Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
577
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 03:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
The Problem:
If a player is spammed with a large number of conversations, their client may lock up and become non-responsive. Organized groups of players occasionally abuse this tactic to prevent players from responding to an attack.
According to Xolve,
Xolve wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote: It is easily preventable... just turn on auto-reject convo's.
Cap pilots in question had auto-reject on, as well as no-convo's from unknown players. System still got bogged down, players still lagged out.
The Solution:
1.) CCP should declare this tactic an exploit, and temporarily ban (3ish days) all players that participated in any recent and verifiable convo bombs. Retro-active punishment is more than acceptable, as any player participating in these convo bombs KNOW they are abusing and exploiting the conversation feature to create lag and obstruct the client of an opponent. This is a clear violation of the Terms of Service:
Quote:16. You may not do anything that interferes with the ability of other EVE Online subscribers to enjoy the game or web site in accordance with its rules. This includes, but is not limited to, making inappropriate use of any public channels within the game and/or intentionally creating excessive latency (lag) by dumping cargo containers, corpses or other items in the game world.
2.) CCP should work on fixing the conv feature to prevent this from lagging out a player's computer. |
General Nusense
Republic University Minmatar Republic
22
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 04:23:00 -
[2] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:The Problem: If a player is spammed with a large number of conversations, their client may lock up and become non-responsive. Organized groups of players occasionally abuse this tactic to prevent players from responding to an attack. According to Xolve, Xolve wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote: It is easily preventable... just turn on auto-reject convo's.
Cap pilots in question had auto-reject on, as well as no-convo's from unknown players. System still got bogged down, players still lagged out. The Solution: 1.) CCP should declare this tactic an exploit, and temporarily ban (3ish days) all players that participated in any recent and verifiable convo bombs. Retro-active punishment is more than acceptable, as any player participating in these convo bombs KNOW they are abusing and exploiting the conversation feature to create lag and obstruct the client of an opponent. This is a clear violation of the Terms of Service: Quote:16. You may not do anything that interferes with the ability of other EVE Online subscribers to enjoy the game or web site in accordance with its rules. This includes, but is not limited to, making inappropriate use of any public channels within the game and/or intentionally creating excessive latency (lag) by dumping cargo containers, corpses or other items in the game world. 2.) CCP should work on fixing the conv feature to prevent this from lagging out a player's computer. Relevant Threads: In F&I: When is an Exploit an Exploit
First you need proof of if this "mythical convo bomb". according to your sources no cap pilot recieved a convo during that operation. There for there is no proof that this actually took place. Lag in Eve is a mystery sometimes appears for no reason.
|
Hot-Drop O'Clock
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 07:41:00 -
[3] - Quote
I propose that you reformulate this thread to a neutral tone. Right now it comes out as a public cry about your coalition's loss.
Firstly, your boo-boo makes this proposal look like it was motivated by vengeance, not a flaw in game mechanics. Secondly, your tears make it look like what you're really after is CCP reimbursing your carrier losses and banning those who kicked your sorry bottom. Thirdly, your hurting bottom tries to hide the fact that your fleet was lost due to them being 20km away from POS shield and capping out - not "convo spam". Fourthly, your crying shows incredible double morals, as convoing has always belonged to CFC repertoire.
If you want to make a serious proposal, take your personal vendetta out of it. |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
577
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 07:42:00 -
[4] - Quote
General Nusense wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote:The Problem:
If a player is spammed with a large number of conversations, their client may lock up and become non-responsive. Organized groups of players occasionally abuse this tactic to prevent players from responding to an attack.
1.) CCP should declare this tactic an exploit, and temporarily ban (3ish days) all players that participated in any recent and verifiable convo bombs. First you need proof of if this "mythical convo bomb". according to your sources no cap pilot recieved a convo during that operation. There for there is no proof that this actually took place. Lag in Eve is a mystery sometimes appears for no reason.
I agree, hearsay is not evidence of wrong doing.... CCP has logs, and assuming they can verify it, they should punish it. People that feel they are wronged, should file a petition for CCP to investigate it.
There is no reason for 100 people to suddenly PM an opponent in the middle of a battle other than to disrupt their client. If that ever happens to you, you clearly have the grounds to file a petition, and all those involved should be appropriately punished (like with a temp ban). In truth, CCP really shouldn't need to tell people this is wrong, as it is clearly a violation of the ToS, but some people need to have there hand held.
|
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
577
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 07:48:00 -
[5] - Quote
Hot-Drop O'Clock wrote:I propose that you reformulate this thread to a neutral tone. Right now it comes out as a public cry about your coalition's loss.
Firstly, your boo-boo makes this proposal look like it was motivated by vengeance, not a flaw in game mechanics. Secondly, your tears make it look like what you're really after is CCP reimbursing your carrier losses and banning those who kicked your sorry bottom. Thirdly, your hurting bottom tries to hide the fact that your fleet was lost due to them being 20km away from POS shield and capping out - not "convo spam". Fourthly, your crying shows incredible double morals, as convoing has always belonged to CFC repertoire.
If you want to make a serious proposal, take your personal vendetta out of it.
Ironically, this hasn't happened to me or my coalition, I just get annoyed when people cheat to win. Agony's not involved in any sov crap, and frankly blues suck balls...
I don't think CCP should reimburse any ship losses, as anyone that takes their ship into a fleet battle should accept its going to die.
Perhaps I'll tone down the post some...
I'm really just peeved that people would attempt such tactics...
|
Lilja Consideratio
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 08:32:00 -
[6] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:Hot-Drop O'Clock wrote:I propose that you reformulate this thread to a neutral tone. Right now it comes out as a public cry about your coalition's loss.
Firstly, your boo-boo makes this proposal look like it was motivated by vengeance, not a flaw in game mechanics. Secondly, your tears make it look like what you're really after is CCP reimbursing your carrier losses and banning those who kicked your sorry bottom. Thirdly, your hurting bottom tries to hide the fact that your fleet was lost due to them being 20km away from POS shield and capping out - not "convo spam". Fourthly, your crying shows incredible double morals, as convoing has always belonged to CFC repertoire.
If you want to make a serious proposal, take your personal vendetta out of it. Ironically, this hasn't happened to me or my coalition, I just get annoyed when people cheat to win. Agony's not involved in any sov crap, and frankly blues suck balls... I don't think CCP should reimburse any ship losses, as anyone that takes their ship into a fleet battle should accept its going to die. Perhaps I'll tone down the post some... I'm really just peeved that people would attempt such tactics...
I agree that the convo bomb tactic isn't making the game any better but worse. But giving retroactive bans - especially when both sides are known to use the same exploit - doesn't sound to me like a "solution" that you claim it to be. |
Dirty Wizard
The Geedunk Expedition
37
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 15:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
+1 in acknowledgement of the problem. -1 to the proposed solution.
The solution is not to ban players for abusing this mechanic. That would take great efforts by the GMs to enforce and police it.
No, the real solution is a game change that neutralizes the negative impact when bombarded by convo spams. A popup should happen like normal, but with each additional convo request, it should create another tab to add to the initial convo request. Most importantly, players should retain full control and use of their cursor when a convo bombardment happens.
In addition, there should be a convo request limit. You can have as many chat channels open as you want, but the initial convo request popup should have a limit on how many can be pending. Players wishing to convo others who have their limit full receive a brief notice that they're busy ATM or whatever.
Five sounds like a reasonable number I suppose, though it's really up to CCP to determine that. Nobody ingame really needs to be immediately contacted by a dozen or so people at once anyways. |
Arduemont
Lords 0f Justice Fidelas Constans
290
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 16:38:00 -
[8] - Quote
I think CCP should just hardcode it so that if a play is set to auto-reject convos that the data shouldn't reach them at all. Policing this as a matter of policy would be difficult time consuming and unnecessary. |
Mikaila Penshar
Take it Deep
10
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 17:40:00 -
[9] - Quote
adding "Convo-Bomb" to my bag full of dirty nasty pirate tricks THANKS!!! |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
580
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 19:21:00 -
[10] - Quote
Dirty Wizard wrote:+1 in acknowledgement of the problem. -1 to the proposed solution.
The solution is not to ban players for abusing this mechanic. That would take great efforts by the GMs to enforce and police it.
No, the real solution is a game change that neutralizes the negative impact when bombarded by convo spams. A popup should happen like normal, but with each additional convo request, it should create another tab to add to the initial convo request. Most importantly, players should retain full control and use of their cursor when a convo bombardment happens.
In addition, there should be a convo request limit. You can have as many chat channels open as you want, but the initial convo request popup should have a limit on how many can be pending. Players wishing to convo others who have their limit full receive a brief notice that they're busy ATM or whatever.
Five sounds like a reasonable number I suppose, though it's really up to CCP to determine that. Nobody ingame really needs to be immediately contacted by a dozen or so people at once anyways.
CCP will not be able to implement this in a quick manner.... so until then, how do you suggest CCP deals with players that abuse the convo mechanic??
I figured a quick swat on the ass (like with a 3-dayish ban), is appropriate way to treat kids that misbehave. |
|
Mikaila Penshar
Take it Deep
10
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 22:23:00 -
[11] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:Dirty Wizard wrote:+1 in acknowledgement of the problem. -1 to the proposed solution.
The solution is not to ban players for abusing this mechanic. That would take great efforts by the GMs to enforce and police it.
No, the real solution is a game change that neutralizes the negative impact when bombarded by convo spams. A popup should happen like normal, but with each additional convo request, it should create another tab to add to the initial convo request. Most importantly, players should retain full control and use of their cursor when a convo bombardment happens.
In addition, there should be a convo request limit. You can have as many chat channels open as you want, but the initial convo request popup should have a limit on how many can be pending. Players wishing to convo others who have their limit full receive a brief notice that they're busy ATM or whatever.
Five sounds like a reasonable number I suppose, though it's really up to CCP to determine that. Nobody ingame really needs to be immediately contacted by a dozen or so people at once anyways. CCP will not be able to implement this in a quick manner.... so until then, how do you suggest CCP deals with players that abuse the convo mechanic?? I figured a quick swat on the ass (like with a 3-dayish ban), is appropriate way to treat kids that misbehave.
a swat on my what sir!?! O.o ...hmmmm, how did you know |
King Rothgar
Black Watch Guard Gl0rious Bastards
311
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 13:04:00 -
[12] - Quote
Never convo bombed someone nor has it been done to me, but I am well aware of this non exploit exploit. I agree it needs to officially be deemed an exploit. Obviously a code change is needed as well to make it impossible to do in the future. I disagree with retroactive bans although I agree that you should know such a thing is a violation of the EULA. The Troll is trolling. |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
670
|
Posted - 2012.10.18 16:32:00 -
[13] - Quote
Based on a recent article at themittani, convo spamming is being declared an exploit.
and it should be!!!! |
Angeal MacNova
LankTech
2
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 00:29:00 -
[14] - Quote
Good |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |