|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3893
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:07:00 -
[1] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Tippia wrote:Kate stark wrote:Tippia wrote:What makes you think it's a bug? the fact that if your safety is on green you shouldn't be able to flag yourself as suspect.... But that's not what the OP is describing. He's entering a limited engagement with someone who has an S-flag. And if you were able to do your own research, you'd understand it's a bug.
Safety on Yellow prevents you from taking any actions that will incur the wrath of concord. Safety on Green prevents you from taking any actions that will give you a suspect flag. Shooting a suspect gives you a 5 minute limited engagement with said suspect. This is working as intended. This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3893
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:15:00 -
[2] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Except that the person doesn't need to shoot him. People are exploiting the fact that drones, which are set to aggressive, will engage them.
The solution is to pay attention to what you're doing & not have them set to aggressive. There is no exploit happening here. This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3893
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:17:00 -
[3] - Quote
Mysttina wrote:Does drones on agressive mode supposed to attack any suspect while safety on green (if no MTU involved).
The drones are attacking the suspect because the suspect is attacking one of the mission runners assets. This is also working as intended. This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3893
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:21:00 -
[4] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Magna Mortem wrote:Except that the person doesn't need to shoot him. People are exploiting the fact that drones, which are set to aggressive, will engage them. The solution is to pay attention to what you're doing & not have them set to aggressive. There is no exploit happening here. This will be declared an exploit and fixed. If you think about it for two or three seconds, you'll understand why. Of course I can be wrong, but the train already started rolling. Imagine the armada that will use this to their advantage...
It is more likely that nothing will change, including the average highsec players inability to adapt. This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3893
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:31:00 -
[5] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:You're too aggressive. It's a game. Go get some self respect. Bye.
The irony in this post is making me hard. This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3893
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:34:00 -
[6] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:Sup.
There is no bug. Most of the players who die to this are the ones who go into a mission, drop drones, MTU and then go AFK. There is 'forcing' someone to enter a limited engagement. Green safety setting means you will do anything to cause yourself to be suspect and it is doing that. Now if you decide to set your drones to 'shoot anything that will not get me Concorded or flagged as suspect'... Guess what? They won't do any of that. But they will go for valid targets. Someone flagged as suspect is a valid target for anyone. That is the entire pint of the crime watch system.
And to make your noodle cook a bit more, there is even players putting on tin badges, forming a gang with other random high sec players. Behold, PvP. And for the first time, high sec players are enforcing the law instead of Concord having to jump in.
That is simply amazing. Wait ... random people are going against clueless mission runners who go suspect?
Apparently reading is really, really hard.
No, random people in highsec are forming gangs & attacking people who go suspect after shooting mobile structures is literally what was said. This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3894
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:37:00 -
[7] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Magna Mortem wrote:You're too aggressive. It's a game. Go get some self respect. Bye. The irony in this post is making me hard. You should look up the definition. You people act like idiots. All I was saying it that it's a bug. **** me if I'm wrong, who cares? You do. I don't. It's as if somebody touched you wrongly and you all go crazy about this. So wow, a random internet stranger says it's a bug. Holy ****, I have wrecked your egos and I didn't actually do anything. It doesn't matter, though. If people cry enough, CCP declares it an exploit and somehow fixes it. If not, then not. I'm already curious about how many threads of whiners this will spawn.
That is a lot of angry words over something you don't care about. This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3895
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:54:00 -
[8] - Quote
Xercodo wrote:I would consider it a bug on the basis that drones shouldn't be attacking anyone when aggressive unless they attack me directly.
That is the definition of defensive.
This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3896
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:04:00 -
[9] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:One can argue and troll over "bug, exploit or intended mechanic" semantics all you want, reality is that it's outright silly for someone set to "green" entering a limited engagement while not actively having chosen to do so. The whole "well don't set to aggressive then" is a similar fallacy as "afk cloakers are no threat" bullshit.
It's obviously an oversight by CCP because they don't really do any sort of combat. pvp or QA. I will give you a Nyx if you show me where an AFK cloaker killed someone.
Can I have an Aeon if I figure out how to do it? This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3898
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 15:11:00 -
[10] - Quote
Skeln Thargensen wrote:I can see people being pissed off because it's not obvious that your drones are going to respond to an attack on a deployable like they would as an attack on your ship. it's simply fixed by putting drones on passive. drones on aggressive is horrible anyway but it does make serpentis missions half bearable, along with a sebo.
It never ceases to amaze me that people who live in highsec know less about the mechanics of highsec than people who don't. This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
|
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4382
|
Posted - 2014.01.07 12:00:00 -
[11] - Quote
asteroidjas wrote:seth Hendar wrote:
you don't wan't pvp => gtfo from eve
Yes, that is indeed the solution we are looking for. Eve has ever, and is always solely a PVP game. Any PVE content should be removed b/c it isn't pvp anyways. Problem solved. Also, to those who claim drones have always since the begining of time automatically (on their own) engaged all suspects i ask this. Why all of a sudden is the only way for you to kill these shiney mission ships by shooting MTU? Why not just loot their wrecks if that supposedly draws drone aggro? Why is everyone now claiming pride in how many ships they've gotten to kill b/c of the MTU...i would think the number of mission runners with wrecks is greater than the number that are using MTU's....so wouldn't it just be easier?
Because looting a wreck isn't the same as attacking an asset of the mission runner, which is specifically what the drones are attempting to protect. It's the same as attacking the mission runners ship outright except that will get you concorded, whereas shooting a mobile structure will not, by design This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4394
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 02:18:00 -
[12] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:It doesn't matter what I say anyway. Senior GM Nythanos has told me I'm wrong, that this is not working as intended, and that this is a bug. I certainly wish they weren't so shortsighted.
Remember that time a Senior GM said telling people that you are your alt is bannable & anyone running ISboxer is botting? Turns out he was wrong. One of the great things to come out of this interesting new way of killing mission runners is a lot of them have started to adapt which is really great to see, for once. This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
|
|
|