or on the forums, "Hey my cyno alt was cloaked up in Fountain for the last 3 weeks straight and now my account got flagged for cheating!"
Then someone will point out, "Well if leaving the game on continually to get something done is an exploit what s the difference between AFK ratting, and AFK pvp."
And then the most ridiculous flame war on the Eve forums will begin! except afk cloakers aren't generating 10-20mil isk/hour off of bounties. I have one question I would like CCP to answer: Is isk generation CCP's concern? or afk playing of their game? Because there are plenty of ways for AFK isk generation in EVE. Datacore research, listing things on the market, or other market manipulations, loyalty points, courier missions, and mining to name a few. I think that warping to and deploying drones take as much if not more effort than most of those other isk methods listed. So where are you drawing the line here? Where is the threshold for AFK isk generation? If AFK playing of the game is the issue, then why are you stopping with just afk ratting? The guy that parks a hostile cloak alt in a system and disrupts other players experience is also having an effect on the game. Why is that pilot OK and the one sitting uncloaked in an anmaly afk is not ok? There really is no distinction. What this looks like is CCP is now trying to control how their players play the game. I would ask that you refrain from taking that approach. That is the unique item that draws many people to play this game. It is unique. That is the "sandbox" as CCP has coined. You work on making the game. Let the players work on creating their experiences within that sandbox. If you find an anomaly that is not producing your desired results then change the anomaly, don't try to change the players. When you try to change the players you will ruin the aspect of this game that makes it great. I look forward to a response.
pretty sure skreegs already said that stuff was designed to be passive and is okay
|
Rayford Carpathia
Gladiators of Rage Intrepid Crossing
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 04:59:00 -
[364] - Quote
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:Wolodymyr wrote:This hasty patch has the potential to bring an amazing argument up.
If this algorithm based purely on being AFK for long stretches of time then it will also flag AFK cloakers.
It will start with someone complaining in a petition or on the forums, "Hey my cyno alt was cloaked up in Fountain for the last 3 weeks straight and now my account got flagged for cheating!"
Then someone will point out, "Well if leaving the game on continually to get something done is an exploit what s the difference between AFK ratting, and AFK pvp."
And then the most ridiculous flame war on the Eve forums will begin! except afk cloakers aren't generating 10-20mil isk/hour off of bounties. You're right. They're griefing. |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
175
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 04:59:00 -
[365] - Quote
daddi0 wrote:Chainsaw Plankton wrote:I would say setting a drone boat up in a manner that it doesn't require any interaction for 23hours (tbh eternally if it weren't for downtime, and/or connection issues) is in direct conflict with the EULA 6-A-3 "patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of ... currency, ... at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play." if you run a 23 hour marathon every now and then I'd think you would be okay, and if not that should be something that should be easy to fight. Three problems
- What's an accelerated rate versus:
- GO in with guns blazing
- Kill everything
- Wait until NPC's respawn (quick: make lunch, go pee, etc)
- repeat
They both result in the same ISK/time
- Who/What decides who is doing a keyboard marathon and who is AFK. How long is a "marathon"? The problem with setting these limits is that its actually EASIER for the bots to observe and avoid them than human players.
- What is the next similar long known behavior to be targeted as being an exploit.
Without requiring some sort of interaction, if the circumstances do not require any action, HOW can you tell who is AFK and who is present but just not interacting. Once you generate an event that requires interaction, you've solved the problem. Inaction = AFK, response = present and aware. Example, Genii offers you a gift, if you don't accept or reject, Genii teleports you someplace else, possibly hostile. If you think outside "normal" mechanics, there are many possibilites. For instance, rather than "fixing" complex, fragile code, perhaps a security modifier could be applied to the complex. Minus 1 after each respawn, Plus one every x hours or so; back to normal if the complex is empty. Let the gankers punish the offenders once security gets low enough; if the wrecks are valuable enough, even the ninja looters might get interested. Substitute COSMOSaggedon for HULKaggedon. CCP doesn't actually have to fix/solve the problem completely, just make it less profitable to continue the practice.
most people can't constantly blitz missions/whatever 23/7 |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
294
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 05:01:00 -
[366] - Quote
Rayford Carpathia wrote:Chainsaw Plankton wrote:except afk cloakers aren't generating 10-20mil isk/hour off of bounties. You're right. They're griefing.
No they're not, they're AFK. How can an AFK cloaker be of any danger to anybody? If he's AFK he can't do anything to you. Your paranoia is your own.
|
Rayford Carpathia
Gladiators of Rage Intrepid Crossing
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 05:18:00 -
[367] - Quote
Suqq Madiq wrote:Rayford Carpathia wrote:Chainsaw Plankton wrote:except afk cloakers aren't generating 10-20mil isk/hour off of bounties. You're right. They're griefing. No they're not, they're AFK. How can an AFK cloaker be of any danger to anybody? If he's AFK he can't do anything to you. Your paranoia is your own. I'll let Wikipedia inform you of the correct definition since you obviously don't know what "griefing" means.
For a Wikipedia essay on the topic, see Wikipedia:Griefing. A griefer is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and harasses other players within the game, using aspects of the game in unintended ways.[1] A griefer derives pleasure primarily or exclusively from the act of annoying other users, and as such is a particular nuisance in online gaming communities, since griefers often cannot be deterred by penalties related to in-game goals.[2] Contents -á[hide]-á 1 History 2 Methods 3 Industry response 4 See also 5 References 6 External links [edit]History
|
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
294
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 05:25:00 -
[368] - Quote
Why not use the CCP definition instead of blindly parroting some irrelevant Wikipedia definition? Here, I'll do the leg work for you.
Quote:In general, "griefing" is a term that means action against another player that makes the target feel like being targeted on purpose or for the sake of harassment only.
In EVE, "griefing" refers to various activities, some of which can be argued not to be "griefing" in the classic sense, but parts of valid gameplay.
There are certain forms of griefing that can get you banned from the game. These include (but probably are not limited to) can baiting in rookie systems and certain forms of verbal harassment.
Source.
Like I said, AFK cloaking isn't a problem, nor is it griefing. I suggest if you want to whine about something that is not a problem, you either keep it to yourself or find one of the dozens of terrible AFK cloaking threads that are buried in these forums. For now, try to keep this thread on-topic. Thanks. |
daddi0
Brooklyn Tax Dodgers
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 05:26:00 -
[369] - Quote
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:most people can't constantly blitz missions/whatever 23/7
You missed my point. What If instead of planting drones and going AFK to get my bounties, I just park there and every respawn blast 'em into pieces with my weapons manually. The ISK/period is the same: I get ALL the bounties every spawn period. SO, this AFK method would NOT seem to violate the EULA clause about an accelerated methodology. And IF I farm it 12/7 or 23/3 is that okay, because I could certainly be at the console for that amount of time, and YOU JUST CAN'T tell if I am or not. And there is the problem in a nutshell: This doesn't really violate the EULA, and it's just about impossible to determine if someone is truely AFK for an "unreasonable" (the definition of which has its own serious issues) period of time or just not punching the keys. |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
294
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 05:33:00 -
[370] - Quote
daddi0 wrote:You missed my point. What If instead of planting drones and going AFK to get my bounties, I just park there and every respawn blast 'em into pieces with my weapons manually. The ISK/period is the same: I get ALL the bounties every spawn period. SO, this AFK method would NOT seem to violate the EULA clause about an accelerated methodology. And IF I farm it 12/7 or 23/3 is that okay, because I could certainly be at the console for that amount of time, and YOU JUST CAN'T tell if I am or not. And there is the problem in a nutshell: This doesn't really violate the EULA, and it's just about impossible to determine if someone is truely AFK for an "unreasonable" (the definition of which has its own serious issues) period of time or just not punching the keys.
If you're blowing up NPC ships with your "weapons manually" you aren't AFK and thus are not a problem. If you are blowing up ships with your drones while AFK for 23/7, which is the entire point of Sreegs announcement and this thread, then you are the problem. It's really, really, really NOT that hard to understand.
And you're wrong about this behavior violating the EULA. Based on the CCP definition of botting:
CCP Sreegs wrote:The activity itself falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within. And botting, as you should well know, is a direct violation of the EULA. Please consider educating yourself or, at the very least, re-reading the CCP posts in this thread.
|
|
Rayford Carpathia
Gladiators of Rage Intrepid Crossing
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 05:47:00 -
[371] - Quote
Suqq Madiq wrote:Why not use the CCP definition instead of blindly parroting some irrelevant Wikipedia definition? Here, I'll do the leg work for you. Quote:In general, "griefing" is a term that means action against another player that makes the target feel like being targeted on purpose or for the sake of harassment only.
In EVE, "griefing" refers to various activities, some of which can be argued not to be "griefing" in the classic sense, but parts of valid gameplay.
There are certain forms of griefing that can get you banned from the game. These include (but probably are not limited to) can baiting in rookie systems and certain forms of verbal harassment. Source.Like I said, AFK cloaking isn't a problem, nor is it griefing. I suggest if you want to whine about something that is not a problem, you either keep it to yourself or find one of the dozens of terrible AFK cloaking threads that are buried in these forums. For now, try to keep this thread on-topic. Thanks. I'm not whining. Merely stating a point. Your definition supports my point as well. Thank you. |
Real Poison
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
109
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 05:47:00 -
[372] - Quote
Now waiting for the ban on AFK traders that use bots to adjust prices by 0.1 isk a second after someone put up a better order. |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
294
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 05:51:00 -
[373] - Quote
Rayford Carpathia wrote:I'm not whining. Merely stating a point. Your definition supports my point as well. Thank you.
Sure it does, if you're a complete idiot. Thank you for proving my point. IF AFK cloaking was considered griefing, then the dozens of threads and likely hundreds of petitions whining about it would have caused CCP to make a change in some way. The problem is, anytime CCP has weighed in on the "issue" of AFK cloaking they've specifically stated that it's not a problem and there is no plan to change it. |
daddi0
Brooklyn Tax Dodgers
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 06:02:00 -
[374] - Quote
Suqq Madiq wrote:daddi0 wrote:You missed my point. What If instead of planting drones and going AFK to get my bounties, I just park there and every respawn blast 'em into pieces with my weapons manually. The ISK/period is the same: I get ALL the bounties every spawn period. SO, this AFK method would NOT seem to violate the EULA clause about an accelerated methodology. And IF I farm it 12/7 or 23/3 is that okay, because I could certainly be at the console for that amount of time, and YOU JUST CAN'T tell if I am or not. And there is the problem in a nutshell: This doesn't really violate the EULA, and it's just about impossible to determine if someone is truely AFK for an "unreasonable" (the definition of which has its own serious issues) period of time or just not punching the keys. If you're blowing up NPC ships with your "weapons manually" you aren't AFK and thus are not a problem. If you are blowing up ships with your drones while AFK for 23/7, which is the entire point of Sreegs announcement and this thread, then you are the problem. It's really, really, really NOT that hard to understand. And you're wrong about this behavior violating the EULA. Based on the CCP definition of botting: CCP Sreegs wrote:The activity itself falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within. And botting, as you should well know, is a direct violation of the EULA. Please consider educating yourself or, at the very least, re-reading the CCP posts in this thread.
I've read all 19 pages of this post as well as almost all of the EULA, and I would suggest that you read more carefully. What I said was that this BOT-like behavior DOES NOT produce any faster than non-bot behavior, not that guns blazing was the problem. As to your final point, Sreegs made the connection between this behavior and botting, NOT the EULA (Sec 6.A.3). As a seller of software and services I take license agreements VERY SERIOUSLY, and the EULA for the game I am paying for (EVE) DOES NOT prohibit bot-like human behavior. NOR does it define the distinction between the two. This is tantamount to changing a contract after everyone has signed it. That's particually onerous in light of the no-refund clause: Section 5.C.1.
Before belittling others, make certain you understand what they're saying and have all your facts straight. Sreegs may speak for CCP, but that of itself does NOT change the EULA, and as it is written now the EULA does not outlaw this behavior: 1. It is not any other software, device or replay method, AND 2. it is NOT a pattern that produces more than could otherwise be acquired (the point of my guns blazing example)
If it is not the desired program behavior, FIX the PROGRAM. If is not desired bahavior to use the game the way it works, CHANGE the EULA outright, describe the conditions to which it applies specifically, and then start giving the necessary refunds as per section 5.C.3
|
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
297
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 06:18:00 -
[375] - Quote
daddi0 wrote:I've read all 19 pages of this post as well as almost all of the EULA, and I would suggest that you read more carefully. What I said was that this BOT-like behavior DOES NOT produce any faster than non-bot behavior, not that guns blazing was the problem.
That's not an issue. It's irrelevant if this very bot-like behavior produces more or less ISK than actively playing the game. You're manufacturing a pretense for a debate that has absolutely no context here.
daddi0 wrote:As to your final point, Sreegs made the connection between this behavior and botting, NOT the EULA (Sec 6.A.3). As a seller of software and services I take license agreements VERY SERIOUSLY, and the EULA for the game I am paying for (EVE) DOES NOT prohibit bot-like human behavior. NOR does it define the distinction between the two. This is tantamount to changing a contract after everyone has signed it. That's particually onerous in light of the no-refund clause: Section 5.C.1.
The Rules of Conduct, which specifically mention and detail what is and is not considered botting or bot-like behavior and the repercussions of such is an extension of the EULA as defined by the document itself. They also have the right, as expressly stated within the EULA that they reserve the right at any time to cancel, modify or alter the "contract" when they see fit based when, and I quote directly from the EULA:
Quote:CCP becomes aware of game play, chat or player activity under your Account that is, in CCP's discretion, inappropriate, offensive, or in violation of the Rules of Conduct.
daddi0 wrote:Sreegs may speak for CCP, but that of itself does NOT change the EULA, and as it is written now the EULA does not outlaw this behavior: 1. It is not any other software, device or replay method, AND 2. it is NOT a pattern that produces more than could otherwise be acquired (the point of my guns blazing example)
Except that it does break the EULA as quoted above when a player is found in violation of the Rules Of Conduct which specifically outlines what is considered botting and bot like behavior or falls within a similar philosophical context. And, yet again, it's irrelevant whether you could have made more ISK by shooting the NPCs with your guns. That's not happening here, nor is it the issue. Enough with the strawmen, k?
daddi0 wrote:If it is not the desired program behavior, FIX the PROGRAM. If is not desired bahavior to use the game the way it works, CHANGE the EULA outright, describe the conditions to which it applies specifically, and then start giving the necessary refunds as per section 5.C.3
You don't deserve a refund, nor will you ever get one. If you're one of the very few people affected by this announcement you deserve to be banned if you continue this obvious violation of the Rules of Conduct as defined by the EULA. |
Antraman
Mirai Yume The Dark Nation
4
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 06:21:00 -
[376] - Quote
Hmmm, better ban the autopilot feature too, and market orders, blueprint research, manufacturing, PI bases....oh, and skill training too.
All those can be done AFK too.
Yes, stupid idea. |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
297
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 06:23:00 -
[377] - Quote
Antraman wrote:Hmmm, better ban the autopilot feature too, and market orders, blueprint research, manufacturing, PI bases....oh, and skill training too.
All those can be done AFK too.
Yes, stupid idea.
Reading is SO hard, amirite? |
Rayford Carpathia
Gladiators of Rage Intrepid Crossing
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 06:33:00 -
[378] - Quote
Suqq, quit insulting people and name calling just because we don't agree with you. You see only what you want to see. You read only what you want to read. Post with your main or just go away. You've already rendered your arguments invalid by your contradictions and insults. |
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
297
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 06:39:00 -
[379] - Quote
Rayford Carpathia wrote:Suqq, quit insulting people and name calling just because we don't agree with you. You see only what you want to see. You read only what you want to read. Post with your main or just go away. You've already rendered your arguments invalid by your contradictions and insults.
What contradictions? Quit lying and trying to derail this thread with your AFK cloaker tears.
Edit: I've edited out the part where I point out that you're an idiot because, whether it's true or not, it's not worth hurting your feelings over. Better now? |
Rayford Carpathia
Gladiators of Rage Intrepid Crossing
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 06:41:00 -
[380] - Quote
The only one that I see crying and whining around here is you. |
|
Suqq Madiq
Amarr Empire
297
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 06:46:00 -
[381] - Quote
Rayford Carpathia wrote:The only one that I see crying and whining around here is you.
Then you're blind or stupid. Which is it? |
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
25
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 07:11:00 -
[382] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: I chose to play better instead of playing harder and a functional MMO should let me do that. Period.
Just fyi, if you're afking, your not playing, you're letting your client play for you while you do something else.
|
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION
149
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 07:41:00 -
[383] - Quote
EvE N00b: "How do you make so much money?" EvE Addict: "I. Never. Stop. Playing" EvE N00b: "Like... Never?" EvE Addict: "Never" EvE N00b: "How?" EvE Addict: "You got a job?" EvE N00b: "errr. Yeah. I pay for....." EvE Addict: "Wrong answer. Lose the job. EvE is your job now. Sex. You getting any?" EvE N00b: "errm, yeah. sometimes" EvE Addict: "Wrong answer. Sex equals negative ISK. No sex equals positive ISK" EvE N00b: "So you never hav...." EvE Addict: "EvE IS MY *****! Do you sleep?" EvE N00b: "Yeah, everyday" EvE Addict: "Wrong answer. Snort *******, drink energy drinks, eat chocolate bars. You got your **** bucket?" EvE N00b: "errr. No. What's a **** bucket?" EvE Addict: "You go to the bathroom, you ain't playing EvE and they can ban you for it" EvE N00b: "So you have a big pile of **** under you right now?" Eve Addict: "Man the **** up n00b! This is internet spaceships!" EvE N00b: "Why not just go AFK for a few minutes to take a dump or watch a movie or troll someone on the foru....." EvE Admin: "BAN!"
Yes. I may have plagiarised a little above. Okay, a lot. But I'm just having fun |
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 08:59:00 -
[384] - Quote
daddi0 wrote: I've read all 19 pages of this post as well as almost all of the EULA, and I would suggest that you read more carefully. What I said was that this BOT-like behavior DOES NOT produce any faster than non-bot behavior, not that guns blazing was the problem. As to your final point, Sreegs made the connection between this behavior and botting, NOT the EULA (Sec 6.A.3). As a seller of software and services I take license agreements VERY SERIOUSLY, and the EULA for the game I am paying for (EVE) DOES NOT prohibit bot-like human behavior. NOR does it define the distinction between the two. This is tantamount to changing a contract after everyone has signed it. That's particually onerous in light of the no-refund clause: Section 5.C.1.
Before belittling others, make certain you understand what they're saying and have all your facts straight. Sreegs may speak for CCP, but that of itself does NOT change the EULA, and as it is written now the EULA does not outlaw this behavior: 1. It is not any other software, device or replay method, AND 2. it is NOT a pattern that produces more than could otherwise be acquired (the point of my guns blazing example)
If it is not the desired program behavior, FIX the PROGRAM. If is not desired bahavior to use the game the way it works, CHANGE the EULA outright, describe the conditions to which it applies specifically, and then start giving the necessary refunds as per section 5.C.3
And 8 hours later, ignorance still reigns supreme! My valiant efforts from last night were obviously not enough.
I have to ask though GÇô after you did all this reading, you still donGÇÖt realize where the problem is? RemarkableGǪ Well, I have run out of GÇ£simpleGÇ¥ examples to present you with, so I am gonna try a different approach.
You are very much correct GÇô on case by case and hour by hour basis, a bot does not generate more funds than a human player would. A botting tengu in 0.0 runs cosmic anomalies. If a neutral/hostile player enters the system, the bot immediately warps to a safe PoS and stays there until the system is clear again. ThatGÇÖs usually what the average carebear does. Yet over a period of time, say 1 month, a bot would almost always generate more isk than the average player.
So with all that said, why do you think that the EULA prohibits the use of bots?
Slightly offtopic GÇô why are multiplayer games called GÇ£multiplayerGÇ¥? What is the allure of MMO games? Online multiplayer games often keep players longer than offline singleplayer games GÇô why do you think that is?
I hope all those questions are not going to overwhelm you. They are clear and simple, arenGÇÖt they? I am very much looking forward to your response.
Oh, I regarding the GÇ£change to the EULAGÇ¥ as you describe it GÇô I donGÇÖt think itGÇÖs possible to always cover all possible exploits in an evolving game world with a creative playerbase. From time to time you just have to make changes on the fly. The way I understand it, CCP is asking GÇô GÇ£Please donGÇÖt abuse that particular game mechanic, until we get a chance to fix itGÇ¥. The players who got hit for doing that, got their bans lifted, so this can be considered an advanced warning GÇô not a post-factor casualty report. Let the gun do the talking! |
Kruku Isu
Rukost
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 09:28:00 -
[385] - Quote
I looked thru the thread. Someone else might have posted this thought, there is alot of bullshiting going on. But if this guy is legit he clearly exploited the game, and the official warning about afk farming complexes is appropriate
If you do not get directly to the relevant post, go to page 2 and look for Postradamus. |
Doctor Gordon Freeman
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 09:34:00 -
[386] - Quote
In the last 24 hours, ccp skreegs and his boss have have had a profound effect on ccp and it's relationship with the player base. Perhaps they should be rewarded for that. Let them go, ccp. |
Zapson
The Companionship Test Alliance Please Ignore
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 09:42:00 -
[387] - Quote
Since you pointed out that sitting AFK in a plex is bad, I bet people now will say, THANK YOU SO MUCH CCP, now I will write some AutoHotKey script which will make some fancy stuff, warp in, warp out, viol+á you're not anymore afk spottable?
It's so uber pathetic. You don't even have to do really exploit any mechanics, you just pop your ship with drones into space. This is a hard game mechanic failure, and should be in my eyes removed, because banning people for HARD FAULTS you programmed into this game is so so so so so easy and not very mature. |
Sylver Nyte
Illuminatii Industries Mildly Sober
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 10:15:00 -
[388] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:
Mistakes happen in development. Developers have to correct them. Sometimes, the mistakes are abused and players should be policed as to not abuse those mistakes as they are not intended to be there in the first place.
CCP Has basiclly NEVER Policed EvE. That would be WHY its called "Sandbox". I mean if they wanna start POLICEING, they could start with HiSec Gate Ganks, NulSec AFK Cloakers, or even just give freighters/Jumpfreighters the ability to defend themself. Lets not go to the fall back, its your responsability to supply an escort BS, because seriously, when the NPC Gaurds wont do thier task then perhaps some of the original code is broken. I mean HIGH Security does infact mean its ment to be policed. Granted these actions can be considered "exploiting" a un-planned Game mechanic interaction, but IMO, there are things that need fixing FAR FAR worse than a simple ISK Exploit. |
Roime
Shiva Furnace Dead On Arrival Alliance
1031
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 10:36:00 -
[389] - Quote
Replace NPC bounties with lootable tags/x thing, that are sold to NPC buy orders.
Gallente - the choice of the interstellar gentleman |
dexington
118
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 10:43:00 -
[390] - Quote
Zapson wrote:Since you pointed out that sitting AFK in a plex is bad, I bet people now will say, THANK YOU SO MUCH CCP, now I will write some AutoHotKey script which will make some fancy stuff, warp in, warp out, viol+á you're not anymore afk spottable?
"Now that i warp around no one will notice i am online 24/7 grinding kills in the same plex 99% of the time."
The perfect crime! GÇ£The best way to keep something bad from happening is to see it ahead of time, and you can't see it if you refuse to face the possibility.GÇ¥-á |
|
Straahl
House of Dying Laggers.
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 10:52:00 -
[391] - Quote
Vera Algaert wrote:You discover an issue with game design that allows for unintended consequences. Now you can
(A) Fix game design so the unintended consequences can no longer happen. (B) Leave the "trick" in the game but ban everyone who uses it.
Takes a special kind of developer to choose (B).
This issue has been well known for months and yet there is no proper fix (rework static plexes), instead we get a honeytrap because Sreegs just enjoys blowing up AT ships and banning unsuspecting players.
The very least you could do is give us an official database of behaviors that are consciously made possible by CCP but will get you banned - this news article and discussion thread will be buried in a few weeks (and compete for attention with many prior GD threads which generally declared this behavior legal) and smart players will keep rediscovering this "exploit" over and over.
edit: on a related note: the drama around the recent give-aways (many people missing the deadlines as they never read the news items) has clearly shown that login screen items and news are not a suitable way to reach out to the EVE playerbase. Using this medium to spread information that is vital to players is asinine.
QFT.
Although I agree with CCP that this is an exploit that needs to be addressed, it is being handled incorrectly. Have CCP already forgotten how their fanbase reacts to these types of dev posts? It's only been a year since the great WiS/Greed is Good SNAFU by CCP. I thought the dev team realized that writing vague and unclear posts about game mechanics turns into a massive shitstorm. People don't like being told how to play in the sandbox, especially when you give them the tools to do it through in-game mechanics.
The people asking about AFK gameplay in general aren't in the wrong by any means. This does pose a good question of the statute of limitations and how you (or CCP) define acceptable gameplay vs. unacceptable gameplay.
Honestly CCP, it would have just been better to fix this exploit and spare yourself the grief. Admit to yourselves a mistake was made with unintended gameplay consequences, correct the issue, and cut your losses. This is not how you win a vote of confidence with your customers.
Oh, and Vera is absolutely correct. Do not think for a moment that login screen links or news posts are sufficient to reach your playerbase, especially when it comes to bannable offenses. They are not. |
Real Poison
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
111
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 10:55:00 -
[392] - Quote
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? |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
177
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 11:16:00 -
[393] - Quote
daddi0 wrote:2. it is NOT a pattern that produces more than could otherwise be acquired (the point of my guns blazing example)
If it is not the desired program behavior, FIX the PROGRAM. If is not desired bahavior to use the game the way it works, CHANGE the EULA outright, describe the conditions to which it applies specifically, and then start giving the necessary refunds as per section 5.C.3
except guns blazing can't happen 23/7 (subtract a few mins for set up time) for a long period of time. also the places where such setups happen are rather limited. running constant mulit-day at the computer not pressing buttons marathon, isn't exactly what I would call normal game play. hell even if you were "guns blazing" for multiple days
12/7 does seem to be an reasonable (Hell I'd probably buy 18/7 from some people) amount of time to play. but I will say I think that doing a small number of keystrokes and then not interacting for multiple hours is wrong. I said earlier that they could do some software things to get rid of the play style. throw in a jamming rat and that would shut down the remote rep, and have some of the other rats favor drones a bit more and that would kill the drones. and have a few frigs that swarm the drones to get under the tracking that need to be killed to get the respawn. and tbh with an EULA change I don't see much more than a few dozen caring, and less caring enough to the point of going for a refund. |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
177
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 11:17:00 -
[394] - 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?
several posts above yours was a link that explained one location in great detail. another location is Otomainen |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
177
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 11:20:00 -
[395] - Quote
Roime wrote:Replace NPC bounties with lootable tags/x thing, that are sold to NPC buy orders.
that works, or since they are pretty much tied to cosmos missions, reduce their bounties by 99% or something and add it all to mission rewards. |
dexington
121
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 11:43:00 -
[396] - Quote
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:Roime wrote:Replace NPC bounties with lootable tags/x thing, that are sold to NPC buy orders. that works, or since they are pretty much tied to cosmos missions, reduce their bounties by 99% or something and add it all to mission rewards.
Why should i be forced to loot every wreck?.
Someone decided to exploit a bug, just ban him or give him a warning, I really don't care and i can't understand why everyone is butthurting. If you decide to engage in game play that is in the dark end of the grey area you have two options, play it safe and send a petition or don't and risk the ban. GÇ£The best way to keep something bad from happening is to see it ahead of time, and you can't see it if you refuse to face the possibility.GÇ¥-á |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1013
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 11:43:00 -
[397] - 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... |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
177
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 11:48:00 -
[398] - Quote
dexington wrote:Chainsaw Plankton wrote:Roime wrote:Replace NPC bounties with lootable tags/x thing, that are sold to NPC buy orders. that works, or since they are pretty much tied to cosmos missions, reduce their bounties by 99% or something and add it all to mission rewards. Why should i be forced to loot every wreck?. Someone decided to exploit a bug, just ban him or give him a warning, I really don't care and i can't understand why everyone is butthurting. If you decide to engage in game play that is in the dark end of the grey area you have two options, play it safe and send a petition or don't and risk the ban.
yea looting is a pain in the ass, but you can only do cosmos once right? and most of the cosmos static areas already have prenerfed bounties. |
Zapson
The Companionship Test Alliance Please Ignore
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 12:16:00 -
[399] - Quote
Well since I think that my post was removed, without notification, I will make another one, with different content. A EULA is something not very strong in the EU, plus if you exclude paying customers from your service based on infringements which should be prohibited via the EULA but are NOT is entering a zone where the action of exclusion could be ruled illegal by a court.
And the part "we claim to have the right to chance it at any given time with no reaseon" is uber bullshit. This basically means, that they can update their EULA, but you still have to agree to the revised version.
I am very disappointed of CCP and a lot of people in the community, since most of you do not understand that the very serious critizism that was made in this thread was treated in a very naive and ignorant way, both by players and Sreegs.
The issue, what I think most think is, that "we" are angry, because you will ban "us" for using a mechanic which made it super easy for us to aquire rather large amounts (not really....). The other issue, what I think many of you have in mind, is that if this gets discussed more openly many people will abuse this to adjust bots to stand under the radar.
I am sorry to address you as being wrong, because this isn't the point why people step up. Many might not be eloquent and just made nuts posts, but the very problem is that by doing such things CCP creates a feeling of insecurity for the player.
The same thing was caused by SOPA, PIPA and what ever the plain intention was not to abuse these treaties or new laws, but they were phrased in very indefinite ways which could have made abuse very easy.
The funny thing is, and this was mentioned before "poor design attracts poor use", is very true. No one can pretend to design a system perfectly, but this isn't about a simple flaw in design or very small code segment being abused. This is a major game mechanic being in the game for a long time.
The only reason why you get back up by many players is, because they are jealous of other people making money. A lot of people won't even notice or know how manipulations affect the market, they are just furious about this very nebulous "threat" those very LITTLE GROUP of players seem to oppose to them. |
dexington
122
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 12:19:00 -
[400] - Quote
Zapson wrote:And the part "we claim to have the right to chance it at any given time with no reaseon" is uber bullshit. This basically means, that they can update their EULA, but you still have to agree to the revised version.
No, you would need to agree to the new version, or stop playing. You are not being forced to agree to the new version. GÇ£The best way to keep something bad from happening is to see it ahead of time, and you can't see it if you refuse to face the possibility.GÇ¥-á |
|
Zapson
The Companionship Test Alliance Please Ignore
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 12:28:00 -
[401] - Quote
dexington wrote:Zapson wrote:And the part "we claim to have the right to chance it at any given time with no reaseon" is uber bullshit. This basically means, that they can update their EULA, but you still have to agree to the revised version. No, you would need to agree to the new version, or stop playing. You are not being forced to agree to the new version.
That's what I said, they can update it, but in order to continue you have to agree in order to continue playing. |
Misty Mountains
Mysterious Island
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 12:32:00 -
[402] - Quote
Vrykolakasis wrote:I really love Screegs' hostile tone in the vast majority of his replies in this topic.
Never mind; I don't. I love hostility inside the game. To be aggressively hostile, condescending, and unprofessional to your customers in real life (or, well, a forum; still real interaction) is not an admirable character trait.
yes, there are game issues in this thread. we all know this and have our opinions. But THIS ^, this is the core problem. |
dexington
122
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 12:35:00 -
[403] - Quote
Zapson wrote:The issue, what I think most think is, that "we" are angry, because you will ban "us" for using a mechanic which made it super easy for us to aquire rather large amounts (not really....).
If you find a way to make 30B a months by being afk 24/7 and think everything is perfectly fine, and you could not possibly be breaking any rules, you are pretty ******* stupid... or more likely, you know you are exploiting a bug.
Zapson wrote:The other issue, what I think many of you have in mind, is that if this gets discussed more openly many people will abuse this to adjust bots to stand under the radar.
Everyone knows that CCP are looking a activity patterns, when detecting bots. GÇ£The best way to keep something bad from happening is to see it ahead of time, and you can't see it if you refuse to face the possibility.GÇ¥-á |
Damion Rayne
Lorentz Technology Group
127
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 12:41:00 -
[404] - Quote
So any word from our resident Team Security guy? Aka the overly hostile, ex-goon, who I have no confidence in what so ever? Aka Sreegs...in case you were wondering. 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.. Teamwork.. Maturity.. Tactics.. www.tacticalgamer.com |
MisterNick
The Sagan Clan Pax Romana Alliance
79
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 12:56:00 -
[405] - Quote
Bloody hell, i've never seen such a mass of self-pitying whingers. Whingers who it seems have no facility for rational thought either. You don't have to be a genius to know the difference between afk farming and afk hauling or missioning
Sreegs, you're a more patient man than I o7 "Human beings make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to invent boredom." |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1013
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 13:25:00 -
[406] - 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... |
OutCast EG
Very Industrial Corp. Legion of xXDEATHXx
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 13:31:00 -
[407] - Quote
I have no idea what this "afk running" thing is about" but again, i see that what's right and what's wrong in player's actions is decided on single person's (Sreegs') judgment and good will. Which looks ********. Give players at least some concrete framework on what they can and cannot do, what's considered bad, what can get you punished, so we're all on the same grounds. I thought this was obvious and logical.
Also, on the second thought, you might want to check your wording, so you don't sound like a pompous douche. No offence, just tired of Sreegs' ever-patronizing tone towards his company's clients. |
Thiama Pacht-Feng
scrutarius Industrie
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 13:38:00 -
[408] - Quote
Hi So your Updat is indeed awesome, but I think it's not fair that her Trimxere (player name) use the boot found guilty even though this is the case. Pettie to be the Eula Quoted ^ ^ although he has not offered or made GÇïGÇïgeminer marco use so as I said great game but if you people for 14 days beginning no reason to block this is a very nice regressive |
Zapson
The Companionship Test Alliance Please Ignore
13
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 13:53:00 -
[409] - Quote
dexington wrote:Zapson wrote:The issue, what I think most think is, that "we" are angry, because you will ban "us" for using a mechanic which made it super easy for us to aquire rather large amounts (not really....). If you find a way to make 30B a months by being afk 24/7 and think everything is perfectly fine, and you could not possibly be breaking any rules, you are pretty ******* stupid... or more likely, you know you are exploiting a bug. Zapson wrote:The other issue, what I think many of you have in mind, is that if this gets discussed more openly many people will abuse this to adjust bots to stand under the radar. Everyone knows that CCP are looking a activity patterns, when detecting bots.
Give me actual numbers, or Sreegs should give out ACTUAL numbers how much they really made. I know a lot of persons which make insane amounts of money and manipulate the market. I do not think I broke any rules, because I never did "AFK COSMOS"-whatever. I am just an observer trying to be objective.
And they did not break any clear rules, just because some meta-philosophical interpretation of the EULA or Sreegs says that this is not okey, it did not actually break any rule. Don't get me wrong. I do not like to see people making money out of nowhere, but they did it on a legitimate basis. Please tell me you wouldn't did the same thing if you spotted something similiar. You probably wouldn't have done it 24h but you would have used it for a good amount of time, which is basically "abusing" the same mechanism. If doing something 24hours is abuse, doing it 8hours is abuse too. Beating your wife gets not any near more legal if you only did it once a week rather than each day.
The very problem is that CCP Sreegs always comes out and says PLAYERS ABUSED IT, WE WILL PUNISH THIS BEHAVIOUR. I said it last time, when the Factional Warfrare thing was around.
Please CCP watch your words, people on the internet are sensitive and you should learn to address things in a much nicer way. "There is problem with COSMOS which opened the possibility to made more money than we intended, we will fix(!) this issue" and not "investigate it and ban all people".
We have much bigger problems than some few high sec carbears getting a bit too much money. This is only another addition to the list of problems that the system might be broken, yet unfixed. And I doubt they will do more about this, rather than simply striking through with bans instead of adjusting the algorithm or altering the gameplay of COSMOS.
http://memegenerator.net/instance/24746559 |
Danny theDog
Phoenix Consortium Industries Black Core Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 13:56:00 -
[410] - Quote
I agree with Dregol but i would like to just state the fact that CCP sreegs concentrating on those players making ISK afk and not actually playing the game wether it be right or wrong i dont care but allowing cloaky campers to stay cloaked 23/7 is ok? you let ppl cloaky camp a system that stops players actually playing the game like how YOU want US to play the game, and more to the point to the habitants of nullsec systems that players spend hours on gaining /fighting for sov over.
Theres a strategical advantage and more to the fact trolololol advanatge to cloaky campers but still if ther gonna doit atleast make them have to sit at thtere pc's to stay cloaked and stop camping a system 23/7
looking at it as a business you are stopping ppl from playing the game half arsed and yet allowing players stopping lots of other players from actually actively playing the game. <-doesn't make sense
(excuse the spelling im on drugs so it makes it ok...i think)
TROLL SHIELD ACTIVATE!! |
|
daddi0
Brooklyn Tax Dodgers
20
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:01:00 -
[411] - Quote
Rayford Carpathia wrote:Suqq, quit insulting people and name calling just because we don't agree with you. You see only what you want to see. You read only what you want to read. Post with your main or just go away. You've already rendered your arguments invalid by your contradictions and insults.
What he said. In some 20+ posts, Suqq, you haven't said anything directly related to the issue at hand, simply flamed other people's comments. Regardless of our opinions, some of us are trying to have a serious discussion about the direction of the game, so eIther get out from behind your 4 month old alt and act responsibly, or quit being a newbie troll and shut-up. To correct your misinformed carping, the Code of Conduct describes how you should BEHAVE, not how you can play, and there is nothing in either it or the EULA that describes or defines BOT-LIKE behavior. That is strictly an artifact of forum discussions like this one.
Contrary to many of the CCP positive/Player negative comments, Much of this discussion is not about whether this behavior is right or wrong, but how CCP is going about it, and what the ramifications of their actions are. AFK is an important fact of life in the game. Hardly anyone, even stupid listless ones, ever do absolutely nothing. Unless you're insanely paranoid or a complete couch potato, very few players sit around and watch while they do 22 jumps through hisec space. I certainly don't. I don't watch my laundry spin, or my chicken roast; I GO DO SOMETHING ELSE. If someone chooses to farm a complex manually because they can do it while at work, or some other reason, the question remains HOW CAN YOU TELL if they are AFK ot not?
The without an answer to this question this kind of decision is indeed a slipperly slope, as this behavoir is very similar to others in the game. The only distinction is some nebulous determination of how much/how fast that has yet to be revealed. |
Thiama Pacht-Feng
scrutarius Industrie
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:05:00 -
[412] - Quote
So what my colleague, he writes, after 14 days As always when he makes Pettie Minert or umlogt or just afk and I know him as the really;) |
dexington
124
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:06:00 -
[413] - Quote
Zapson wrote:Give me actual numbers, or Sreegs should give out ACTUAL numbers how much they really made.
Linkage
23 hours a day, 28 days a month is around 29B GÇ£The best way to keep something bad from happening is to see it ahead of time, and you can't see it if you refuse to face the possibility.GÇ¥-á |
Zapson
The Companionship Test Alliance Please Ignore
13
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:09:00 -
[414] - Quote
dexington wrote:Zapson wrote:Give me actual numbers, or Sreegs should give out ACTUAL numbers how much they really made. Linkage23 hours a day, 28 days a month is around 29B
...."with a fleet".
The size is not very specific and you can do pretty much the same or more money with a "fleet" or miners in less time.
|
dexington
124
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:15:00 -
[415] - Quote
Zapson wrote:dexington wrote:Zapson wrote:Give me actual numbers, or Sreegs should give out ACTUAL numbers how much they really made. Linkage23 hours a day, 28 days a month is around 29B ...."with a fleet". The size is not very specific and you can do pretty much the same or more money with a "fleet" or miners in less time.
Not while being afk 23 hours a day. GÇ£The best way to keep something bad from happening is to see it ahead of time, and you can't see it if you refuse to face the possibility.GÇ¥-á |
Zapson
The Companionship Test Alliance Please Ignore
13
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:17:00 -
[416] - Quote
dexington wrote:Zapson wrote:dexington wrote:Zapson wrote:Give me actual numbers, or Sreegs should give out ACTUAL numbers how much they really made. Linkage23 hours a day, 28 days a month is around 29B ...."with a fleet". The size is not very specific and you can do pretty much the same or more money with a "fleet" or miners in less time. Not while being afk 23 hours a day.
The funny thing is you don't have to be afk that long to make the same amount of money with a fleet of miners. Mining is semi-afk you come back every once and again. If you do the same with COSMOS afking you would say it's legit? |
GFL Kalor
Shadow Council
10
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:17:00 -
[417] - Quote
Damion Rayne wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:CARB0N FIBER wrote:How do you know I'm AFK?
Are you hacking my web cam?
Is there a time limit on how long I can play?
What is this time limit?
Will this time limit be like other rules, where we don't know what it is till we are banned?
Since playing 23 hours a day is now a bannable offense will we be getting a dicounted rate?
So we pay for 720 hours of game time, in which we can play 690 hours. So how many of the 690 hours of the 720 hours we pay for can we play without getting banned?
Another thing, ALT's. Obviously if you have multiple accounts logged in one is AFK. So should you banned if you have multiple accounts?
I know you saying something like I'm not AFK, I have a screen and keyboard for every account. How do we know that? This is a very old, old issue. I have proof of people getting banned and sent a GM message stating they did not detect any botting software but their "too regular and prolonged gameplay" flagged them as bots. This is why in the past I always asked CCP Sreegs for ways for players to defend and prove their innocence. This is why I created multiple in game tickets about the same matter and all of them got a "players cannot defend themselves, they will be banned with no ability of recourse" reply. Which in fact proves that this entire thing is being handled in an entirely incompetent manner. Let's just remember, big brother Sreegs is watching us and if we play for more than a few hours straight and we're not actively pushing buttons, it's best to just log off. Oh and that will eventually go to hauling, mining, salvaging, PI, day-trading, and mission running.
I wonder if this means my "Off Grid Booster" is a bot? Are you going to ban them as well???? |
Emperor Salazar
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
633
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:19:00 -
[418] - Quote
This is now a thread dedicated to fielding ideas on how to nerf afk cloaking, as it is a serious problem in null sec and it needs to be addressed. |
Brokers Clone
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:29:00 -
[419] - Quote
THIS looks like what Skreggs was talking about.
Gotta hand it to him, He really attempted to cloud the issue....MMMyeah
OK, I see this as going a weeee bit too far. And I see CCP deciding to nip it off however, I still say:
1. Tell the CSM you are gonna make a change to player capabilities Re:COSMOS 2. Fix it 3. No banning needed. Just a footnote, buried in a patch log
(But of course, CCP Skreggs would not get a chance to... ummm... Shine)
(Of course, you have to admit, he WAS pretty cool about replying to all of our Kvetching) |
dexington
124
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:33:00 -
[420] - Quote
Zapson wrote:The funny thing is you don't have to be afk that long the make the same amount of money with a fleet of miners. Mining is semi-afk you come back every once and again. If you do the same with COSMOS afking you would say it's legit?
You just don't get it, they did not discover a new profession. Someone found a way to afk grind isk, and decided to exploited the best he could, when what he should have done was inform ccp of the problem. I really don't care if people cheat and exploit, i can do **** all about it. It is just ******** to try and make CCP the bad guys for enforcing a rule everyone knows exist, exploit a bug and you risk perma ban. And it was pretty obvious this was not working as intended, why else would it be the only place in the game it was possible.
If you can't see what effect it would have on the economy of eve if everyone did this, then you clearly do not understand eve. GÇ£The best way to keep something bad from happening is to see it ahead of time, and you can't see it if you refuse to face the possibility.GÇ¥-á |
|
Satyra Eventide
Koshaku Gentlemen's Agreement
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:39:00 -
[421] - Quote
put like, a 3 hour timer on drones, just like you did with probes? no, seriously. ban bots and bad people, but if you didn't make the game the way you wanted, then fix it. |
Achaiah7
Interwebs Cooter Explosion Fatal Ascension
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:53:00 -
[422] - Quote
Protip: next time you post something that's going to affect a huge population of EVE be explicit about what you mean. There are all kinds of AFK activities that are OK .... why not state exactly that you're targeting one plex that keeps respawning over and over so people can abuse it. *facepalm* |
Zapson
The Companionship Test Alliance Please Ignore
13
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:59:00 -
[423] - Quote
dexington wrote:Zapson wrote:The funny thing is you don't have to be afk that long the make the same amount of money with a fleet of miners. Mining is semi-afk you come back every once and again. If you do the same with COSMOS afking you would say it's legit? You just don't get it, they did not discover a new profession. Someone found a way to afk grind isk, and decided to exploited the best he could, when what he should have done was inform ccp of the problem. I really don't care if people cheat and exploit, i can do **** all about it. It is just ******** to try and make CCP the bad guys for enforcing a rule everyone knows exist, exploit a bug and you risk perma ban. And it was pretty obvious this was not working as intended, why else would it be the only place in the game it was possible. If you can't see what effect it would have on the economy of eve if everyone did this, then you clearly do not understand eve.
There are not enough sites to exploit it on a very high level. Many mining OPS have a larger influence on the market on this, especially since this "exploit" was only done by a few people.
It's hard-limited by the amount of COSMOS sites, with the right rats and bounty.
I am not blind, but the "if everyone does this"-argument is a very bad one, since if really everyone would do this, everyone would get the exact same amount of money out of it.^^ And as I said before, there are hard-limits on doing this. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1013
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 15:10:00 -
[424] - 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... |
AnonyTerrorNinja
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 15:27:00 -
[425] - Quote
Suggestion in case it has not been mentioned already; for affected complexes, have the beacon despawn and respawn elsewhere in the system when it has been completed.
Despawning should occur as soon as the objective has been completed AND there are no players on grid to the 'final' pocket OR
Despawning should occur as soon as everything that has any value in all rooms have been cleared AND
Despawning should occur when the objective has been completed but all of the complexes entities have not been destroyed within a reasonable amount of time.
Respawning should be able to occur in different systems on the same constellation, with it being possible that, where there are multiple beacons for the same complex in the constellation, they can all appear in the same system simultaneously. Respawning of entities within the complexes should not occur.
This functionality has the dual benefit of denying people absolute power of farming since they might not be in the system where the complex has respawned, as well as preventing AFK farming from being possible. A high respawn rate could still be possible, but people would need to actively find and re-start the process of getting set up to 'farm' their isk.
As far as making known COSMOS and DED statics possible to find, simply change the current function of labeling individual stars with the items to highlighting the entire constellation with mouseover information showing the quantity of and 'level' of items within the constellation.
Tada, issue resolved, EVE's complex-farming becomes a dynamic, competitive experience. At this point, for anyone to consistently farm the things for 23 hours, they'd definitely need to utilize a bot.
|
Bossodor
Zombie Miners Team
16
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 15:27:00 -
[426] - Quote
I can not understand why the players should be responsible for errors of CCP |
daddi0
Brooklyn Tax Dodgers
22
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 15:44:00 -
[427] - Quote
Lone wolf or not, exactly what words in the EULA spell this out as not acceptable. I'm not a lawyer, but as a software vendor, I'm not too bad with contract language. If there is wording in the EULA that defines this behavior, I don't see it, and I'm willing to bet many others don't either. If its there, its so obtuse as to (almost?) be mis-representation of the use and purpose of the game. If its not, then all the justification for this action is smoke and mirrors. Either way overlooks the actual presentation of this decision which is a subplot in itself.
Take PI for instance. If I discover that my extraction yields are higher with shorter time periods than longer ones, am I the one to decide this is a bug, an exploit or the intended game design, or do I just use shorter extraction times. If I want to use 7 days as my time period, am I being put at an unfair disadvantage from those using a 4 hour period? In either case, AFK ISK is taking place, and for 24/7 not 23/7. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4290
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 15:58:00 -
[428] - Quote
Sylver Nyte wrote:CCP Has basiclly NEVER Policed EvE. That would be WHY its called "Sandbox". I mean if they wanna start POLICEING, they could start with HiSec Gate Ganks, NulSec AFK Cloakers, or even just give freighters/Jumpfreighters the ability to defend themself. Lets not go to the fall back, its your responsability to supply an escort BS, because seriously, when the NPC Gaurds wont do thier task then perhaps some of the original code is broken. I mean HIGH Security does infact mean its ment to be policed. Granted these actions can be considered "exploiting" a un-planned Game mechanic interaction, but IMO, there are things that need fixing FAR FAR worse than a simple ISK Exploit.
"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. "WeGÇÖre a professional Merc Alliance, like PL" ~ snot shot, 2012 |
dexington
124
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 16:02:00 -
[429] - Quote
daddi0 wrote:Lone wolf or not, exactly what words in the EULA spell this out as not acceptable.
From the TOS
You may not exploit any bug in EVE Online to gain an unfair advantage over other players. You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum. Bugs should be reported through the bug reporting tool on our website. GÇ£The best way to keep something bad from happening is to see it ahead of time, and you can't see it if you refuse to face the possibility.GÇ¥-á |
Zapson
The Companionship Test Alliance Please Ignore
14
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 16:13:00 -
[430] - Quote
dexington wrote:daddi0 wrote:Lone wolf or not, exactly what words in the EULA spell this out as not acceptable. From the TOS You may not exploit any bug in EVE Online to gain an unfair advantage over other players. You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum. Bugs should be reported through the bug reporting tool on our website.
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. |
|
Caldari Acolyte
Naari LLC
30
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 16:13:00 -
[431] - Quote
highonpop wrote:CCP could just get rid on infinite respawns
TADA!
Problem solved Common sense is best sense, also bought a pail to put by my desk just in case . |
Cyxopyc
hirr Against ALL Authorities
4
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 16:15:00 -
[432] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Game Design will also be looking at changing our complex systems so that this is no longer possible in the near future. This always has been the solution. Fix those things in EVE that don't work well for game play. Also, pay attention and act on feedback from your testers on the test server.
coolzero wrote:lol wth...
...
...
now since you made this statement about you cant do them afk anymore, WILL THAT MEAN AFK CLOAKING IN A SYSTEM TO DISRUPT OPERATIONS WILL BE BANNABLE ALSO........ Cloaking is one of those things that doesn't work well with game play. I feel it has always been overpowered. Feel free to EVEmail me for ideas on solutions.
|
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1014
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 16:16:00 -
[433] - 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... |
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
10
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 16:18:00 -
[434] - Quote
daddi0 wrote:Lone wolf or not, exactly what words in the EULA spell this out as not acceptable. I'm not a lawyer, but as a software vendor, I'm not too bad with contract language. If there is wording in the EULA that defines this behavior, I don't see it, and I'm willing to bet many others don't either. If its there, its so obtuse as to (almost?) be mis-representation of the use and purpose of the game. If its not, then all the justification for this action is smoke and mirrors. Either way overlooks the actual presentation of this decision which is a subplot in itself.
Take PI for instance. If I discover that my extraction yields are higher with shorter time periods than longer ones, am I the one to decide this is a bug, an exploit or the intended game design, or do I just use shorter extraction times. If I want to use 7 days as my time period, am I being put at an unfair disadvantage from those using a 4 hour period? In either case, AFK ISK is taking place, and for 24/7 not 23/7.
Adding lazy to ignorant, are we? Please, read my previous post, right here. Number 384. I am very interested in what your response will be.
Let the gun do the talking! |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1014
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 16:25:00 -
[435] - 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... |
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
11
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 16:36:00 -
[436] - 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.
Inappropiate: EDIT: Holy ****, asked a german lawyer. EULA ain't worth **** in germany lawlawlawlawlawlawl^^
I have underlined the interesting part in your post. Let's agree on one thing - AFK complex camping doesn't require a regular time investment, other than 30-40 minutes per day, for setting up your characters in the proper rooms.
So let's compare - which player activity, can get you 29 bil per month, with less than 30-40 minutes active playing per day? Let the gun do the talking! |
Anslo
The Scope Gallente Federation
70
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 16:40:00 -
[437] - Quote
Is Screegs in here taking on players too? I hope so... /popcorn |
daddi0
Brooklyn Tax Dodgers
23
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 16:55:00 -
[438] - Quote
Kyle Frost wrote:daddi0 wrote:Lone wolf or not, exactly what words in the EULA spell this out as not acceptable. I'm not a lawyer, but as a software vendor, I'm not too bad with contract language. If there is wording in the EULA that defines this behavior, I don't see it, and I'm willing to bet many others don't either. If its there, its so obtuse as to (almost?) be mis-representation of the use and purpose of the game. If its not, then all the justification for this action is smoke and mirrors. Either way overlooks the actual presentation of this decision which is a subplot in itself.
Take PI for instance. If I discover that my extraction yields are higher with shorter time periods than longer ones, am I the one to decide this is a bug, an exploit or the intended game design, or do I just use shorter extraction times. If I want to use 7 days as my time period, am I being put at an unfair disadvantage from those using a 4 hour period? In either case, AFK ISK is taking place, and for 24/7 not 23/7. Adding lazy to ignorant, are we? Please, read my previous post, right here. Number 384. I am very interested in what your response will be.
Lazy, ignorant, let's get serious. I wouldn't be writing such detailed explanantions that almost anyone can understand if I were lazy. I'd be vaguely refering to language that is very subjective, or doesn't even exist.
To that end: I don't see your point. Yes bots are prohibited.
This, however, is human behavior, not aided by ANY outside means, mechanical or software. It just happens to be performed non-interactively; but you can't know if it is for certain. The EULA is a CONTRACT that both parties abide by. IT DOES NOT contain language that outlaws this behavior. Please stop being vague and show the EXACT words that you claim do so. And then, if they exist, how they exclude the very similar profit inducing activities such as BP copying, manufacturing, POS operation, etc, ALL of which involve somoe setup, and then doing nothing for perhaps months, until the finished item is delivered. It that's too close to the kind of rgument you like to leave to the lawyers, please keep in mind that this IS A TRIAL of the gamers, with an ill-handled, misunderstood, at best, and seletive and secretive, at worst, judgement process, with an appeal process that has a reputation of being unresponsive.
I don't happen to benefit from this practice, and I actually applaud the creativity of turning the farming into a protection racket, that was profitable, seemingly within the rules, and did not affect those who were mission running. Isn't this the idea of an "open-ended" game? Isn't it what corporations do on a large scale everywhere they can?
And that is the crux of my problem with all of this. At what point is it acceptable or not, how can we be sure we're doing the right thing, and how can we be sure we will be fairly heard on appeal if we are unjustly banned? Shouldn't I be repaid for my banned time if the ruling is overturned? That doesn't sound like its the case. Would you accept that from any other service vendor; I'm sorry your phone didn't work for a month, but we're going to bill you anyway???
I have a programmable mouse I use for hotkeys in almost every game I play. It substitutes mouse buttons for keyclicks; no multiples, no repeat, just simple substituion so I don't have to go to the keyboard. Is that legal in EVE or not?? Show me the language that gives a definitive answer? If the EVE hotkey tab can accept the codes from a gaming keypad does that mean its acceptable and the intended game design, or is it an oversight, or unintended , left-over artifact of the past, that will now be ruled illegal??
If I'm on the wrong path here folks, please everyone jump donw my throat, but until we have concrete, definite answers to how this will handled going forward, I'll continue to pretend I'm the ACLU, and defend against the revocation of previously grants rights without due course or clear "legal" definitions.
Thanks to all for you for your serious interest in the future of the GAME |
Anslo
The Scope Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 17:09:00 -
[439] - Quote
btw if you don't like the change, vote with your wallet. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
912
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 17:38:00 -
[440] - Quote
Bossodor wrote:I can not understand why the players should be responsible for errors of CCP They are not. CCP is responsible for CCP's errors. The players are responsible for exploiting the situation.
Even if someone forgets to lock their door it is not legal to steal their stuff. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
|
highonpop
Void.Tech Fatal Ascension
203
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 18:00:00 -
[441] - Quote
I have rethought my last suggestion
Have the perma-spawn PLEX's have set # of waves. Have the next spawn cycle only be able to trigger until all parties involved in the previous spawn cycle have left. Make them at least have to warp out and back every 10 minutes or so. That way there is 'less' AFK. It wont kill the AFKer totally, but it will not allow him to just sit there all day without moving.
edit:
PS, I didnt read the posts betwen my last post (page 8) and this one. too many. not enough time. sorry If I have repeated anything someone else already mentioned.
http://www.soundboard.com/sb/Very%20best%20of%20Makalu%20Zarya |
Bossodor
Zombie Miners Team
18
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 18:01:00 -
[442] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Bossodor wrote:I can not understand why the players should be responsible for errors of CCP They are not. CCP is responsible for CCP's errors. The players are responsible for exploiting the situation. Even if someone forgets to lock their door it is not legal to steal their stuff.
#48Posted: 2012.08.09 12:44 "Why doesn't CCP just change the ******* mission then instead of threatening players? What the **** you assholes (CCP)." |
highonpop
Void.Tech Fatal Ascension
203
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 18:02:00 -
[443] - Quote
Bossodor wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:Bossodor wrote:I can not understand why the players should be responsible for errors of CCP They are not. CCP is responsible for CCP's errors. The players are responsible for exploiting the situation. Even if someone forgets to lock their door it is not legal to steal their stuff. #48Posted: 2012.08.09 12:44 "Why doesn't CCP just change the ******* mission then instead of threatening players? What the **** you assholes (CCP)."
CCP Sreegs wrote:highonpop wrote:CCP could just get rid on infinite respawns
TADA!
Problem solved That would certainly fix this particular issue yes.
/thread? i dont get why CCP will acknowledge that the could fix the problem with a simple fix. but wont.
http://www.soundboard.com/sb/Very%20best%20of%20Makalu%20Zarya |
Caellach Marellus
Aideron Technologies Sspectre
581
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 18:22:00 -
[444] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Caellach Marellus wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote: He isn't talking about missions
Pity, AFK missioners should get whacked with the same thing. Missions are clearly static and their NPCs clearly respawn...
Because that's clearly what I said right?
I'm just big on the whole "nerf passive isk income" Especially when you're undocked and in space doing it through automation. Enjoy your gaming.
http://northern-goblin.blogspot.com |
Nizou
Nizou Heavy Industries Corp
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 18:39:00 -
[445] - Quote
Why doesn't CCP just fix the broken mechanics, instead of threatening their players.
|
Ensign X
40
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 18:53:00 -
[446] - Quote
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? |
Nizou
Nizou Heavy Industries Corp
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 19:08:00 -
[447] - Quote
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? |
Ensign X
41
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 19:10:00 -
[448] - Quote
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. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1018
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 19:17:00 -
[449] - 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... |
Gawain Edmond
Selective Hearing Nearly Feared
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 19:39:00 -
[450] - Quote
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 |
|
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1020
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 19:57:00 -
[451] - 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... |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
915
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 20:10:00 -
[452] - Quote
highonpop wrote:I have rethought my last suggestion
Have the perma-spawn PLEX's have set # of waves. Have the next spawn cycle only be able to trigger until all parties involved in the previous spawn cycle have left. Make them at least have to warp out and back every 10 minutes or so. That way there is 'less' AFK. It wont kill the AFKer totally, but it will not allow him to just sit there all day without moving.
edit:
PS, I didnt read the posts betwen my last post (page 8) and this one. too many. not enough time. sorry If I have repeated anything someone else already mentioned. Nice idea, but opens up griefing via parking a ship in the plex and going afk. Now no one else can do the site.
What Ive heard that would work:
Remove the bounties and increase the rewards just for these complexes and missions. It could be just a mission reward, or from selling special loot like tags. Having it be a mission reward would also curtail non-afk farming allowing these plexes to be what they are supposed to be: mission sites.
Have a timer for each person who enters and only award bounties to that person for a set time. To reset the timer they got to leave. Timer is for just you, others could earn bounties even after your timer expires.
Have a flag for each person and NPC. You can only collect a bounty from a particular NPC once per visit to the plex.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
136
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 20:15:00 -
[453] - Quote
Ever wonder why just about every single MMO company makes your character 100% efficient 24 hours a day but then is shocked to find players *cough* "playing" *cough* 24 hours a day.
Old school PnP RPGs would make you find a safe spot and actually rest ... something that made sense, and if kept in MMOs, would have put the casuals and the botters + farmers on a more equal footing. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
179
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 20:36:00 -
[454] - Quote
daddi0 wrote:Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
12/7 does seem to be an reasonable (Hell I'd probably buy 18/7 from some people) amount of time to play. but I will say I think that doing a small number of keystrokes and then not interacting for multiple hours is wrong.
And this is exactly WHY it is a slippery slope. First, the limits cannot be easily determined, and second this is EXACTLY the behavior pattern of PI. A few keystokes, and no interaction for hours (days even); I could remain online, AFK or not, without doing anything else, logout, or go do some other game activity. But in the first case, you cannot tell what I'm doing or what my intentions are.
except PI was designed to run like that, CCP Sreegs said that here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1770396#post1770396 and last I checked sentry drones don't do so well when you warp off or log off |
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
11
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 21:04:00 -
[455] - Quote
daddi0 wrote: Lazy, ignorant, let's get serious. I wouldn't be writing such detailed explanantions that almost anyone can understand if I were lazy. I'd be vaguely refering to language that is very subjective, or doesn't even exist.
To that end: I don't see your point. Yes bots are prohibited.
This, however, is human behavior, not aided by ANY outside means, mechanical or software. It just happens to be performed non-interactively; but you can't know if it is for certain. The EULA is a CONTRACT that both parties abide by. IT DOES NOT contain language that outlaws this behavior. Please stop being vague and show the EXACT words that you claim do so. And then, if they exist, how they exclude the very similar profit inducing activities such as BP copying, manufacturing, POS operation, etc, ALL of which involve somoe setup, and then doing nothing for perhaps months, until the finished item is delivered. It that's too close to the kind of rgument you like to leave to the lawyers, please keep in mind that this IS A TRIAL of the gamers, with an ill-handled, misunderstood, at best, and seletive and secretive, at worst, judgement process, with an appeal process that has a reputation of being unresponsive.
And that is the crux of my problem with all of this. At what point is it acceptable or not, how can we be sure we're doing the right thing, and how can we be sure we will be fairly heard on appeal if we are unjustly banned? Shouldn't I be repaid for my banned time if the ruling is overturned? That doesn't sound like its the case. Would you accept that from any other service vendor; I'm sorry your phone didn't work for a month, but we're going to bill you anyway???
Oh why was I expecting anything different?! I stand by what I wrote earlier GÇô you and a number of other people in this thread just donGÇÖt like to think.
You wanna get serious? I have been serious in most of my posts in this thread GÇô I would try to simplify things, and give examples, and explain as if you are slow or something. And none of that worked! I should have just trolled your ignorant asses and then point and laugh as you swing your torches and pitchforks in vein.
I tried something different with you GÇô I tried to get you to think on your own and realize the core of the problem yourself. I obviously overestimated you. I asked you several simple questions. But instead of giving me some simple answers, you chose to repeat what you have written already, completely missing the main issue. Did you even think about what I asked you? No, I am sorry GÇô of course you didnGÇÖt. And here we are, back to where we started GÇô the slow bus.
OK, the slow bus it isGǪ As you pointed out already, it can often be difficult to distinguish between a bot and a player who is beingGǪ how did you put it GÇô he is performing things non-interactively. Especially if the player is really dumbGǪ sorry, I got carried away. So letGÇÖs imagine for a moment, that CCP allows this method of AFK farming complexes. They might as well openly allow the use of bots. At first, when the mass use of bots becomes legit, there might be a small increase in the number of active subscription. People would be able to afford to pay for numerous accounts with isk. But soon the situation is going to change, as the massive amount of generated ISK brings serious inflation and fucks up the game economy. Long time players will leave and new players are not gonna stick around for long, as it will be very hard for them to compete with the older players (as if itGÇÖs not hard enough already).
Eventually, a time will come when more than 50% of the characters you see in EVE will actually be computer controlled. And the % of human players and the overall number of players will be going in only one direction GÇô down. And that is why I asked you earlier about multiplayer games and why online multiplayer games often hold the playerGÇÖs interest longer than singleplayer games. It is just more interesting to play with other human players. Players can bring life to an otherwise stagnant gameworld, they can create new content themselves, they are better opponents than NPCs and so on. Now you hopefully understand why bots are prohibited in pretty much all online games.
AFK camping complexes is virtually the same as using a bot and it produces the same results. Naturally, CCP prohibits it. And some people just canGÇÖt figure out why, since AFK camping doesnGÇÖt appear to openly violate the EULA. Those people stop thinking, they forget about common sense or logic.
For the N time GÇô you can not anticipate everything in a massive, player populated universe like EVE. Some people are always looking for loopholes and every now and then they find one. Theese loopholes have to be closed, so the EULA is bound to change periodically. Do you want a written notification 3 months in advance before they do it? Should the exploit be left open and the people utilizing it be left untouched during that time? Oh crapGǪ I forgot GÇô you donGÇÖt do well with questionsGǪ Well the EULA does say, that CCP reserves the right to change it at any time they deem necessary GÇô so where the **** is the problem? (that one is rhetorical, relax)
And in regards to where the line is drawn for acceptable and unacceptable AFK activities GÇô they did explain exactly what type of behavior is being targeted, didnGÇÖt they? And if you read through the earlier pages of this thread, you will find numerous clarifications written by other players and a CCP employee. So much for your statement that you read the whole thingGǪ
P.S. I never claimed AFK farming is explicitly prohibited by the EULA. I live in Europe and here the EULA doesn't mean jack **** (legally anyway). I've never even read the damn thing. But then again, in most cases I am capable of figuring out what is and what isn't acceptable gameplay without extra help. Let the gun do the talking! |
Perkar
The Flying Tigers Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 21:57:00 -
[456] - Quote
um....CCP..... so all of a sudden you care about afk mission running? so, afk mining and botting is cool? i know you say something vague about it in EULA but, stop by any ice belt anywhere in highsec...........
every ship killed was afk or a bot. they never did anything to protect themselves or even warp the pod. they just sat there. so how is it ok to do that (it IS ok because you dont do anything about it) but its not ok to farm a mission site?
http://eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&view=kills&plt_id=1135496&m=1&y=2012 |
Ensign X
41
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 22:09:00 -
[457] - Quote
Perkar wrote:um....CCP..... so all of a sudden you care about afk mission running? so, afk mining and botting is cool? i know you say something vague about it in EULA but, stop by any ice belt anywhere in highsec........... every ship killed was afk or a bot. they never did anything to protect themselves or even warp the pod. they just sat there. so how is it ok to do that (it IS ok because you dont do anything about it) but its not ok to farm a mission site? http://eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&view=kills&plt_id=1135496&m=1&y=2012
Dude, what are you smoking?
CCP said nothing in this entire thread about AFK mission running and have made it abundantly clear in the past that they don't approve of botting hence the hundreds (thousands?) of bots they've banned.
Your inability to comprehend the point of this announcement by CCP is staggering, which leads me back to my original question (what are you smoking?), and into my next question (share, please?). |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1020
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 23:05:00 -
[458] - 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... |
daddi0
Brooklyn Tax Dodgers
25
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 00:00:00 -
[459] - Quote
Kyle Frost wrote:
P.S. I never claimed AFK farming is explicitly prohibited by the EULA. I live in Europe and here the EULA doesn't mean jack **** (legally anyway). I've never even read the damn thing.
Gee, I thought You were going to make some sense this time. You're entire tirade seems to be based on the idea that I'm in favor of allowing bots or game exploits. Its a great argument except that it overlooks the facts:
- I haven't EVER argued in favor of bots
- I haven't even argued in favor of allowing this exploit
- I explicity stated that changing the EULA was a proper step to take
What I have discussed is the inability to distinguish between certain human bahavior and bot behavior, and the enforcement applied when that behavior is discovered. Let's face it, this exploit haas been available for years, and most likely in use without detection until it got so big that it bacame obvious, or a bot scanner discovered a new behavior and flagged it; a false positive in point of fact, since its not a bot.
The quoted text above suddenly explains quite clearly the lack of understanding about the need for clear rules and a transparent and forgiving exnforcement mechanism, which seems to be the grievance of many "edge" players.
The simple answer is that it is a cultural difference. I live in the United States. We expect the EULA to be the basis of the contract that both sides agree to, otherwise what's the point of having to agree to it. We also expect to be charged with specific crimes, by a known accuser, with evidence to warrant those charges, and provided with the open and adequate means to refute them even BEFORE we are imprisoned. In others words, the ability to receive a fair trial, where it is the state's responsibility to prove a crime has been committed. You on the other hand, live in a region when the citizens accept the fact that the police can imprison them without reason, without charges and without showing any evidence. Thus you accept the fact that defense must take place after the fact, and it is your responsibility to discover what you've been accused of and whyand prove your innocence.
This is an irreconcilable difference in point of view and thus not possible to change with any form of discussion of facts or philosophy about law and safeguards. /discussion
|
Atruin Naskingar
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 00:45:00 -
[460] - Quote
How about some constructive suggestions.
I was thinking along the lines of drastically re-improving all "Rat"/"Navy" AI to be on par with Sleeper/Incursion Rat spawns.
Solution being that in these special case complex you randomize spawn timers (whatever they are 12-24 mins) and spawn amounts. But the longer a player is present in a complex, the next wave escalates into a bigger/more dangerous wave. The "AFK'ers risk losing their drones and ships once the wave escalates beyond a certain point to break their passive tanks.
But this leaves active players the time to get out or get some friends. If solo, have the Rats de-spawn in numbers after a certain amount of time so they can continue on. Now of course there has to be some sort of limit in place with fleets so this doesn't get abused to the point where players can continuously escalate and get bigger spawns forever.
Just food for thought...
*Edited for more stuff |
|
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
27
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 01:26:00 -
[461] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong
I'm going to point out something that, at least to me, is glaringly obvious. I imagine that in 23 pages someone has pointed it out as well, but I feel that despite that it should be pointed out repeatedly. Logging in for 24 hours is not "way more than a person can." I routinely go through one or two 20+ hour ice mining operations per month, and when I first started playing the game I probably spent roughly 65 out of the first 72 hours logged into the game and playing before it got to the point where I was snoring more than playing.
|
Challu
Wishful Desires Inc. Armada Assail
52
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 02:04:00 -
[462] - Quote
Shereza wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong I'm going to point out something that, at least to me, is glaringly obvious. I imagine that in 23 pages someone has pointed it out as well, but I feel that despite that it should be pointed out repeatedly. Logging in for 24 hours is not "way more than a person can." I routinely go through one or two 20+ hour ice mining operations per month, and when I first started playing the game I probably spent roughly 65 out of the first 72 hours logged into the game and playing before it got to the point where I was snoring more than playing.
You're fine. Just search for Dev posts if you're too lazy to check the 23 pages. (Though for all the mining you do, surely you have time :))
|
MOUNT EVEREST
Mysterious Island 0001
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 02:32:00 -
[463] - Quote
As a customer there are few things that irritate me more than an arrogant, know-it-all employee trying to tell me what to do without first listening to what I have to say. So basically, when I saw the FIRST, UNEDITED news item from this guy, It just pissed me off, even though it really didn't change a damn thing about how I play the game. If somebody like that worked for me, and I saw that kind of behavior, well, they wouldn't be working for me, period. |
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 02:39:00 -
[464] - Quote
Challu wrote:You're fine. Just search for Dev posts if you're too lazy to check the 23 pages. (Though for all the mining you do, surely you have time :))
I know I'm fine, I wasn't worried about anything to begin with. I just took exception to the idea that everyone who plays EVE is either in part or whole someone over 40 who needs their 8 hours of beauty sleep and has a job and life outside of EVE. |
Xython
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
1023
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 07:04:00 -
[465] - Quote
So does this mean that sitting in an ice field 23x7 with 23 accounts mining ice the entire time is an exploit and will be properly handled from now on? |
xXxNIMRODxXx
DYNAMIC INTERVENTION ORPHANS OF EVE
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 07:26:00 -
[466] - Quote
was just laughing abt it and i only want to share: what if this thing happen:
someone that does this, using a drone boat in that static plex, using sentry drones, doesn't go afk, but just fall asleep in front of the pc?
He is using the mechanics, so he's not breaking any rule; he is not afk at all, he is there, just fell over the keyboard (LOL). He is abusing it you say....LOL how can you decide how much time and what kind of stuff he wants to use, are you god? how can you judje it? do you want us to play like you decide? time to pack up my stuff, and more will follow (like a jewish exodus, i guess, cause your behaviour here reminds me abt the **** "do what we want you to do, or die -ban in our case-") Like someone else stated, we pay for 720 hour of gametime, every month. So i guess that everybody here will agree saying that if there is someone that is using in game mechanics to its finest, and not exploiting the game, because - actually - from my point of view, those who did this, are just playing by the rules within the limits, cause you can't actually know IF (and only IF) they are AFK, let's say, for a drink, or at the phone, for a shower, or (reality to its core) had a friend come by, and, anyway, they are still not breaking any EULA imho nor exploiting but using the game mechanics YOU made, cause they are there, using stuff that can grant them some free-time more than having to constantly hit F1 to 8, so, in the end... how can you seriously tell they are breaking the rules or violating the EULA. Just because they are using (not abusing) what you gave us? You know what a software/mechanic exploit is? something broken in the game that the discoverer can get advantage out of it. There is no exploit in here. Or are you telling us that the sites you made are broken? Well then fix them.
Seriously, this is pathetic. You can't tell us how to play the game the way you want us to play it, nor the time we can spend on it, nor you can tell if a man needs to rest in 24 hours , or 9 or 72 or every 10 seconds. You can't give someone a Ferrari and tell him "don't go more than 50 km/h, cause i could sht in my pants", get a tampon, the problem is yours. I got a car that can go 370 km/h, i got a free road to run it at it limits, i'm on a racetrack......and i gotta slow down cause you are scared? get out (gently) and let me run. Otherwise, don't give a Ferrari. |
Ensign X
42
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 07:26:00 -
[467] - Quote
Xython wrote:So does this mean that sitting in an ice field 23x7 with 23 accounts mining ice the entire time is an exploit and will be properly handled from now on?
No. It means you need to learn to read or have somebody read the announcement to you as it has nothing to do with mining, ice mining or anything else that isn't specifically mentioned in the announcement.
Keep trying.
xXxNIMRODxXx wrote:nonsensical rant
Da **** did you just say? AFK bleaching out my eyeballs. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 07:39:00 -
[468] - Quote
I'd like to get this straight.
The issue is people using current game mechanics to make exorbitant amounts of isk endlessly without having to do anything but relog once a week. This issue was seen to be unacceptable and the programming is being worked on to prevent this from further exploitation. So for now until the game mechanics are fixed it will be a bannable offense.
That is reasonable.
What is not reasonable is the snarky and sarcastic attitude. Sreegs you are addressing your customers not you're friends or team mates. A certain level of professionalism is expected when you release news with such strong implications to your customer base. Your ability to communicate in a non-aggressive manner can be the difference between a smooth patching period and a public relations "**** storm" as has been so specifically discriptive of this particular incident.
The news post by Sreegs (current and edited) is alarming to anyone who partakes in any kind of afk isk generating activity because of the sarcastic remarks about doing laundry and watching a marathon of a show. A large portion if not the vast majority of the player base will identify with at least one of those practices. If you do want to be sarcastic useing an imaginary scenerio in the future, please try to be more specific with the "unusual" practice in question. Maybe a 7 day cruise or a weekend get-away in the mountains while continuously generating lots of isk. That sounds more like something i'd be against as well. |
Xython
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
1027
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 07:55:00 -
[469] - Quote
Ensign X wrote:Xython wrote:So does this mean that sitting in an ice field 23x7 with 23 accounts mining ice the entire time is an exploit and will be properly handled from now on? No. It means you need to learn to read or have somebody read the announcement to you as it has nothing to do with mining, ice mining or anything else that isn't specifically mentioned in the announcement. Keep trying.
Ok, I will.
There's a quoted segment up there from CCP Sreegs stating that making isk or other forms of income while logged in for 24 hours is a "bad thing" (tm). Specifically, the quote I'm speaking of is:
CCP Sreegs wrote:Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong
AFK Ice Mining falls under this category.
1. A person AFK Ice Mining can mine for 23.5 hours straight without having to stop. (With the proper bot setup, they literally don't have to stop at all. Without a bot, then they merely have to check every so often and kick their cans out for a friend to pick up, or drag it back to the nearest station.) 2. This is a direct source of income (making money). 3. Mining is meant to be active, which is why mining materials take up more mass than 0 m3.
Therefore, since CCP Sreegs is stating that making money for more than 24 hours a day while you are actually AFK is "doing something wrong" -- which, by definition, means an exploit. (CCP saying you are playing the game wrong.)
Therefore, without a doubt, we can logically extrapolate from this:
CCP Sreegs is stating that AFK Ice Mining (alongside other forms of AFK Mining) is a bannable exploit. |
Xython
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
1027
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 07:58:00 -
[470] - Quote
Anyone else annoyed that the "fix" for this is going to be large swarms of weak Frigates to screw up drones? Drone ratting is already a horrifically annoying affair without "fixes" trying to keep highsec exploiters from abusing mechanics.
(The most annoying part of drone ratting is not knowing your drones are being pelted from the overview, you have to keep your drone window open and expanded so you can watch HP. If a person could see when drones or fighters under your command are being shot -- say, with a different color or pattern to the targeting icon -- it'd go a long way towards making it not horrible.) |
|
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 07:59:00 -
[471] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote: What is not reasonable is the snarky and sarcastic attitude. Sreegs you are addressing your customers not you're friends or team mates. A certain level of professionalism is expected when you release news with such strong implications to your customer base. Your ability to communicate in a non-aggressive manner can be the difference between a smooth patching period and a public relations "**** storm" as has been so specifically discriptive of this particular incident.
There is nothing wrong with Sreegs attitude tbh. The real issue lies in people have reading and comprehension skills comparitable to that of roadkill. People raised their initial concerns. Clarification was provided. Then page after page saw the same stupid posts with the same questions that had already been previously answered. If anything he has done a good job to keep replying to all the ragers. |
xXxNIMRODxXx
DYNAMIC INTERVENTION ORPHANS OF EVE
12
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 08:01:00 -
[472] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:I'd like to get this straight.
The issue is people using current game mechanics to make exorbitant amounts of isk endlessly without having to do anything but relog once a week. This issue was seen to be unacceptable and the programming is being worked on to prevent this from further exploitation. So for now until the game mechanics are fixed it will be a bannable offense.
That is reasonable.
What is not reasonable is the snarky and sarcastic attitude. Sreegs you are addressing your customers not you're friends or team mates. A certain level of professionalism is expected when you release news with such strong implications to your customer base. Your ability to communicate in a non-aggressive manner can be the difference between a smooth patching period and a public relations "**** storm" as has been so specifically discriptive of this particular incident.
The news post by Sreegs (current and edited) is alarming to anyone who partakes in any kind of afk isk generating activity because of the sarcastic remarks about doing laundry and watching a marathon of a show. A large portion if not the vast majority of the player base will identify with at least one of those practices. If you do want to be sarcastic useing an imaginary scenerio in the future, please try to be more specific with the "unusual" practice in question. Maybe a 7 day cruise or a weekend get-away in the mountains while continuously generating lots of isk. That sounds more like something i'd be against as well.
The point is about the mechanics of the game. They made a game. The game is made this way. We are using the game, so, the mechanics, to the maximum, cause the game and the mechanics themselves, let us do that. We are not cheating, then. But we are exploiting. Exploiting:An exploit, in video games, is the use of a bug or glitches, rates, hit boxes, or speed, etc. by a player to their advantage in a manner not intended by the game's designers.[1] It is often colloquially abbreviated sploit. Exploits have been classified as a form of cheating;
Are we cheating? No Are we using a bug at our advantage? No A glitch? No Etc.? No
Yo Devs, there's something wrong WITH YOU.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
179
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 08:07:00 -
[473] - Quote
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. |
Xython
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
1028
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 08:11:00 -
[474] - Quote
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? |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
179
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 08:23:00 -
[475] - Quote
except it does not require you to check your ship. |
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 11:20:00 -
[476] - Quote
xXxNIMRODxXx wrote: The point is about the mechanics of the game. They made a game. The game is made this way. We are using the game, so, the mechanics, to the maximum, cause the game and the mechanics themselves, let us do that. We are not cheating, then. But we are exploiting. Exploiting:An exploit, in video games, is the use of a bug or glitches, rates, hit boxes, or speed, etc. by a player to their advantage in a manner not intended by the game's designers.[1] It is often colloquially abbreviated sploit. Exploits have been classified as a form of cheating;
Are we cheating? No Are we using a bug at our advantage? No A glitch? No Etc.? No
Yo Devs, there's something wrong WITH YOU.
Just putting this out there, but I'm pretty sure when CCP created their game, they actually intended for it to be played... by people.
Are you playing? No
|
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1024
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 13:11:00 -
[477] - 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... |
Xython
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
1028
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 13:47:00 -
[478] - Quote
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. |
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
12
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 13:49:00 -
[479] - Quote
Xython wrote: 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.
Please, go consult your corp mate, his name is Richard Desturned. He will explain in goonie-speak so that you can understand. Let the gun do the talking! |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1024
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 14:08:00 -
[480] - 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... |
|
Subrahmaya Chandrasekhar
The Three Musketeers
20
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 15:32:00 -
[481] - Quote
Not sure how relevant my little note here is, so take it with a grain of salt:
I recently read that sitting for extended periods of time shortens your lifespan - anything over a few hours a day - and that the shortening can be as much as quitting smoking can add to your life. There was also a headline somewhere about some Koreans gaming online ... they just keep playing and playing until they literally die in front of their computers, I guess.
So maybe we should all try to limit the time we play. I have played for 18 hours a day on numerous occassions, and I know it's bad for me. I nod off too, anywhere from a second on up to much longer periods of time. Frankly, I'm addicted, and to Eve in particular. It's funny, but it's not funny, if you know what I mean.
(I used to be in good shape, I've run the Boston marathon 3 times, but over the years I've been playing this game I've gradually become less and less fit. Obviously it's my fault. No fate but what we make, as Sarah Connor said.) Independent thinking is not encouraged in a professional Army. It is a form of mutiny. Obedience is the supreme virtueBritish Prime Minister Lloyd George, in his 'War Memoirs'-á |
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
13
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 16:21:00 -
[482] - Quote
daddi0 wrote:Gee, I thought You were going to make some sense this time. You're entire tirade seems to be based on the idea that I'm in favor of allowing bots or game exploits. Its a great argument except that it overlooks the facts:
- I haven't EVER argued in favor of bots
- I haven't even argued in favor of allowing this exploit
- I explicity stated that changing the EULA was a proper step to take
What I have discussed is the inability to distinguish between certain human bahavior and bot behavior, and the enforcement applied when that behavior is discovered. Let's face it, this exploit haas been available for years, and most likely in use without detection until it got so big that it bacame obvious, or a bot scanner discovered a new behavior and flagged it; a false positive in point of fact, since its not a bot. The quoted text above suddenly explains quite clearly the lack of understanding about the need for clear rules and a transparent and forgiving exnforcement mechanism, which seems to be the grievance of many "edge" players. The simple answer is that it is a cultural difference. I live in the United States. We expect the EULA to be the basis of the contract that both sides agree to, otherwise what's the point of having to agree to it. We also expect to be charged with specific crimes, by a known accuser, with evidence to warrant those charges, and provided with the open and adequate means to refute them even BEFORE we are imprisoned. In others words, the ability to receive a fair trial, where it is the state's responsibility to prove a crime has been committed. You on the other hand, live in a region when the citizens accept the fact that the police can imprison them without reason, without charges and without showing any evidence. Thus you accept the fact that defense must take place after the fact, and it is your responsibility to discover what you've been accused of and whyand prove your innocence. This is an irreconcilable difference in point of view and thus not possible to change with any form of discussion of facts or philosophy about law and safeguards. /discussion My entire GÇ£tiradeGÇ¥ was based on the idea, that in order to get my message across, I have to start from A and B and teach you the alphabet. Amazingly, not even that worked.
The reason why I wrote that little piece about the bots, was because of how focused you were on the EULA. GÇ£ItGÇÖs doesnGÇÖt violate the EULA, so itGÇÖs fine. You canGÇÖt possible ban somebody for that!GÇ¥ You in-directly acknowledged that there was a problem and suggested a fix, but your main focus was how you canGÇÖt tell if somebody was AFK and how this doesnGÇÖt violate the EULA. The fact that AFK complex camping is pretty much the same as botting and what kind of effect it can have on other players GÇô those are minor details.
It doesnGÇÖt violate the EULA, never mind the restGǪ not another thought. See, thatGÇÖs why I called you ignorant. This is probably going to be considered an extreme example, but you donGÇÖt seem to understand the easy, simple ones. IGÇÖve also noticed, that you have a hard time understanding simple questions, but I am gonna risk it. Do you know, that in some countries in the Middle East and Africa, stoning to death is a legal punishment for people who have committed adultery? You can join the crowd and throw stones at some defenseless woman, who cheated on her abusive husband. How about that, ah? You think it is ok, because itGÇÖs legal? You think the people who participate in this should go free?
And yeah, you said they should change the EULA, which brings another very interesting, and somewhat funny question. And please, put those few brain cells together and give me a reply on that one, cause I bet it will be hilarious! What would have happened if they had done exactly that GÇô change the EULA and then proceed to ban AFK complex farmers? That would have been the right thing to do from a legal point of view, yes? Instead of posting some vague, arrogant message in the news column, the next time you start EVE a window pops up GÇô GÇ£The EULA has changed. Please read carefully and indicate that you accept the new terms by clicking AcceptGÇ¥. Everyone has seen the EULA window numerous times. What do 95% of the players do when they see that window GÇô they just scroll to the bottom and click Accept. Hell, I bet thatGÇÖs what you do! (like secretly, when you are not arguing on the forums )
You know what would have happened in a day or two, after the bans settled? This thread would have been not 20 but 120 pages long and the tears would be dripping from your monitor and falling on your desk. Those poor farmers wouldnGÇÖt be happy at all GÇô accounts banned, no refunds (cause they all accepted the EULA without reading), various other morons whining for their GÇ£sandboxGÇ¥ and bla, bla, bla... But you - you would be perfectly fine with it because you, as a seller of software, take license agreements VERY SERIOUSLY and you always read the fine print before playing with internet spaceships. Well I believe congratulations are in order, fine sir! You are probably not gonna get caught cheatingGǪ I mean, provided that was the way CCP did things. Are we on the same page now?
For dessert GÇô you stated, several times I believe, that CCP canGÇÖt be sure if a person is AFK or not. Now considering that they have access to all the server side data, thatGÇÖs just not true - not when it concerns greater periods of time. But in the case in question, you donGÇÖt really need an automated bot detector or a CSI team to figure it out, do you? (ok, maybe YOU do). 9 accounts, all registrated to one person, all logged from one IP, online 23/7, all doing the same thing. You think a human can actively play 9 accounts 23/7? Actually, looking back to some of the posts on this thread, I am expecting somebody to jump and say GÇô GÇ£Yeah, I do that on regular basis GÇô I double team with my wifeGÇ¥.
Let the gun do the talking! |
daddi0
Brooklyn Tax Dodgers
35
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 21:33:00 -
[483] - Quote
Kyle Frost wrote:And yeah, you said they should change the EULA, which brings another very interesting, and somewhat funny question. And please, put those few brain cells together and give me a reply on that one, cause I bet it will be hilarious! What would have happened if they had done exactly that GÇô change the EULA and then proceed to ban AFK complex farmers? That would have been the right thing to do from a legal point of view, yes? Instead of posting some vague, arrogant message in the news column, the next time you start EVE a window pops up GÇô GÇ£The EULA has changed. Please read carefully and indicate that you accept the new terms by clicking AcceptGÇ¥. Everyone has seen the EULA window numerous times. What do 95% of the players do when they see that window GÇô they just scroll to the bottom and click Accept. Hell, I bet thatGÇÖs what you do! (like secretly, when you are not arguing on the forums ) . . . For dessert GÇô you stated, several times I believe, that CCP canGÇÖt be sure if a person is AFK or not. Considering that they have access to all the server side data, thatGÇÖs just not true - not when it concerns greater periods of time. But for the case in question, you donGÇÖt really need an automated bot detector or a CSI team to figure it out, do you? (ok, maybe YOU do). 9 accounts, all registrated to one person, all logged from one IP, online 23/7, all doing the same thing. You think a human can actively play 9 accounts 23/7? Actually, looking back to some of the posts on this thread, I am expecting somebody to jump and say GÇô GÇ£Yeah, I do that on regular basis GÇô I double team with my wifeGÇ¥.
Actually I do read the EULA on every prodcut I buy and use, and expect the vendor to abide by their side of it as well, otherwise I don't accept it. And that's just the problem, just because its possible to determine some of the behavior, you can't be sure of th rest.
Now, back to AFK and determining behavior. Yep, 9 accoutns doing the same thing is pretty easy to figure out, so is the guys standing over the bodey with a smoking gun. Those are not the cases in question, but the more subtle ones. If I only have one account , and perfomr any activity for 18 hours without any keys strokes, am I AFK or just sitting there? And as you have so often pointed out, not every case can be pre-determined, so how do you know which of them is okay. CCP says minitg is okay, what about anything or everything else thatt no one has run across or been caught doing yet?
Hows this for an example, if I dont' respond to you on the forum, did you win, or am I just ignoring you as not worth the effort? How can you tell? Are you sure you shut me up, or did I just assume you're too narrow-minded to see the broader implications of the decisions like this, regardless of any single, specific case.
Maybe this one is easier for you you understand. Since you've already applied derogatory labels, I'll do the same in the example. From everyting I've written can you determine for certain whether I think you're well meaning but witout a broad sense of vision, or just a pompous ass who can't accept the fact that some people are concerned about the impact of events beyond just the current situation. In any case I'm done with the particular thread of discussison , so you can take you pick of the posibilities from the prior example. |
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
13
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 22:35:00 -
[484] - Quote
GÇ£WinningGÇ¥ or driving you off was never my objective. You think I would write one wall of text after another just to GÇ£beat youGÇ¥ in a forum war? And you call me a pompous ass?!
And narrow-minded? Well there is an irony overload! I did try to explain to you just how limited your perspective is, you bringing up the EULA again and again. I asked you a number of simple questions, trying to provoke some basic logic and thinking in you GÇô that didnGÇÖt work, you didnGÇÖt answer a single one. What am I supposed to do next GÇô draw you pictures? Nah, **** that GÇô I donGÇÖt think even electroshock therapy is gonna help you. But hey, you know what GÇô thatGÇÖs your problem. And the really good news is GÇô CCP cares even less than I do. So go ahead and protest this grave injustice as much as you wish. DonGÇÖt give up GÇô the future of EVE is in your hands!
P.S. ItGÇÖs amazing how you skip everything I wrote, even when I directly address and develop scenarios that you brought up. You just go on and on about the same thing like a broken lantern. ItGÇÖs ok bro, donGÇÖt feel bad GÇô IGÇÖve done it too, when I was talking to one of my ex girlfriends. Whatever she said, my reply was GÇô It wasnGÇÖt me.
Let the gun do the talking! |
Zapson
The Companionship Test Alliance Please Ignore
19
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 00:23:00 -
[485] - Quote
Just to state: It is NOT suspicious if a person plays with X accounts simultaniously, since CCP allowed the use of multboxing programs, which states, that you are allowed to project an action on as many accounts as you want, as long as you performed it by yourself. So it's legal to use automation software, if it just helps you to manage multiple accounts while(!) you are in charge of what happens. |
Zapson
The Companionship Test Alliance Please Ignore
19
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 00:29:00 -
[486] - Quote
Kyle Frost wrote:P.S. ItGÇÖs amazing how you skip everything I wrote, even when I directly address and develop scenarios that you brought up. You just go on and on about the same thing like a broken lantern. ItGÇÖs ok bro, donGÇÖt feel bad GÇô IGÇÖve done it too, when I was talking to one of my ex girlfriends. Whatever she said, my reply was GÇô It wasnGÇÖt me.
I honestly don't think you're "scenarios" are worth anything, since they are only examples, never were happening in real or are just plain theory. And we do not need any scenarios, because the point is HOW CCP dealt with the issue. The issue itself isn't the primary element of this discussion. In my opinion it's obvious, that CCP took a slightly harsh / wrong approach to the problem, resulting in massive rampage and unclearness.
Again, no one tries to protect the action of making ISK in an "unfair" way, but we have to properly discuss and define this, instead of rushing.
|
General Xenophon
BLD Holdings Mistakes Were Made.
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 01:20:00 -
[487] - Quote
Dregol wrote:From: http://community.eveonline.com/news/newsFromEve.asp?newsTitle=regarding-afk-complex-farming-1The original post: What exactly is the problem here CCP? A pilot has to /actively/ probe down a complex, the speed at which he or she wants to complete the process shouldn't be measured. You also seem to blatantly ignore the fact that other people can probe these down and complete them while you're AFK boating around. I do find it hilarious, though, that you want to go after complex runners. I'd like to see the numbers of how much isk is generated from plexing, but taking what I presume to be a fairly safe guess, I'd be astonished if it represents more than 1% of the total isk generated in EVE. I mean it's not like you just made it 1000% easier for other professions to do anything AFK. I applaud your effort to remove any AFK actions from the game, but seriously, stop picking on fringe problems, and look at the real problems in EVE.
+1
This is really really a waste of time CCP. Why don't you fix fighters, fix station bugs, fix overview bugs instead of witch hunting people running plexes. McCarthyism much?
You guys are getting better at stuff, but just change the focus to what's really needed. Not this other unhelpful crap. |
Korvin
Shadow Kingdom Best Alliance
350
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 01:23:00 -
[488] - Quote
With all my respect to CCP Sreegs, this situation reminds me that people use a microscope instead of hummer.
You made a tool to detect bots, suddenly you found out, that this tool can accidentally detect a broken part of a game devs should fix, like a deadspace with unbalanced afk income ets. Instead of using this tool to locate this design flaws and polish your game, you still use it as a bad bot detecting system, confusing people with unclear rules they should guess here and there.
Let me give you and example. DED1, (50000 isk an hour if you stay there with your drones all the time and noone else would show up, that is a rare case). Someone just wait a gatekeeper thats spawns each 1-1,5 hours. Suddenly, they fall asleep, or had an emergency call or their fridge broke, forgot about the game and walk away. Or just stay there and sometimes check if a gatekeeper spawned. Your rules says, that they are exploiting, but that is not the case imho.
Just detect and fix those broken parts you find out with your tool, no need to ruin all the rest instead. __________________________________ Member of CSM 4&5 |
daddi0
Brooklyn Tax Dodgers
35
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 03:00:00 -
[489] - Quote
Kyle Frost wrote:GÇ£WinningGÇ¥ or driving you off was never my objective. You think I would write one wall of text after another just to GÇ£beat youGÇ¥ in a forum war? And you call me a pompous ass?!
You just don't get the concept of an abstraction, do you? You defend yourself thinking I attributed some sort of motive to you. What I actually said was that if I did, you couldn't tell if I did or what it was. You are so grounded in the literal words, you can't see the theory behind them. Most of this discussion has nothing whatever to do with the present exploit itself, but the means by which this KIND of behhavior will be discovered, and the reaction to it by CCP.
So, to use your words, let me try one last time to make it very simple. I'm sure other players can come up with better examples but this should do.
A gamer takes his shield tank out to a mining belt, drops off a mining drone and a couple of combat drones. Soon the npc spawns come, get killed by the drones, and then the cycle repeats. Every once in a while he checks to make sure his drones are okay; they are, so nothing is done. Now this isn't very much ISK, but it has the same circumstances as the exploit in question, and will be flagged by the bot-detectors as AFK farming. Before writing,anything, just try to imagine this as an EXAMPLE, and not attack it as an unreasonable situation.
SO what's the problem. I'll put it into simple terms for you:
- This will be flagged by the anti-bot/AFK scanners as the newly defined AFK behavior.
- Even if reviewed by humans, no clear determination can be made.
No problem you say. Well you'd be right except
- we don't know if CCP considers this legal or not
- A sizable population is afraid that CCP will ban first and ask you about it later. Which they apparently have done in this case, since they're reversing them.
- The workings of the ban appeal process sounds like its flawed.
So, in simple terms,
- we have situations that may or may not be "illegal" as far as CCP is concerned
- we don't know what the conditions are that will cause CCP to deem something illegal
- A sizable population has little faith in the manner in which CCP will handle a situation when it arises.
- At least some of the false positive banned players have been unhappy with the way the process took place
While the final solution to this exploit is not unreasonable, CCP has reinforced its past reputation for impulsive, high-handed behavior and further weakened itself in the eyes of many players. You may not care about now, but you will if you ever become one of the false positives. And don't get on a high horse about that never happening to you, because by your own admission, you don't need the rules, you know better than that, the rules are for everyone else:
Kyle Frost wrote: P.S. I never claimed AFK farming is explicitly prohibited by the EULA. I live in Europe and here the EULA doesn't mean jack **** (legally anyway). I've never even read the damn thing. But then again, in most cases I am capable of figuring out what is and what isn't acceptable gameplay without extra help
So, you just click ACCEPT on every new set of rules of gameplay, and then ignore them because your judgement is better than that anyway. Just don't look for any simpathy if CCP decides it isn't.
Better let the gun do the thinking too. |
Budsin Adar
CCP's Secret Services
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 04:06:00 -
[490] - Quote
The Major issue is the people that are Bot mining in systems and you come back on late at night and they are still there and they go for 23 hrs a day and there is some in fleets of 6 Yes i know who they are its 1 corp 1 person now to get bot miners out of the game. We don't say they should be banned because they come back ... My idea is to hurt them make them show up as NPC's if they want to play this way then when they get into structure they pop out and we get the ships and no Concord or we blow them up and take the ore and what have ya. this plan is better i think CCP Let me know Peace everyone and anyone who is doing it watch out you may have no time codes to pay for loss of ships that will make alot of people happy Cheers o/
|
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
181
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 04:49:00 -
[491] - Quote
Korvin wrote:With all my respect to CCP Sreegs, this situation reminds me that people sometimes use a microscope instead of a hummer.
You made a tool to detect bots, suddenly you found out, that this tool can accidentally detect a broken part of a game devs should fix, like a deadspace with unbalanced afk income ets. Instead of using this tool to locate this design flaws and polish your game, you still use it as a bad bot detecting system, confusing people with unclear rules they should guess here and there.
Let me give you and example. DED1, (50000 isk an hour if you stay there with your drones all the time and noone else would show up, that is a rare case). Someone just wait a gatekeeper thats spawns each 1-1,5 hours. Suddenly, they fall asleep, or had an emergency call or their fridge broke, forgot about the game and walk away. Or just stay there and sometimes check if a gatekeeper spawned. Your rules says, that they are exploiting, but that is not the case imho.
Just detect and fix those broken parts you find out with your tool, no need to ruin all the rest instead.
1. he said design will be looking into it here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1770620#post1770620
Quote:The activity we ARE discussing is identical in every aspect other than involving a 3rd party piece of software to botting. Therefore, until Design can fix it we are not giving people passes when the sensors are tripped. 2. it is a lot more than 50,000 isk/hour in the right spots, protip: the first room of a 1/10 is not the correct spot. |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
181
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 05:10:00 -
[492] - Quote
daddi0 wrote:You just don't get the concept of an abstraction, do you? You defend yourself thinking I attributed some sort of motive to you. What I actually said was that if I did, you couldn't tell if I did or what it was. You are so grounded in the literal words, you can't see the theory behind them. Most of this discussion has nothing whatever to do with the present exploit itself, but the means by which this KIND of behhavior will be discovered, and the reaction to it by CCP. So, to use your words, let me try one last time to make it very simple. I'm sure other players can come up with better examples but this should do. A gamer takes his shield tank out to a mining belt, drops off a mining drone and a couple of combat drones. Soon the npc spawns come, get killed by the drones, and then the cycle repeats. Every once in a while he checks to make sure his drones are okay; they are, so nothing is done. Now this isn't very much ISK, but it has the same circumstances as the exploit in question, and will be flagged by the bot-detectors as AFK farming. Before writing,anything, just try to imagine this as an EXAMPLE, and not attack it as an unreasonable situation. SO what's the problem. I'll put it into simple terms for you:
- This will be flagged by the anti-bot/AFK scanners as the newly defined AFK behavior.
- Even if reviewed by humans, no clear determination can be made.
No problem you say. Well you'd be right except
- we don't know if CCP considers this legal or not
- A sizable population is afraid that CCP will ban first and ask you about it later. Which they apparently have done in this case, since they're reversing them.
- The workings of the ban appeal process sounds like its flawed.
So, in simple terms,
- we have situations that may or may not be "illegal" as far as CCP is concerned
- we don't know what the conditions are that will cause CCP to deem something illegal
- A sizable population has little faith in the manner in which CCP will handle a situation when it arises.
- At least some of the false positive banned players have been unhappy with the way the process took place
While the final solution to this exploit is not unreasonable, CCP has reinforced its past reputation for impulsive, high-handed behavior and further weakened itself in the eyes of many players. You may not care about now, but you will if you ever become one of the false positives. And don't get on a high horse about that never happening to you, because by your own admission, you don't need the rules, you know better than that, the rules are for everyone else: Kyle Frost wrote: P.S. I never claimed AFK farming is explicitly prohibited by the EULA. I live in Europe and here the EULA doesn't mean jack **** (legally anyway). I've never even read the damn thing. But then again, in most cases I am capable of figuring out what is and what isn't acceptable gameplay without extra help
So, you just click ACCEPT on every new set of rules of gameplay, and then ignore them because your judgement is better than that anyway. Just don't look for any simpathy if CCP decides it isn't. Better let the gun do the thinking too.
I thought I had little faith in ccp but **** you guys are relentless. Your example is like finding a five dollar bill on the ground, where what has been deemed "Sploits!" would have been like finding a box with $100,000 in it. there is a very large difference that people are just unable/unwilling to understand. if a miner falls asleep with their drones out first I doubt the bounty gains will be large enough to trigger the bot detection, and second it would be infrequent enough to warrant action, or cause detection.
Sreegs said that it was pretty much limited to a COSMOS plex or two.
CCP Sreegs wrote:It was edited once because people misinterpreted my comments to mean that we were banning activity that we aren't. This seems to still be the case. There is a very specific situation which caused this detection which is essentially warping into a particular cosmos plex at downtime, dropping your sentry drones, applying reps to them then leaving your computer until the next downtime. This is possible because in that particular room the drones respawn.
This is going on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. That is bad. If you haven't already heard from us then to date you haven't been doing it. However, there have been cases where people HAVE been doing this and complained that there was no announcement put out about it. Here is the announcement.
This potentially impacts more than the one COSMOS plex which is why the specific COSMOS plex was not mentioned in the OP. Were I to mention it then they would move to a new plex and we'd be dealing with the same rage from them because THIS IS A DIFFERENT PLEX. |
Xel Set
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
4
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 05:45:00 -
[493] - Quote
Not that I struggle with either of these issues, but.....
why should consequence-free, afk generation of isk in complexes be any less valid than consequence-free denial of isk generation via afk-cloaky camping? |
Sjugar
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
47
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 06:18:00 -
[494] - Quote
I can't see how this is any different from AFK cloaking 23/7 in a system.
23/7 doing complexes while not at your computer: playing the game while not playing the game. 23/7 disrupting a system while not at your computer: playing the game while not playing the game. |
Ensign X
58
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 06:35:00 -
[495] - Quote
Xel Set wrote:Not that I struggle with either of these issues, but.....
why should consequence-free, afk generation of isk in complexes be any less valid than consequence-free denial of isk generation via afk-cloaky camping?
AFK cloakers are no danger to anybody, because they are AFK. YOU make the decision to hide in your POS or station or whatever. Why should CCP hold your hand while you PVE just because some random dude is AFK in your system?
Sjugar wrote:I can't see how this is any different from AFK cloaking 23/7 in a system.
23/7 doing complexes while not at your computer: playing the game while not playing the game. 23/7 disrupting a system while not at your computer: playing the game while not playing the game.
How is somebody who is AFK, generating zero ISK and not being a danger to anybody "disrupting a system"? If they're AFK you have nothing to worry about. If they're not AFK that means they're playing the game. And how does any of this relate to the very specific activity that's been mentioned in the announcement and this thread? Find one of the dozen AFK Cloaker whine threads elsewhere and latch onto that instead of derailing this thread. |
Sjugar
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
47
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 06:43:00 -
[496] - Quote
Ensign X wrote:Xel Set wrote:Not that I struggle with either of these issues, but.....
why should consequence-free, afk generation of isk in complexes be any less valid than consequence-free denial of isk generation via afk-cloaky camping? AFK cloakers are no danger to anybody, because they are AFK. YOU make the decision to hide in your POS or station or whatever. Why should CCP hold your hand while you PVE just because some random dude is AFK in your system? Sjugar wrote:I can't see how this is any different from AFK cloaking 23/7 in a system.
23/7 doing complexes while not at your computer: playing the game while not playing the game. 23/7 disrupting a system while not at your computer: playing the game while not playing the game. How is somebody who is AFK, generating zero ISK and not being a danger to anybody "disrupting a system"? If they're AFK you have nothing to worry about. If they're not AFK that means they're playing the game. And how does any of this relate to the very specific activity that's been mentioned in the announcement and this thread? Find one of the dozen AFK Cloaker whine threads elsewhere and latch onto that instead of derailing this thread. Here's the standard AFK cloaker argument.
Well. If the cloaker is there he is very dangerous and you should stay docked. Now he is on 23/7 and you can never know if he's there so you need to treat the situation as if he's there all the time otherwise you WILL lose your ship. So: the cloaker is disrupting operations 23/7.
|
Ensign X
58
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 06:56:00 -
[497] - Quote
Sjugar wrote:Here's the standard AFK cloaker argument.
Well. If the cloaker is there he is very dangerous and you should stay docked. Now he is on 23/7 and you can never know if he's there so you need to treat the situation as if he's there all the time otherwise you WILL lose your ship. So: the cloaker is disrupting operations 23/7.
So what you're actually saying is that people in Nullsec are so terrified of people who are AFK that they will hide inside their stations and POSes when they aren't whining about it on the forums? Wow. That's pretty sad. I thought you nullbears were a lot harder than that. Yo, I heard you can safely go about your business in highsec without cowering in station whenever somebody is cloaked while AFK. Maybe that's where you belong.
And, besides, what does that have anything to do with an announcement and warning about people who were exploiting a broken (and "soonGäó" to be fixed) highsec complex mechanic? Couldn't you resurrect one of the dozen AFK Cloaker tears threads rather than attempting to derail this one? It boggles the mind... |
Kyle Frost
Atlantean Defense Fleet In Umbra Mortis
13
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 09:03:00 -
[498] - Quote
Zapson wrote:Kyle Frost wrote:P.S. ItGÇÖs amazing how you skip everything I wrote, even when I directly address and develop scenarios that you brought up. You just go on and on about the same thing like a broken lantern. ItGÇÖs ok bro, donGÇÖt feel bad GÇô IGÇÖve done it too, when I was talking to one of my ex girlfriends. Whatever she said, my reply was GÇô It wasnGÇÖt me. I honestly don't think you're "scenarios" are worth anything, since they are only examples, never were happening in real or are just plain theory. And we do not need any scenarios, because the point is HOW CCP dealt with the issue. The issue itself isn't the primary element of this discussion.In my opinion it's obvious, that CCP took a slightly harsh / wrong approach to the problem, resulting in massive rampage and unclearness. Again, no one tries to protect the action of making ISK in an "unfair" way, but we have to properly discuss and define this, instead of rushing.
You didnGÇÖt actually read any of my examples/scenarios, did you? Well I hope you at least remember your own words GÇô I have underlined the interesting part, just in case.
The main point is how CCP dealt with the issue, not the issue itself GÇô your words. One of the posters kept focusing on that, stating several times how unjust/unfair CCPGÇÖs approach is, because there were no actual EULA violations. That person suggested, that CCP change the EULA outright, before taking any actions against players. So I asked him GÇô what would have happened if CCP did exactly that, change the EULA and then ban/penalize players. And he ignored me completely.
You are not happy with the way CCP handled things GÇô ban accounts/outlaw certain tactics and then make announcement after the fact (even though they lifted the bans). So how about if they had done the reverse? Make an announcement and outlaw the specific AFK tactic with one action - changing the EULA - and then proceed with the bans. Think that would have been better? ItGÇÖs a simple question.
And letGÇÖs be realistic GÇô there is no massive rampage here, pleaseGǪ not even a tiny, baby rampage . Just some people who canGÇÖt read.
Let the gun do the talking! |
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
31
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 09:54:00 -
[499] - Quote
Sjugar wrote:I can't see how this is any different from AFK cloaking 23/7 in a system.
23/7 doing complexes while not at your computer: playing the game while not playing the game. 23/7 disrupting a system while not at your computer: playing the game while not playing the game.
Remove local.... problem solved |
Challu
Wishful Desires Inc. Armada Assail
52
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 10:05:00 -
[500] - Quote
TheSkeptic wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote: What is not reasonable is the snarky and sarcastic attitude. Sreegs you are addressing your customers not you're friends or team mates. A certain level of professionalism is expected when you release news with such strong implications to your customer base. Your ability to communicate in a non-aggressive manner can be the difference between a smooth patching period and a public relations "**** storm" as has been so specifically discriptive of this particular incident.
There is nothing wrong with Sreegs attitude tbh. The real issue lies in people have reading and comprehension skills comparitable to that of roadkill. People raised their initial concerns. Clarification was provided. Then page after page saw the same stupid posts with the same questions that had already been previously answered. If anything he has done a good job to keep replying to all the ragers.
This, tbqfh.
The :dense: in this thread is truly mindboggling.
|
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
181
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 10:08:00 -
[501] - Quote
Challu wrote:TheSkeptic wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote: What is not reasonable is the snarky and sarcastic attitude. Sreegs you are addressing your customers not you're friends or team mates. A certain level of professionalism is expected when you release news with such strong implications to your customer base. Your ability to communicate in a non-aggressive manner can be the difference between a smooth patching period and a public relations "**** storm" as has been so specifically discriptive of this particular incident.
There is nothing wrong with Sreegs attitude tbh. The real issue lies in people have reading and comprehension skills comparitable to that of roadkill. People raised their initial concerns. Clarification was provided. Then page after page saw the same stupid posts with the same questions that had already been previously answered. If anything he has done a good job to keep replying to all the ragers. This, tbqfh. The :dense: in this thread is truly mindboggling.
yeap, I mean at worst I can only fault him for being a bit blunt in one of his later replies. |
daddi0
Brooklyn Tax Dodgers
35
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 15:01:00 -
[502] - Quote
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:I thought I had little faith in ccp but **** you guys are relentless. Your example is like finding a five dollar bill on the ground, where what has been deemed "Sploits!" would have been like finding a box with $100,000 in it. there is a very large difference that people are just unable/unwilling to understand. if a miner falls asleep with their drones out first I doubt the bounty gains will be large enough to trigger the bot detection, and second it would be infrequent enough to warrant action, or cause detection. Sreegs said that it was pretty much limited to a COSMOS plex or two. CCP Sreegs wrote:It was edited once because people misinterpreted my comments to mean that we were banning activity that we aren't. This seems to still be the case. There is a very specific situation which caused this detection which is essentially warping into a particular cosmos plex at downtime, dropping your sentry drones, applying reps to them then leaving your computer until the next downtime. This is possible because in that particular room the drones respawn.
This is going on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. That is bad. If you haven't already heard from us then to date you haven't been doing it. However, there have been cases where people HAVE been doing this and complained that there was no announcement put out about it. Here is the announcement.
This potentially impacts more than the one COSMOS plex which is why the specific COSMOS plex was not mentioned in the OP. Were I to mention it then they would move to a new plex and we'd be dealing with the same rage from them because THIS IS A DIFFERENT PLEX.
In general I agree with you. The problem is the in-between areas and CCP's patterns of behavior. This is not a discusion whether exploits should be illegal, or if this particular instance is even an exploit. Its about how exploits get defined and how CCP treats its paying customers when it decides to classify any particular behavior as unacceptable.
In this game we're SUPPOSED to find boxes occasionally, its not like walking on the street where boxes of money don't usually exist. So, If I find a $100 box, is that intended, or an exploit?? WHERE IS the line? If I suddenly get consistently good drops in exploration, am I lucky, or did I find an exploit?
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. 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.
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. 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.
|
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1029
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 15:28:00 -
[503] - 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... |
Georgiy Giggle
REFORD Division REFORD
57
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 18:32:00 -
[504] - Quote
Suqq Madiq wrote:Georgiy Giggle wrote:Bring a balance to game between real players and bots, instead of beating REAL players only!!! You think these players who park their Sentry ships in PLEXes 23hrs / day, 7days / week are real players. That's your problem. They're no better than bots and deserve to be banned.
Still, there are players that play same way while they ARE near keyboard. Ban your brain! Not mastering proprieties, won't become firmly established. - Confucius |
daddi0
Brooklyn Tax Dodgers
35
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 18:49:00 -
[505] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:daddi0 wrote: 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? Sorry, I don't, that's why I said "seems". It's just my feeling from reading the forums over the years, that this has happened in the past. There is room for me to be mistaken about that. The immediate fact is that it did happen this time, and it seems that people have the feeling it can happen again. That appears to be the "fear" people have about these kinds of actions, not fear of being banned for known violations, that's a given and a good thing. Its fear of being sanctioned for something that up until now was not considered illegal or at all.
War Kitten wrote:daddi0 wrote: 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.
And this is where the discussion has its focus and we are each entitled to an opinion. There hasn't been, as far as I know, any prior statement that AFK income generation of itself is (or is going to be) considered for a bannable offense; it some senses, it can't be, since PI, trade, and other activities are exactly that. Bots are by definition outside mechanisms that allow a user to be AFK while performing some useful function. This was a simple use of the game mechanics. While that may well be an exploit, until it is so defined, the users should not be deemed criminals and summarily banned. They CAN be penalized or stripped of their gains, as in the recent LP exploit, and then banned if they continue.
The other issue in the discussion is when this pattern becomes an unacceptable exploit. If I set up this complex in a non-optimal way so it cannot survive completely AFK, start it in the morning, and remote into it while at work, checking on it periodically, and making adjustments, so that I only spend 20-30 minutes of effort over a 12-15 hour period but am not AFK, is that an exploit or is it a mining-like pattern that is acceptable?
As a side note, my understanding of "good" bots is that they don't behave in this fashion when single-boxing the game. Bots are meant to perform the necessary interventions that usually require being at the keyboard. They only become obvious when multi-boxing, or over long analysis periods. I have no problem with bots that are detected and banned.
War Kitten wrote: 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.
I think we're pretty much in agreement here. Its just my feeling that the community wants somewhat better communication of what the rules are, especially when they change, and to have a better feeling about the appeals process for those players trapped as false positives.
I agree with you, if the game changes outweigh the enjoyment received from the game, its time to quit. That's the rational choice we each must make.
Thank you for well thought out and presented discussion points, Its a welcome change. |
Lanalore Taim
Bob Hope Foundation Yulai Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 20:35:00 -
[506] - Quote
What I would like to know is what gives CCP the authority to declare what is more than "humanly capable" as far as gameplay is concerned. I remember when Starcraft came out and individuals would literally play for 36+ hours straight. I worked in the world's largest casino. An atmosphere where it was commonplace to see the same person at the same slot machine when I left my shift as when I had began 12 hours prior. Until they are running physicals on their subscribers and show me a medical degree they are completely full of it.
Next issue... Hmm. Let's see. Automated systems detecting afkers. Anyone else see an issue here? Perhaps show you care about the players, maybe perform something in this game with some integrity for once. Have GMs message players who are suspected of afk isking. If said players respond within, oh say 5-10mins, they aren't afking. Oh wait, MMOs have only been doing that since the inception of UO in 1997. But no, you go ahead and ban people who you can't prove are afk, by using afk non-human intelligence monitoring sytems? Complete and utter hypocrisy. Rather use an automated ban hammer than take the time to find out for yourselves what is going on? But who cares, eve already has their subscription money right?
And really, let's just be completely honest for a minute. BS in HS? Unlimited spawning complexes in HS? You deserve to be taken advantage of. CCP needs to ban themselves after this hoax. |
Lady Zarrina
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
39
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 22:03:00 -
[507] - Quote
Wow I would hate to be Sreegs. Bad enough you have to try to hunt down people who play outside of the rules. Then you have to answer to every tom **** and harry to help ease their simple minds they will not incorrectly get banned. Use common sense FFS. Allocate resources to FiS |
Xel Set
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
4
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 22:34:00 -
[508] - Quote
Ensign X wrote:Xel Set wrote:Not that I struggle with either of these issues, but.....
why should consequence-free, afk generation of isk in complexes be any less valid than consequence-free denial of isk generation via afk-cloaky camping? AFK cloakers are no danger to anybody, because they are AFK. YOU make the decision to hide in your POS or station or whatever. Why should CCP hold your hand while you PVE just because some random dude is AFK in your system? Sjugar wrote:I can't see how this is any different from AFK cloaking 23/7 in a system.
23/7 doing complexes while not at your computer: playing the game while not playing the game. 23/7 disrupting a system while not at your computer: playing the game while not playing the game. How is somebody who is AFK, generating zero ISK and not being a danger to anybody "disrupting a system"? If they're AFK you have nothing to worry about. If they're not AFK that means they're playing the game. And how does any of this relate to the very specific activity that's been mentioned in the announcement and this thread? Find one of the dozen AFK Cloaker whine threads elsewhere and latch onto that instead of derailing this thread.
You've missed the point. CCP is on the record, extensively, stating they intend for the game to be played actively and for consequences to exist for any activity. AFK cloaking is not playing the game, it's the opposite, and the player faces no consequences for using going afk to game the system. Cracking down on afk-plexers without fixing AFK cloaky income disruption is a hypocritical double-standard and CCP's activity with afk plexing spotlights that point.
Despite your desperation to frame the argument as one where I'm asking to have my hand held, it's actually your own poopy diaper that needs to be changed. I AFK cloak my own enemies so long as the rules allow it. That doesn't mean I fail to recognize or support a broken game mechanic when I see it, while your own monochromatic gameplay apparently relies upon a faulty premise. Cry about it some more. |
Ensign X
64
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 00:16:00 -
[509] - Quote
Xel Set wrote:You've missed the point. CCP is on the record, extensively, stating they intend for the game to be played actively and for consequences to exist for any activity. AFK cloaking is not playing the game, it's the opposite, and the player faces no consequences for using going afk to game the system. Cracking down on afk-plexers without fixing AFK cloaky income disruption is a hypocritical double-standard and CCP's activity with afk plexing spotlights that point.
Despite your desperation to frame the argument as one where I'm asking to have my hand held, it's actually your own poopy diaper that needs to be changed. I AFK cloak my own enemies so long as the rules allow it. That doesn't mean I fail to recognize or support a broken game mechanic when I see it, while your own monochromatic gameplay apparently relies upon a faulty premise. Cry about it some more.
You're the idiot crying here. Don't forget that.
CCP has never said and will never say that AFK cloaking is a problem in EVE because it irrefutably is not. Yet, instead of taking your tears into one of the dozen joke threads about this non-existent issue, you bring it here to a thread which has absolutely nothing, zero, nada, zilch to do with AFK cloaking.
That you or anybody else is so terrified of somebody who is cloaked while AFK in a system that it shuts down all PVE speaks volumes about the cowardice of these people and suggests that they should, instead, spend their time within the safe confines of Highsec.
In your own words, "AFK cloaking is not playing the game". How can anybody possibly be a danger to you or force the shutdown of ISK generation if they're not playing the game unless it's your own cowardice that forces you to consider somebody who isn't at their keyboard or even playing the game a threat. That's. Just. Pathetic. |
Xel Set
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
4
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 00:43:00 -
[510] - Quote
Ensign X wrote:Xel Set wrote:You've missed the point. CCP is on the record, extensively, stating they intend for the game to be played actively and for consequences to exist for any activity. AFK cloaking is not playing the game, it's the opposite, and the player faces no consequences for using going afk to game the system. Cracking down on afk-plexers without fixing AFK cloaky income disruption is a hypocritical double-standard and CCP's activity with afk plexing spotlights that point.
Despite your desperation to frame the argument as one where I'm asking to have my hand held, it's actually your own poopy diaper that needs to be changed. I AFK cloak my own enemies so long as the rules allow it. That doesn't mean I fail to recognize or support a broken game mechanic when I see it, while your own monochromatic gameplay apparently relies upon a faulty premise. Cry about it some more. You're the idiot crying here. Don't forget that. CCP has never said and will never say that AFK cloaking is a problem in EVE because it irrefutably is not. Yet, instead of taking your tears into one of the dozen joke threads about this non-existent issue, you bring it here to a thread which has absolutely nothing, zero, nada, zilch to do with AFK cloaking. That you or anybody else is so terrified of somebody who is cloaked while AFK in a system that it shuts down all PVE speaks volumes about the cowardice of these people and suggests that they should, instead, spend their time within the safe confines of Highsec. In your own words, "AFK cloaking is not playing the game". How can anybody possibly be a danger to you or force the shutdown of ISK generation if they're not playing the game unless it's your own cowardice that forces you to consider somebody who isn't at their keyboard or even playing the game a threat. That's. Just. Pathetic.
|
|
Ensign X
65
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 00:48:00 -
[511] - Quote
You've quoted my post while adding nothing to it, so I can only consider you in full agreement with me and this issue as settled. Thank you for your contribution. |
Xel Set
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
4
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 00:54:00 -
[512] - Quote
Ensign X wrote:Xel Set wrote:You've missed the point. CCP is on the record, extensively, stating they intend for the game to be played actively and for consequences to exist for any activity. AFK cloaking is not playing the game, it's the opposite, and the player faces no consequences for using going afk to game the system. Cracking down on afk-plexers without fixing AFK cloaky income disruption is a hypocritical double-standard and CCP's activity with afk plexing spotlights that point.
Despite your desperation to frame the argument as one where I'm asking to have my hand held, it's actually your own poopy diaper that needs to be changed. I AFK cloak my own enemies so long as the rules allow it. That doesn't mean I fail to recognize or support a broken game mechanic when I see it, while your own monochromatic gameplay apparently relies upon a faulty premise. Cry about it some more. You're the idiot crying here. Don't forget that. CCP has never said and will never say that AFK cloaking is a problem in EVE because it irrefutably is not. Yet, instead of taking your tears into one of the dozen joke threads about this non-existent issue, you bring it here to a thread which has absolutely nothing, zero, nada, zilch to do with AFK cloaking. That you or anybody else is so terrified of somebody who is cloaked while AFK in a system that it shuts down all PVE speaks volumes about the cowardice of these people and suggests that they should, instead, spend their time within the safe confines of Highsec. In your own words, "AFK cloaking is not playing the game". How can anybody possibly be a danger to you or force the shutdown of ISK generation if they're not playing the game unless it's your own cowardice that forces you to consider somebody who isn't at their keyboard or even playing the game a threat. That's. Just. Pathetic.
Wow, thatGÇÖs a whole lot of butthurt. Your total failure to address any of the obviously salient issues I raised, your persistently desperate deflections, and your inarticulate inability to address my rhetoric without exposing ineptitude through almost exclusive reliance on emotionally charged accusation: they all speak volumes about the maturity behind the reasoning of your GÇ£argumentGÇ¥.
As such, IGÇÖm going to let my argument stand and speak for itself. CCP does not intend for their game to be played AFK, and no amount of your frothing at the mouth can override that very simple truth, which is exactly why you donGÇÖt even try. IGÇÖm finished with you and enjoying how miserably you unhesitatingly represent yourself to the entire Eve community impotent impotent, insubstantial, poorly reasoned forum raging. IGÇÖm sure your apoplectic need to respond will be equally entertaining. U so mad, lol.
|
Wuxi Wuxilla
The Tuskers
42
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 01:11:00 -
[513] - Quote
Xel Set wrote:
Wow, thatGÇÖs a whole lot of butthurt. Your total failure to address any of the obviously salient issues I raised, your persistently desperate deflections, and your inarticulate inability to address my rhetoric without exposing ineptitude through almost exclusive reliance on emotionally charged accusation: they all speak volumes about the maturity behind the reasoning of your GÇ£argumentGÇ¥.
As such, IGÇÖm going to let my argument stand and speak for itself. CCP does not intend for their game to be played AFK, and no amount of your frothing at the mouth can override that very simple truth, which is exactly why you donGÇÖt even try. IGÇÖm finished with you and enjoying how miserably you unhesitatingly represent yourself to the entire Eve community with impotent, insubstantial, poorly reasoned forum raging. IGÇÖm sure your apoplectic need to respond will be equally entertaining. But keep telling yourself that you're not the idiot. U so mad, lol.
After this post I'm pretty sure I know who is mad and it's not him.
|
FuzzyWuzzy WasACareBear
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 03:54:00 -
[514] - Quote
Dregol wrote:Pisov viet wrote: Then MAYBE the problem is CCP placing NPC battleships to kill in highsec. .
Pretty much just this. It'd be great if while "fixing" these complexes if they "accidentally" moved all level 3/4 agents to low/null sec.
ROFL...lowsec ganker scumbags have been rubbing themselves wanting this for years now......CCP isnt stupid. |
Rinko the Salvager
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 04:05:00 -
[515] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:cheese monkey wrote:Sreegs... Before you alienate your entire player/customer base i suggest you withdraw this and have a think a bit longer. The mere fact that u have edited it 3 times is negligence at best! Its ok to admit you were wrong and say sorry. If anything doing so would GAIN you some respect. It was edited once because people misinterpreted my comments to mean that we were banning activity that we aren't. This seems to still be the case. There is a very specific situation which caused this detection which is essentially warping into a particular cosmos plex at downtime, dropping your sentry drones, applying reps to them then leaving your computer until the next downtime. This is possible because in that particular room the drones respawn. This is going on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. That is bad. If you haven't already heard from us then to date you haven't been doing it. However, there have been cases where people HAVE been doing this and complained that there was no announcement put out about it. Here is the announcement. This potentially impacts more than the one COSMOS plex which is why the specific COSMOS plex was not mentioned in the OP. Were I to mention it then they would move to a new plex and we'd be dealing with the same rage from them because THIS IS A DIFFERENT PLEX.
Jesus christ, the news post didn't clear this out until I read this thread half way to read this specific post. Please update your news post to make sure everyone reading the post understands that this refers to "COSMOS" complex. This was very very upsetting news to us all, and the way you have been continuously clarifying in this thread shows how little you understand the way your news post is read and understood.
Please CLARIFY more! |
BigCynoBoom
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 04:23:00 -
[516] - Quote
I can't see how this is an exploit, CCP ******* things up as usual.
If it only takes a few locking your drones up and putting reps on them to do this effectively then you can't criticize people for doing it and leaving. They already bought the ship, put it together and found a Cosmos to farm not much left to do for 23 hours except jerk off at your computer. |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
332
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 05:59:00 -
[517] - Quote
"going to do your laundry"? um excuse me.. but putting in a load of laundry doesn't take 23 hours. I have consistantly done my laundry three minutes at a time for years because of mining cycle time.
If the person is going to their bed and sleeping that's a different story but you can drop sentries and sit there with your eyes glued to your monitor and accomplsih the same thing.
I think you are nit-picking here CCP.. If I were you I would be very careful accusing people of being AFK in a game where AFK activity is very much part of the norm, (skill training, contract and market orders, PI, moon mining, sitting in station doing nothing, freighting on autopilot, and to a much lesser degree regular mining.) [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG] |
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
31
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 06:23:00 -
[518] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote:"going to do your laundry"? um excuse me.. but putting in a load of laundry doesn't take 23 hours. I have consistantly done my laundry three minutes at a time for years because of mining cycle time.
If the person is going to their bed and sleeping that's a different story but you can drop sentries and sit there with your eyes glued to your monitor and accomplsih the same thing.
I think you are nit-picking here CCP.. If I were you I would be very careful accusing people of being AFK in a game where AFK activity is very much part of the norm, (skill training, contract and market orders, PI, moon mining, sitting in station doing nothing, freighting on autopilot, and to a much lesser degree regular mining.) Sounds to me like you are joining the tin foil hat folks that claim that "afk" is any activity engaged in where you do not toucvh the keyboard regardless of your presence in the seat.
PS BTW.. "afk" cloaking is not an issue. if you are absent you are no threat and cannot do anything, making money or otherwise, in game. I've always said that the cloaking nerf-herders are really all about nerfing the non "afk" cloakers.
If only you didn't AFK your way through the previous 25 pages of this thread.... you might have posted something new and relevant then. |
Hazen Koraka
HK Enterprises
31
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 07:37:00 -
[519] - Quote
They might wanna look at the same for the static DED complexes in hisec... always some people camping the last rooms in these complexes 24/7 - for an example, just look at Autama... 2/10 |
Samroski
Games Inc.
68
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 07:43:00 -
[520] - Quote
Subrahmaya Chandrasekhar wrote:Not sure how relevant my little note here is, so take it with a grain of salt:
I recently read that sitting for extended periods of time shortens your lifespan - anything over a few hours a day - and that the shortening can be as much as quitting smoking can add to your life. There was also a headline somewhere about some Koreans gaming online ... they just keep playing and playing until they literally die in front of their computers, I guess.
So maybe we should all try to limit the time we play. I have played for 18 hours a day on numerous occasions, and I know it's bad for me. I nod off too, anywhere from a second on up to much longer periods of time. Frankly, I'm addicted, and to Eve in particular. It's funny, but it's not funny, if you know what I mean.
(I used to be in good shape, I've run the Boston marathon 3 times, but over the years I've been playing this game I've gradually become less and less fit. Obviously it's my fault. No fate but what we make, as Sarah Connor said.) You need to get back to using the monitor-on-the-treadmill routine that you used 3 years ago when you were transporting minerals for my freighter from minmitar to caldari space. What folly, but healthy nevertheless :) |
|
ManiakMogg
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 13:39:00 -
[521] - Quote
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... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1031
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 14:34:00 -
[522] - 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... |
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
32
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 15:03:00 -
[523] - 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...
Please biomass your main |
ManiakMogg
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 16:49:00 -
[524] - Quote
Oh god, im lazy to fight stupidity again. EDIT : and so i wont, stay in your ****. |
Eleanor of Aquitaine
Mysterious Island 0001
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 19:52:00 -
[525] - Quote
I can feel the hate in this thread. On all sides.
Do you see what happens when an employee interacts badly with customers? *********************************************** The customer is king.-á Long live the king! |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1032
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 19:58:00 -
[526] - 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. |
Zapson
The Companionship Test Alliance Please Ignore
23
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 21:15:00 -
[527] - Quote
For those stating people as cowards, because they see a potential thread in AFK cloakers.
They are called AFK cloakers because most of the time they are AFK, which does not imply that they are not any thread, because any moment they could come back and catch you. |
Templar Knightsbane
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 23:10:00 -
[528] - Quote
Sad thread to read through tbh |
|
ISD TYPE40
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
101
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 01:41:00 -
[529] - Quote
First of all, people need to read this.
CCP Sreegs wrote:Dregol wrote:
If you'd take the time to read this thread, you'd realize that there was a broken complex whereby people could AFK and have drones kill respawns 23/7. This is /not/ working as intended. AFKing through something that isn't respawning (regular complexes) is fine. What CCP is addressing is a mechanic whereby you can do nothing for hours on end and continue to make isk.
My point from earlier still stands: isk should not be as easy to make as it is in high sec. I'm glad CCP is actively fixing bugs/broken mechanics, but there are mechanics far more broken than this.
I'm merely going to quote this. It's not going to please everyone and certainly not going to please those who were making isk while going about their lives doing things other than playing EVE actively but at the end of the day we're only referring to situations in THIS PARTICULAR CASE where you could in theory generate isk 24 hours a day without ever touching your computer. This does not apply to every situation you might perhaps maybe possibly use sentry drones in and nobody's going to ban your accounts because you went to get a cup of coffee. There were however cases where this was being abused and so we're stating publically that abusing it is wrong and from this point forward the automated systems will handle it. Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong
With that done, please ensure that any question you ask is relevant to THIS particular issue. CCP Sreegs has made it quite clear that his news story ONLY affects one particular form of AFK'ing and which one is mentioned quite clearly in the post he chose to quote.
Feel free to ask your questions, but remember that these forums operate with certain rules which can be found here, please make sure that when you post, you post following these rules.
I have cleaned this thread of as many off topic, trolling and personal attack posts as I can without completely destroying the thread; however if this behaviour continues I will lock it. While it is clear that many people are upset over this subject, please remember to post responsibly so that a proper discussion can take place and we can have a set of forums that we can all be proud of. Thank you for taking the time to read this, it is appreciated - ISD Type40. ISD Type40 Ensign Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Fyrr Deerdan
Envoy Corps Holdings
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 02:22:00 -
[530] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Clearly the news item wasn't clear enough about that so I've had it edited.
And thanks for clarifying. The original news piece was worrying, but the addendum was downright hilarious
|
|
Acteon Hunt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 03:11:00 -
[531] - Quote
Sreegs, the only issue here is really the haziness of the article, even after the edits. Obviously, you know what you were trying to say, so it reads perfectly clear to you, but for everyone else, there's too little detail, and all it comes across as is "AFK PVE is now bannable," even though that wasn't even close to the intent.
Trust me, over explaining is better than being ambiguous. Fill that sucker up with detail and let us know exactly what is and isn't a bannable offense. Give us the exact scenario, the respawning COSMOS missions, that is considered an exploit so that we know you aren't just ban hammering everyon who goes to do their laundry without logging.
Ex: "There is a specific set of static complexes, such as the COSMOS plexes, that will constantly respawn rats. AFK farming these for days on end is considered an exploit, and is, from this point on, a bannable offense. This does not effect regular gameplay."
And while you probably don't want to listen to advice from some random noob on the web, don't get defensive on the forums. It corrodes your image as a dev. If there's anything that could be percieved as argumentative in your post people will assume you're getting all huffy, even when you aren't.
Again, you're probably thinking "Who the hell is this nub to give me advice on being a dev?" You're entitely to think that, I am some random nub, but crystal clarity and some congeniality can prevent pretty much every forum fire.
Take care o/ |
Antigena
Opportunity Cost
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 03:23:00 -
[532] - Quote
not that i'm anyone special, but IMHO, if their solution is to ban then discuss (ie, the player protests and wants their account back, etc), there's a problem. and any "automated" system for banning strikes exactly that worry into the mind of the reader, because such systems cannot have intuition.
if their solution is to try to reason with you and then ban you if you're being a serious problem even though they gave you plenty of chances, then it's fine. but that's far more than what any automated system is capable of. if the "automated" system just flags your account for investigation then fine.
Most dev's i've seen elsewhere in the world dont want to give exact details of the exploit they dont want people to do because then they're just advertising it with instructions for everyone to go do and that's counter productive to their goals.
eventually any company has to realize that the flaws in THEIR product are THEIR responsibility to fix, not the players, or go out of business if fate would so have it.
if they handle this badly, then they will reap the rewards for doing so, otherwise, no problem.
|
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
193
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 05:45:00 -
[533] - Quote
This is clearly an exploit of the game mechanics, all the people who where doing it are now crying about it. Go mining or something. |
Rada Ionesco
Club a Seal
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 08:35:00 -
[534] - Quote
This has been going on forever and I don't see how this is an enforceable issue, or even why CCP thinks it is a problem. Is there some time limit that people have where they can safely be AFK? LOL. I am so glad I am cancelling my third account in a couple days, once again they are focusing on the unimportant and not on the important problems in this game, as usual. Cheers CCP, have fun not fixing your game, again, and again... |
ManiakMogg
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 10:54:00 -
[535] - Quote
ISD TYPE40 wrote:With that done, please ensure that any question you ask is relevant to THIS particular issue. CCP Sreegs has made it quite clear that his news story ONLY affects one particular form of AFK'ing and which one is mentioned quite clearly in the post he chose to quote. Feel free to ask your questions, but remember that these forums operate with certain rules which can be found here, please make sure that when you post, you post following these rules. I have cleaned this thread of as many off topic, trolling and personal attack posts as I can without completely destroying the thread; however if this behaviour continues I will lock it. While it is clear that many people are upset over this subject, please remember to post responsibly so that a proper discussion can take place and we can have a set of forums that we can all be proud of. Thank you for taking the time to read this, it is appreciated - ISD Type40. 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. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1035
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 11:10:00 -
[536] - 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. |
ManiakMogg
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 11:58:00 -
[537] - Quote
War Kitten wrote: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. Its not about the content, its about the form. Btw, what dont you understand in "sounds like"? What a waste of time.
EDIT : Just a line in a patchnote would have been enough "We fixed the plexs allowing afk farming." Flaming sreegs is not required. I think he is just good @ pressing button to make ships blow up in AT. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1039
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 13:06:00 -
[538] - 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. |
ManiakMogg
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 13:24:00 -
[539] - Quote
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. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1039
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 13:42:00 -
[540] - 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. |
|
ManiakMogg
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 14:04:00 -
[541] - Quote
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? |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1041
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 15:08:00 -
[542] - 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. |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
333
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 16:14:00 -
[543] - Quote
TheSkeptic wrote:Barbara Nichole wrote:"going to do your laundry"? um excuse me.. but putting in a load of laundry doesn't take 23 hours. I have consistantly done my laundry three minutes at a time for years because of mining cycle time.
If the person is going to their bed and sleeping that's a different story but you can drop sentries and sit there with your eyes glued to your monitor and accomplsih the same thing.
I think you are nit-picking here CCP.. If I were you I would be very careful accusing people of being AFK in a game where AFK activity is very much part of the norm, (skill training, contract and market orders, PI, moon mining, sitting in station doing nothing, freighting on autopilot, and to a much lesser degree regular mining.) Sounds to me like you are joining the tin foil hat folks that claim that "afk" is any activity engaged in where you do not toucvh the keyboard regardless of your presence in the seat.
PS BTW.. "afk" cloaking is not an issue. if you are absent you are no threat and cannot do anything, making money or otherwise, in game. I've always said that the cloaking nerf-herders are really all about nerfing the non "afk" cloakers. If only you didn't AFK your way through the previous 25 pages of this thread.... you might have posted something new and relevant then.
Did you have something to say? 25 pages? I read some but that is not a requirement to post.. as ccp directed me here to make a comment. but if you must know I probably read about 50%, more than you read of my post. ..though I do admit my post was not directed to in even remotely. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG] |
Zapson
The Companionship Test Alliance Please Ignore
23
|
Posted - 2012.08.14 16:22:00 -
[544] - Quote
This goes out to anyone who quotes the following part from CCP Sreegs: "we are going to fix this issue".
The exact quoute would be:
Quote: Game Design will also be looking at changing our complex systems so that this is no longer possible in the near future
I highly doubt that "Game Design" will really fix this issue or look into it. Why do I think so? Because time has proven that many core game mechanics considered broken or too old, not up2date, or plain and simply annoying haven't been looked into until now, even though most of the player base agrees that there are certain problems. |
Qartie
RED MASHINE UNDEAD.
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 00:32:00 -
[545] - Quote
-» -é-¦-¦ -+-+-+-+-+-¦-Ä, -ç-é-+ -í-í-á -¦-¦-+-¦-¦-é -¦-ü-æ -¦-+-Å -â-+-¦-+-î-ê-¦-+-+-Å -¦-+-+-+-ç-¦-ü-é-¦-¦ -+-+-¦-+-+-ü-ç-+-¦-+-¦... |
Whar Target
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 01:27:00 -
[546] - Quote
Decimat Draconia wrote:I agree that the COSMOS exploit needs to be fixed, lets just keep it to high sec plexes though.
If you afk plex in 0.0 you run the risk of being scanned down and podded - this is the beauty of NULL. Oh this is funny. Deep within territory your alliance controls, it's dangerous to afk bot plexes? I doubt it..
You can probably afford to lose a couple domi's a week and still come out ahead, not that you would even lose that many though. You can't tell players they'll be banned for afk'ing high sec plexes while nullbears have alt accounts botting away. |
Lemming Alpha1dash1
Lemmings Online
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 10:21:00 -
[547] - Quote
Itterate on sub par PVE content and introduce better AI (from wh's) into hisec cosmos plexes and possible missions |
Blue Macaw
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 19:31:00 -
[548] - Quote
Sandbox? +¦_o |
Brokers Clone
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 14:30:00 -
[549] - Quote
Quote:Exploit fixes An exploit has been fixed making the world a better place for all.
Was that so hard? |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
930
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 15:33:00 -
[550] - Quote
Brokers Clone wrote:Quote:Exploit fixes An exploit has been fixed making the world a better place for all. Was that so hard? Was the fix for this issue, or was it something else? And if it was for afk complex farming, what was the fix? http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
|
Marcus Caspius
57
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 05:34:00 -
[551] - Quote
It amazes me that the response from CCP is not OMG sorry guys we fukced-up, there's an exploit that WE created and you were clever enough to figure it out.
While I have huge respect for CCP Sreegs & Co and greatly value their work against botting, I think its time that CCP man-up instead of swinging the 'ban-your-@ss' bat every time THEY screw up and it ends up with undesirable effects.
___
I work in a Software Product Development Environment and the last thing I do is penalise my users for utilising a feature my developers introduced (whether by design or unintentional) that does not have to desired effect.
So, sorry CCP you gotta HTFU and take ownership of your mistakes.
But ... keep banning bots! Grammatical error and spelling mistakes are included for your entertainment!
|
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 07:20:00 -
[552] - Quote
Marcus Caspius wrote: I work in a Software Product Development Environment and the last thing I do is penalise my users for utilising a feature my developers introduced (whether by design or unintentional) that does not have to desired effect.
Guessing you don't write financial software. Probably a good thing.
|
Tenris Anis
Schattenengel Clan
51
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 17:41:00 -
[553] - Quote
Dregol wrote:
The TL;DR of this is there were some creative individuals who were AFKing in complexes 23/7 and generating income whilst not at their computers for extended periods of time. CCP considers this to be an exploit, and will be addressing the problem.
AFKing 23/7 killing respawning rats: exploit AFK missioning/anoming/freightering: not an exploit
And that is part of the problem. AFK anoms, freightering, mining (ffs, ice mining for real?) and missions are designed to be done while afk. This may be nice for developers who can play this way eve and still develope eve at the same time, it is kinda a boring thing for the rest of us, who would prefer not to play eve at work, but instead play eve after work. Still the game is build around those activities. |
Marcus Caspius
57
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 20:26:00 -
[554] - Quote
TheSkeptic wrote:Marcus Caspius wrote: I work in a Software Product Development Environment and the last thing I do is penalise my users for utilising a feature my developers introduced (whether by design or unintentional) that does not have to desired effect. Guessing you don't write financial software. Probably a good thing.
Even in that instance, you can't penalise Users for the design flaws introduced by the Vendor. Surely all business rules and constraints should be intact and operational. Is that not the point of automation? Otherwise a system has no purpose....? Grammatical error and spelling mistakes are included for your entertainment!
|
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
35
|
Posted - 2012.08.22 04:34:00 -
[555] - Quote
Marcus Caspius wrote:TheSkeptic wrote:Marcus Caspius wrote: I work in a Software Product Development Environment and the last thing I do is penalise my users for utilising a feature my developers introduced (whether by design or unintentional) that does not have to desired effect. Guessing you don't write financial software. Probably a good thing. Even in that instance, you can't penalise Users for the design flaws introduced by the Vendor. Surely all business rules and constraints should be intact and operational. Is that not the point of automation? Otherwise a system has no purpose....?
So if your developers identify an issue, where users can generate wealth via an unintended bug (feature), you alert your users of the issue and inform them that exploiting the loophole is punishable. It's still OK? mental |
Loose End
The Big Bambu
31
|
Posted - 2012.08.22 15:15:00 -
[556] - Quote
Dregol wrote:From: http://community.eveonline.com/news/newsFromEve.asp?newsTitle=regarding-afk-complex-farming-1Edit: The original concerns/rage in this thread have been addressed by Sreegs. The TL;DR of this is there were some creative individuals who were AFKing in complexes 23/7 and generating income whilst not at their computers for extended periods of time. CCP considers this to be an exploit, and will be addressing the problem. AFKing 23/7 killing respawning rats: exploit AFK missioning/anoming/freightering: not an exploit Sreegs explanation here, concerns about mining, and freightersThe original post: What exactly is the problem here CCP? A pilot has to /actively/ probe down a complex, the speed at which he or she wants to complete the process shouldn't be measured. You also seem to blatantly ignore the fact that other people can probe these down and complete them while you're AFK boating around. Is there some mechanic where NPCs are respawning in complexes after a certain amount of time? If they are, I can understand where the problem is. Anything with respawning NPCs and AFKing is bad mmkay, and there's a simple solution: stop **** from respawning in complexes. I do find it hilarious, though, that you want to go after complex runners. I'd like to see the numbers of how much isk is generated from plexing, but taking what I presume to be a fairly safe guess, I'd be astonished if it represents more than 1% of the total isk generated in EVE. I mean it's not like you just made it 1000% easier for other professions to do anything AFK. I applaud your effort to remove any AFK actions from the game, but seriously, stop picking on fringe problems, and look at the real problems in EVE.
While you and many other consider this and many other issues to be the small problems, this Dev has been assigned to this problem. Not a different problem. EvE is Swiss Cheese with problems. It is the Elephant of Problems. But the question is then...How does one eat the elephant? One bite at a time. And this issue is a bite. It might be less or more tough than other bites from other parts of the elephant. It might even be a bit of elephant sphincter muscle. But this poor ******* has been assigned to eat it. It will probably drive him to start abusing drugs, alcohol and small furry animals. But fix it to the best of his questionable skills he will. For love of EvE or paycheck or both. It don't matter...but yelling at the guy won't get nothing fixed.
|
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
194
|
Posted - 2012.08.26 02:13:00 -
[557] - Quote
This is eve online, not your every dayJAVA game for phones, here, you are considered to be the elite of the elite when it comes to creativity on how to swindle ISK ( or Dev tears ) out of other players.
This is why im here, really the freekin game is really interesting enough just reading the eve forums sometimes haha but with all honestly, no offense intended, just stating the obvious, as my character does.
P.S. No offense intended, Just roleplaying the speak my mind Kara Books. |
Justin Cody
Tri-gun Lost Obsession
26
|
Posted - 2012.08.26 19:29:00 -
[558] - Quote
Teranicus wrote:Quote: WILL THAT MEAN AFK CLOAKING IN A SYSTEM TO DISRUPT OPERATIONS WILL BE BANNABLE ALSO........ especially afk cloaking in anoms so they dont respawn
That no longer works...when you are cloaked you are removed from the system inventory and you don't count against a spawn. |
Crove
Fringe Raiders
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.27 04:29:00 -
[559] - Quote
It's a little incredible that this thread is just page after page of logical failure.
It's not that all AFK-able activities which earn isk are banned, only those which allow you afk for the entire 23 hours between downtimes with no interactions from a human whatsoever while continuously earning isk. Here's a list of those:
- The one specific corner case listed at the start of this thread
There. The sky isn't falling and Eve is no different than it was yesterday unless you were setting up in a very specific place, with a very specific kit, and then going to work / sleeping / doing hot yoga / whatever while you earned isk all day. Oh yeah, and CONCORD had your back so players couldn't do anything about it, either.
This isn't "the man" "telling you how to play eve" or anything else crazy, it's just the closing of an exploit.
|
Crove
Fringe Raiders
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.27 04:33:00 -
[560] - Quote
Marcus Caspius wrote: I work in a Software Product Development Environment and the last thing I do is penalise my users for utilising a feature my developers introduced (whether by design or unintentional) that does not have to desired effect.
Hey, me too! Except I work on enterprise software where an attitude like the above might means millions of dollars in lost business in the span of a few hours. While eve probably isn't quite that high stakes, it's certainly an enterprise application. And in an enterprise application, when you have abusive users, you make sure the service protects itself from them. You don't say, "gee, the product isn't perfect, so go ahead and break it."
Sorry for double post, but...ugh. Everyone and their mom thinks they are a high flying software guru on the internet, and then comes up with genius statements like this one.
|
|
Dekatris
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 15:26:00 -
[561] - Quote
i'm so glad i don't play this god awful game anymore. |
MinefieldS
1 Sick Duck Standss on something
111
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 21:24:00 -
[562] - Quote
Why are you giving them amnesty, CCP??? |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: [one page] |