Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Taedrin
Kushan Industrial
23
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 00:35:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP has always had a history of poor communication with their customers. Mind you, I'm not talking about developers talking on the forums. The devs post here all of the time. But the fact of the matter is that there is little to no official communication from CCP to the players.
This is highlighted by CCP's chosen method of informing players what is and isn't deemed "an exploit": by having each and every single individual player file a petition about it. To make matters worse, players are not even allowed to share this information with other players.
Seriously, is there even a less efficient way to do this!?!?
And to make matters worse, when game policy changes, players have no means to learn about these changes.
Yes, we have the CSM to communicate with CCP, but that only happens a few times a year, and their meetings are bound by NDAs.
What we need is a central location, such as on a locked evelopedia page, where CCP can definitively declare in a public avenue what IS and what ISN'T allowed. This way when policy changes, players can at least see when changes are made. And even better, if this happens, we can free up precious GM resources that would otherwise be wasted on redundant questions.
Here's a starter list for CCP to make definitive public statements on: 1) Keyboard macros a'la the G15 Logitech keyboard 2) Loggoffski/loggonski 3) Corp hopping to evade war decs 4) Corp recycling to evade war decs 5) Alt recycling 6) Alliance hopping to evade war decs. 7) Using alt corps to artificially inflate the cost of war decs 8) "Hacking" local chat to make you not appear on other people's local channel 9) can baiting in newbie systems 10) Modifying non-executable EVE data to make decorative changes to EVE, such as getting the TV to play customized videos. 11) Market cache scraping to automatically collect,collate and upload market data.
And I'm sure there are dozens of other topics that CCP should make public statements about. |
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
150
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 00:38:00 -
[2] - Quote
I remind you that it is not allowed to post exploits in the forum either. If one of the things mentioned is one, get ready for some damage control :) Forum fix for firefox and chrome Get working images and colored text Classic forum style 2.25final |
Roosterton
Eternal Frontier
6
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 00:40:00 -
[3] - Quote
Liked for support. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
207
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 00:43:00 -
[4] - Quote
Yes please.
All we have now is old GM posts that may or may not have been overturned since they were made (and which may even have been somewhat inaccurate at the time they were written), and with no way of determining whether they are applicable or not.
Communication and clarity are not bad words, CCP GÇö stop treating them as such. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
DarkAegix
Acetech Systems
54
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 00:57:00 -
[5] - Quote
Some of the things the OP is whining about are already clearly defined as exploits or bannable offences. Are you seriously confused over hacking local channel and can baiting in rookie systems? *Please* tell me that you've listed those for the sake of other, clueless players, rather than yourself. |
Roosterton
Eternal Frontier
6
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 01:15:00 -
[6] - Quote
While we're at it, is it legal to which videos on the screen of your CQ? |
Angry Onions
NixCraft
2
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 01:21:00 -
[7] - Quote
Taedrin wrote:CCP has always had a history of poor communication with their customers. Mind you, I'm not talking about developers talking on the forums. The devs post here all of the time. But the fact of the matter is that there is little to no official communication from CCP to the players.
This is highlighted by CCP's chosen method of informing players what is and isn't deemed "an exploit": by having each and every single individual player file a petition about it. To make matters worse, players are not even allowed to share this information with other players.
Seriously, is there even a less efficient way to do this!?!?
And to make matters worse, when game policy changes, players have no means to learn about these changes.
Yes, we have the CSM to communicate with CCP, but that only happens a few times a year, and their meetings are bound by NDAs.
What we need is a central location, such as on a locked evelopedia page, where CCP can definitively declare in a public avenue what IS and what ISN'T allowed. This way when policy changes, players can at least see when changes are made. And even better, if this happens, we can free up precious GM resources that would otherwise be wasted on redundant questions.
Here's a starter list for CCP to make definitive public statements on: 1) Keyboard macros a'la the G15 Logitech keyboard 2) Loggoffski/loggonski 3) Corp hopping to evade war decs 4) Corp recycling to evade war decs 5) Alt recycling 6) Alliance hopping to evade war decs. 7) Using alt corps to artificially inflate the cost of war decs 8) "Hacking" local chat to make you not appear on other people's local channel 9) can baiting in newbie systems 10) Modifying non-executable EVE data to make decorative changes to EVE, such as getting the TV to play customized videos. 11) Market cache scraping to automatically collect,collate and upload market data.
And I'm sure there are dozens of other topics that CCP should make public statements about.
1) I would guess its allowed, as it doesn't give someone else too much of an advantage 2) There is nothing in the EULA says you cant, its also a legitimate strategy, and also try prove/disprove some one logg(off/on)ski'd 3) Duh thats allowed 4) look above 5)And again, look at #3 6) Back to #3 7) Can't really prove that some one is doing that without API keys, derp. 8) Duh, that'll get you banned, dumb ass 9) Reference #8 10) Would be a local side mod, so it wouldn't be detectable by server (not sure on that) 11) Not too sure, dont care either way. |
Taedrin
Kushan Industrial
25
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 01:21:00 -
[8] - Quote
DarkAegix wrote:Some of the things the OP is whining about are already clearly defined as exploits or bannable offences. Are you seriously confused over hacking local channel and can baiting in rookie systems? *Please* tell me that you've listed those for the sake of other, clueless players, rather than yourself.
This isn't about whether I know something is an exploit or not. This is about CCP providing us with an easy, convenient and reliable source of information regarding what is and isn't allowed.
Hacking local, for example, is obviously an exploit. However, it was public knowledge that Monkeysphere was doing this to kill carebears in 0.0, yet as far as I know, he was never penalized for it. Was doing this REALLY a bannable offense? AFAIK, CCP never said a word about this publicly.
Everyone knows that canbaiting in a newbie system is a bannable offense, right? Of course this is just hearsay. I haven't seen any official CCP statement on the subject before, and if there ever HAS been, it was a random GM post in a random thread that I would have to spend 15 minutes tracking down to find.
Logon traps were commonly said to be an exploit back in 2005, now I hear people say that GMs respond to petitions of such activities with "you are allowed to log on and log off whenever you want"
Artificially inflating the cost of wardecs by using alt corporations was publicly declared an exploit by a GM in a random thread, yet EVE Uni has publicly stated that CCP never stated that "decshields" were exploits. Was the GM who says that decshields are exploits lying, or was the GM who told EVE Uni they WEREN'T exploits lying? Or did CCP change their policy sometime between the two statements?
So on and so on. |
Taedrin
Kushan Industrial
25
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 01:34:00 -
[9] - Quote
Angry Onions wrote: 1) I would guess its allowed, as it doesn't give someone else too much of an advantage 2) There is nothing in the EULA says you cant, its also a legitimate strategy, and also try prove/disprove some one logg(off/on)ski'd 3) Duh thats allowed 4) look above 5)And again, look at #3 6) Back to #3 7) Can't really prove that some one is doing that without API keys, derp. 8) Duh, that'll get you banned, dumb ass 9) Reference #8 10) Would be a local side mod, so it wouldn't be detectable by server (not sure on that) 11) Not too sure, dont care either way.
Everything you say is probably either based on hearsay or comes from your version of "common sense". I say this because most everything on that list which you claim isn't an exploit, has at one time or another been considered to be an exploit by CCP and the players.
The issue at hand here is official clarification/communication.
|
T'Laar Bok
26
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 01:48:00 -
[10] - Quote
Taedrin wrote:1) Keyboard macros a'la the G15 Logitech keyboard.
Allowable also G510, G13, G19 etc etc. you can even write maros using the Lua language suppled with those keyboards.
Amphetimines are your friend. |
|
Brooks Puuntai
Nomadic Asylum
92
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 01:54:00 -
[11] - Quote
Using a Orca/carrier to swap ships while aggressed. Since the Orca does not get aggression. |
Gregor Palter
56
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 01:56:00 -
[12] - Quote
CCP, to me, always have been headless chickens running around aimlessly picking at little problems but never having the attention span to take care of something proper. Lack of guidance, lack of direction, lack of quality control. The ineffective way of having to deal with "what is allowed and what isn't" and the total neglect to have these things communicated properly, in a structured manner, if proof of that yet again. |
|
GM Karidor
Game Masters C C P Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 02:17:00 -
[13] - Quote
For the sake of communication... Know that we have noticed this thread. However, please forgive me that I am not answering the points that have been brought up right away, even though most of them are pretty obvious and clear cut (in my opinion at least). As the answers to those points will most certainly be quoted back to us in petitions for the time to come, I'm sure you understand that I don't just want to blurt out something real quick, as much as I'd like to
And don't forget, if you're in doubt about something you intend to do might be skirting the rules on the wrong side of the rules, file a petition. GM Karidor | Senior Game Master |
|
Headerman
Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx
106
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 02:28:00 -
[14] - Quote
Yes... go ahead and give a detailed analysis of what you did, so we may exploit the game as well, thank you. |
Taedrin
Kushan Industrial
28
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 02:36:00 -
[15] - Quote
GM Karidor wrote:For the sake of communication... Know that we have noticed this thread. However, please forgive me that I am not answering the points that have been brought up right away, even though most of them are pretty obvious and clear cut (in my opinion at least). As the answers to those points will most certainly be quoted back to us in petitions for the time to come, I'm sure you understand that I don't just want to blurt out something real quick, as much as I'd like to And don't forget, if you're in doubt about something you intend to do might be skirting the rules on the wrong side of the rules, file a petition.
Thank you very much for the response, GM Karidor.
I would just like to stress that the point of this thread isn't to discuss what is allowed and what isn't, it's to advocate for a centralized repository of "the rules" so that players don't need to waste precious GM resources asking if they are allowed to drop decloaking cans or not (answer: it is allowed so long as it is not excessive, as determined on a per-case basis by the GM at hand).
And ideally, this centralized repository (whether it is an evelopedia page or not) would be regularly updated as players continue to ask questions via petitions. And best of all, we players will finally have something we can point to and link to when telling new players what is allowed and what isn't instead of relying upon hearsay to spread this information. |
Nyio
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
130
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 02:41:00 -
[16] - Quote
GM Karidor wrote:And don't forget, if you're in doubt about something you intend to do might be skirting the rules on the wrong side of the rules, file a petition.
...and WAIT ...and WAIT ...and WAIT ...and WAIT ...and WAIT Features & Ideas Discussion: Agent Finder, Black Holes Needs a banner here.. |
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
150
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 02:42:00 -
[17] - Quote
Answer coming sooner than you think. Watch this space-« Forum fix for firefox and chrome Get working images and colored text Classic forum style 2.25final |
Brooks Puuntai
Nomadic Asylum
92
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 02:43:00 -
[18] - Quote
Nyio wrote:GM Karidor wrote:And don't forget, if you're in doubt about something you intend to do might be skirting the rules on the wrong side of the rules, file a petition. ...and WAIT
Also hes trying to say to turn yourself in. Though probably not the best idea, last guy to do that got banned. |
beor oranes
The Capitalist Protectorate Mad Scientists
8
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 02:44:00 -
[19] - Quote
I've always worked on the notion that if I think its dubious or I am unsure then its probably illegal and I shouldn't do it.
Now being able to watch your own legally bought movies (not downloaded illegally) on your CQ TV, would be sick. Or even if they allowed you to connect to Eve-files and only watch things from there. Though without being able to invite your mates over and giving them a virtual beer out of the virtual fridge it would be a bit lonely. |
beor oranes
The Capitalist Protectorate Mad Scientists
8
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 02:45:00 -
[20] - Quote
Brooks Puuntai wrote:Nyio wrote:GM Karidor wrote:And don't forget, if you're in doubt about something you intend to do might be skirting the rules on the wrong side of the rules, file a petition. ...and WAIT Also hes trying to say to turn yourself in. Though probably not the best idea, last guy to do that got banned.
He did but however his conscience was clear and he felt good about himself.
|
|
Taedrin
Kushan Industrial
28
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 03:01:00 -
[21] - Quote
Brooks Puuntai wrote:Nyio wrote:GM Karidor wrote:And don't forget, if you're in doubt about something you intend to do might be skirting the rules on the wrong side of the rules, file a petition. ...and WAIT Also hes trying to say to turn yourself in. Though probably not the best idea, last guy to do that got banned.
Source? You don't get banned for asking a question about the rules through the petition system. You might, however, get banned for asking a question, and then doing it anyways while you wait for a response. Or for doing the activity and then asking a question about it after the fact. |
Brooks Puuntai
Nomadic Asylum
92
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 03:03:00 -
[22] - Quote
It was in reference to the guy who reported the issues with these forums. Sorry I don't have a source only because I believe they deleted it. |
Taedrin
Kushan Industrial
28
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 03:17:00 -
[23] - Quote
Brooks Puuntai wrote:It was in reference to the guy who reported the issues with these forums. Sorry I don't have a source only because I believe they deleted it.
I don't think that is the same thing that the GM was talking about. The GM was talking about players being allowed to ask questions regarding the rules via the petition system.
The guy who you are talking about most likely did more than privately tell CCP about an issue with these forums. I am not exactly familiar with the issue because I wasn't really using the new forums when they first came out. But I expect that what happened was either this guy used the bug himself, or he told the public how to use the bug. |
Nyio
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
130
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 03:26:00 -
[24] - Quote
My little contribution to this thread was only to point out that if you file a petition you'll have to WAIT... and... nvm. Features & Ideas Discussion: Agent Finder, Black Holes Needs a banner here.. |
|
GM Karidor
Game Masters C C P Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 03:26:00 -
[25] - Quote
Brooks Puuntai wrote:GM Karidor wrote:And don't forget, if you're in doubt about something you intend to do might be skirting the rules on the wrong side of the rules, file a petition. Also hes trying to say to turn yourself in. Though probably not the best idea, last guy to do that got banned.
Taedrin is quite correct, as in-game issues are the field of Customer Support, not the Forums.
In that regard, even if the deed has been done already and you realize that you may have violated a rule, turning yourself in (and most importantly, stopping to do it) before you get reported by others or get caught by us is something we will respect and always hold in your favour. For good and bad examples in this regard I can only point you to Sreegs Dev Blog, the philosophy on how to report something "exploity" in the game you may have run into accidentally is somewhat similar. GM Karidor | Senior Game Master |
|
|
GM Karidor
Game Masters C C P Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 04:00:00 -
[26] - Quote
Nyio wrote:My little contribution to this thread was only to point out that if you file a petition you'll have to WAIT... and... nvm.
Did you count the minutes or seconds? (sorry, could not resist )
In all seriousness, though, on average it's not as bad as some want to make it out to be. Far from it actually, though there have been extreme cases that are of course and understandably rather annoying for the according petitioner. But well, if I am not mistaken you have been reading the rather long thread in that regard already, and it's not really the point of this one here, so lets leave it at that and stop the derailing GM Karidor | Senior Game Master |
|
Lithalnas
Privateers Privateer Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 04:45:00 -
[27] - Quote
This is what is commonly known about your list o stuff that you want to know about. The GMs can chime in it things have been changed or have always been a bit fuzzy.
1) Keyboard macros a'la the G15 Logitech keyboard A long time ago there was a thread about this and the feeling i got from that thread was that as long as it does not automate something like mining or give you an advantage its ok. Mostly the thread way back when was to use the G15 LCD screen to display other data and people wanted to group keys such as guns together. However I suspect someone could modify the key-binds to do some sort of turbo button function for locking. This would give the advantage to tacklers and thus would be against the rules.
2) Loggoffski/loggonski Much to my chagrin this is legal in all forms.
3) Corp hopping to evade war decs Legal to most extents. Corp hoping has been petitioned to death and has been found to be legal in almost all cases. I have not seen the exception rule be enforced in ages so I guess it no longer is a rule. The only other instance of rule breaking with wars is the Imune Alliance. One alliance which sheds the wars of incoming corps.
4) Corp recycling to evade war decs This was the rumored exception but I have not seen an example of it
5) Alt recycling You can recycle alts, you cant recycle alts for suicideing when their sec gets too bad.
6) Alliance hopping to evade war decs. Legal, or at lease leaving an alliance to avoid a dec. Useing the Imune tactic of joining an alliance and then leaving to shed a dec is considered illegal.
7) Using alt corps to artificially inflate the cost of war decs Considered legal as far as PRVTR knows
8) "Hacking" local chat to make you not appear on other people's local channel The monkeysphere hack is considered an exploit
9) can baiting in newbie systems considered a bannable offence
10) Modifying non-executable EVE data to make decorative changes to EVE, such as getting the TV to play customized videos. Technically illegal, but people still do it. I do not think CCP cares much for such decorative tweaking of the captains quarters. Messing with space stuff however may get you banned.
11) Market cache scraping to automatically collect,collate and upload market data. CCP wants to use the API for this, they may also want 99$ I would say this would be illegal but CCP wont catch you. |
Nyio
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
130
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 04:52:00 -
[28] - Quote
GM Karidor wrote:Nyio wrote:My little contribution to this thread was only to point out that if you file a petition you'll have to WAIT... and... nvm. Did you count the minutes or seconds? (sorry, could not resist ) In all seriousness, though, on average it's not as bad as some want to make it out to be. Far from it actually, though there have been extreme cases that are of course and understandably rather annoying for the according petitioner. But well, if I am not mistaken you have been reading the rather long thread in that regard already, and it's not really the point of this one here, so lets leave it at that and stop the derailing
Fair enough.. *Still mad though* Features & Ideas Discussion: Agent Finder, Black Holes Needs a banner here.. |
Brooks Puuntai
Nomadic Asylum
92
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 05:56:00 -
[29] - Quote
Lithalnas wrote:
2) Loggoffski/loggonski Much to my chagrin this is legal in all forms.
3) Corp hopping to evade war decs Legal to most extents. Corp hoping has been petitioned to death and has been found to be legal in almost all cases. I have not seen the exception rule be enforced in ages so I guess it no longer is a rule. The only other instance of rule breaking with wars is the Imune Alliance. One alliance which sheds the wars of incoming corps.
4) Corp recycling to evade war decs This was the rumored exception but I have not seen an example of it
7) Using alt corps to artificially inflate the cost of war decs Considered legal as far as PRVTR knows
See this is where there are discrepancies.
2. -Logoffskis "are" considered legal because CCP can't prove it was a log off or a D/C. However there are many cases where a fleet will logoffski and its pretty obvious they all didn't d/c at once.
-Log on traps USE to be considered illegal however not sure if this has changed.
3. While leaving a corp during a war dec is acceptable however it use to be that if done repeatedly it was considered a exploit. Again not sure if these rules have changed.
4. Same as #3 where recycling a corp to avoid decs is a no no.
7. This was considered a exploit as pointed out in the Eve Uni thread. However it seems they have stopped doing this.
It seems like it depends on what GM you happen to talk to on whether or not its a exploit or not. When you bring it to the forums it usually gets deleted(since talking about exploits is a no no), and your told to file a petition. Which starts the cycle all over again. Thats why CCP should be more official and clear about whats legit and whats not especially when it comes to common issues, such as the ones in the OP. This is where communication has always been lacking with CCP, you hear multiple things from multiple people(sometimes GMs/Devs) and yet you never get confirmation. |
Torfin Sigsonn
Ghost Recon Squad Trinova
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.26 09:53:00 -
[30] - Quote
Taedrin wrote:9) can baiting in newbie systems .
Answer in Evelopedia
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Grief_play
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |