Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Esuntria
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 06:50:00 -
[1] - Quote
sorry, i don't use english well.
in mission, you set drone 'Aggressive' mode
when another people attack your Mobile Tractor unit, drone will attack him. (even your safety is green)
and he can attack you legitimately
this bug make many victim
ex)
http://eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&view=kills&plt_id=23312&m=12&y=2013
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17887
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 06:55:00 -
[2] - Quote
What makes you think it's a bug? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Paranoid Loyd
University of Caille Gallente Federation
147
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 06:56:00 -
[3] - Quote
Awwwww
Now everyone is going to know.
Why did you have to spoil it? |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9122
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 06:56:00 -
[4] - Quote
Marlona Sky you little raskle you! Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
7095
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 06:58:00 -
[5] - Quote
Damn, he's been busy. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
405
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 07:00:00 -
[6] - Quote
Dear Marlona Sky. Please continue to kill rattlesnakes, and any other ships with "pith" items fitted.
Yours sincerely Secretary of the Gurista loot farmers association.
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
605
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 07:27:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tauranon wrote:Dear Marlona Sky. Please continue to kill rattlesnakes, and any other ships with "pith" items fitted.
Yours sincerely Secretary of the Gurista loot farmers association.
But Pith is so shiny... We're winning the war if it says so on CAOD! -á
|
Gogela
Freeport Exploration Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
2829
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 07:52:00 -
[8] - Quote
Killing MTUs is a new profession. Didn't you get the memo? I'm working towards a billion in MTU kills atm....
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5344
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 07:59:00 -
[9] - Quote
OOo, highsec pvp There are no goons. The goons; 0.0 dream is over.
Progodlegend said the goal of N3 is to destroy Goonswarm Federation, but in reality NCdot is in Fountain due to the fact it is virtually the last place there is action. ~NC., Fountain 2013 |
Ravan Hekki
Blue-Fire
46
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 08:43:00 -
[10] - Quote
HS PvP best PvP. |
|
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 08:59:00 -
[11] - Quote
Tippia wrote:What makes you think it's a bug? The fact that it is. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
7095
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:04:00 -
[12] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Tippia wrote:What makes you think it's a bug? The fact that it is. Except that it isn't. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
3453
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:07:00 -
[13] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Magna Mortem wrote:Tippia wrote:What makes you think it's a bug? The fact that it is. Except that it isn't.
It isn't till it is.
Mr Epeen
There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass! |
Ritsum
Ubiquitous Hurt
252
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:12:00 -
[14] - Quote
Soooooo......
Ganker shoots your MTU and turns suspect, your drones shoot him since that is considered a safe 'non criminal' action and opens up mutual aggression allowing the ganker to shoot your ship?
Does not sound like a bug to me. Be more careful with your drones, AFK mission running will get you killed.
Safety does not mean "Don't shoot other ships", it means "Do not do anything that would cause a sec status loss" aka "Criminal Actions". Also includes prevention from aiding someone in a mutual aggression fight as that would turn you suspect etc.
With that in mind I may just have to give this a go as the payout seems to be much better then missions or exploration. Gotta fuel my PvP somehow. Play EvE how you want to play it and do not let others dictate how you play. Evolve your playstyle to protect yourself from others! Even in "PVE", "PVP" is there, lurking in the shadows. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17888
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:13:00 -
[15] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Tippia wrote:What makes you think it's a bug? The fact that it is. OookGǪ so what makes you think it's a bug? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Kate stark
1012
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:15:00 -
[16] - Quote
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.... Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17888
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:18:00 -
[17] - Quote
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. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Kate stark
1012
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:22:00 -
[18] - Quote
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. in that case, it's working as intended. Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
Mr Pragmatic
813
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:22:00 -
[19] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Magna Mortem wrote:Tippia wrote:What makes you think it's a bug? The fact that it is. OookGǪ so what makes you think it's a bug?
Oh I dunno, how about the fact its not documented well, it be as if your turrets auto target the aggressor. Is that okay too? Super cali hella yolo swaga dopeness. -á-Yoloswaggins, in the fellowship of the bling. |
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:23:00 -
[20] - Quote
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. |
|
Brutal Wyrm
A Powerful Lowsec Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:24:00 -
[21] - Quote
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....
Go test that theory with a friend. Have him or her become suspect and set your safety to green. Then realize that you're wrong and there is no bug here, just a lack of common sense from people. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17888
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:24:00 -
[22] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:And if you were able to do your own research, you'd understand it's a bug. GǪand what makes you say that? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
7095
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:29:00 -
[23] - Quote
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.... Guess what? You're not. Educate yourself. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
Kate stark
1012
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:31:00 -
[24] - Quote
Brutal Wyrm wrote:Go test that theory with a friend. Have him or her become suspect and set your safety to green. Then realize that you're wrong and there is no bug here, just a lack of common sense from people.
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Guess what? You're not. Educate yourself.
hey guys, you're about 6 posts too late to jump on the "zomg ur wrng" bandwagon. Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
I Love Boobies
All Hail Boobies
835
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:31:00 -
[25] - Quote
Use 3 MJD Sentry Domi with RR set up for missions and this really shouldn't be a problem. You're 100km or so from the warp in point, gives your sentries time to work. And by the time they get close, you can either warp off if they bring lots of friends, or you can have your other combat drones ready and waiting if they get in range.
Had people come in, seen my "fleet", and they warped out fast. Is it overkill for missions? Hell yeah. Gets missions done FAST though. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
7095
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:32:00 -
[26] - Quote
Kate stark wrote:Brutal Wyrm wrote:Go test that theory with a friend. Have him or her become suspect and set your safety to green. Then realize that you're wrong and there is no bug here, just a lack of common sense from people. James Amril-Kesh wrote:Guess what? You're not. Educate yourself. hey guys, you're about 6 posts too late to jump on the "zomg ur wrng" bandwagon. Cry some more then. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1233
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:33:00 -
[27] - Quote
It's clearly a bug, if you think otherwise you're trolling or drunk.
Oh and CCP hates drones. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Kate stark
1012
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:35:00 -
[28] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Kate stark wrote:Brutal Wyrm wrote:Go test that theory with a friend. Have him or her become suspect and set your safety to green. Then realize that you're wrong and there is no bug here, just a lack of common sense from people. James Amril-Kesh wrote:Guess what? You're not. Educate yourself. hey guys, you're about 6 posts too late to jump on the "zomg ur wrng" bandwagon. Cry some more then. i'm not crying. i openly admitted i made a mistake with some game mechanics this early in the morning, and that was half a page ago. if your life is that empty you need to jump on that to make yourself feel good, well, good for you. Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17888
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:39:00 -
[29] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:It's clearly a bug, if you think otherwise you're trolling or drunk. To wit, it's such a huge bug that it completely disables people's ability to describe what the bug is. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Esuntria
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:49:00 -
[30] - Quote
probably.. when safety is green status, who steal my item from my wreck and get suspect , drone never attack him in before engage manually.. |
|
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
2814
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:53:00 -
[31] - Quote
It's not a bug, it's Shoddy Design (TM)
Don't set your drones to aggresive and you're safe. You should be safe even if they were set to aggressive, but this is CCP what we're talking about.
Of course, having your drones to passive means you must press "F" and direct them to each target individually, but, that's not too different from what you should be doing now. The Greater Fool Bar is now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden! |
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
233
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:56:00 -
[32] - Quote
This is just a delightful new way of farming tears. What could possibly be wrong with it.
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
14931
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:58:00 -
[33] - Quote
Mr Pragmatic wrote: Oh I dunno, how about the fact its not documented well
This is Eve, there's very little documentation about anything from CCP. |
Kate stark
1013
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 10:15:00 -
[34] - Quote
Esuntria wrote:probably.. when safety is green status, who steal my item from my wreck and get suspect , drone never attack him in before engage manually.. but, why Mobile Tractor Unit attack make drone engage to him automatically?
because stealing loot isn't an act of aggression, shooting an MTU is. Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
ElQuirko
Black Dragon Fighting Society The Devil's Tattoo
2796
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:03:00 -
[35] - Quote
Tippia wrote:What makes you think it's a bug? Because crap drone mechanics Dodixie > Hek |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3893
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:07:00 -
[36] - 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. |
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:10:00 -
[37] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Sentamon wrote:It's clearly a bug, if you think otherwise you're trolling or drunk. To wit, it's such a huge bug that it completely disables people's ability to describe what the bug is. It was there all along, for you to see.
The drones should never agress with green safety, but they do. You can call it an oversight, a bug, or shabby game design. Either way, people who do use it for their advantage are exploiting it. |
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:11:00 -
[38] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote: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. 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. |
Mysttina
Alpha Spectres
11
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:14:00 -
[39] - Quote
Does drones on agressive mode supposed to attack any suspect while safety on green (if no MTU involved) ?
If not, that is the main point raised by OP as the bug.
It's not about the victim getting limited engagement when attacking the suspect.....
|
Prince Kobol
1222
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:15:00 -
[40] - Quote
So let me get this straight,
If I attack a MTU and the mission runners drones are set to aggressive mode there is a chance the drones will attack me.
If this happens I will then have a limited engagement timer against the mission runner.
Wow if this is true I know what I am going ot be doing |
|
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3893
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:15:00 -
[41] - 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 -
[42] - 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. |
Lugalbandak
Anunnaku Warfare Corp.
282
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:18:00 -
[43] - Quote
Its not a bug , you set your drones on Aggressive , AGGRESSIVE!!! , ofcourse tey gonna shoot s flag ppl even on green, turrets cant be set Aggressive . thats a down & upside of drones. you know when you get jammed or so tey still fire etc The police horse is the only animal in the world that haz his male genitals on his back |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1234
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:18:00 -
[44] - Quote
Lol poor Goons still trying hard to turn highsec into nullsec.
Or is to to kill drones assist cause they break your boring blob fights? .. not sure ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
129
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:18:00 -
[45] - 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. and the drones consider the mtu to be an extension of the player which has been agressed, just like another drone say. this one is easy man, really.
keep you drones on passive and manage them. If in doubt...do...excessively. |
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:19:00 -
[46] - Quote
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...
I won't touch this until I know it's NOT going to be declared an exploit. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
7101
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:19:00 -
[47] - Quote
ElQuirko wrote:the idea that another capsuleer can force a limited engagement without going criminal themselves Nobody forced you to set drones to aggressive. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1234
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:20:00 -
[48] - 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...
I'm out looking for Orcas with MTU's and drones out myself :D ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3893
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:21:00 -
[49] - 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. |
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:21:00 -
[50] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:ElQuirko wrote:the idea that another capsuleer can force a limited engagement without going criminal themselves Nobody forced you to set drones to aggressive. What's the default setting? |
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
7101
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:21:00 -
[51] - Quote
I know it seems otherwise when drones have been ridiculously broken for a long time but when something set to aggressive is actually aggressive it's probably working as intended. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
Lugalbandak
Anunnaku Warfare Corp.
282
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:22:00 -
[52] - 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...
haha silly man , you ever do pvp in this game? The police horse is the only animal in the world that haz his male genitals on his back |
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:23:00 -
[53] - Quote
Lugalbandak wrote: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... haha silly man , you ever do pvp in this game? According to my killboard ... yes! :D |
Karrl Tian
Bourbon Bandits Anarchy.
282
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:23:00 -
[54] - Quote
Tippia wrote:What makes you think it's a bug?
In highsec, PvP outside of a duel is always a bug. Now I just hope I can get in on some of this before the Bear-tears reach the critical mass level for CCP to changes this.
Btw, just going to head things off and tell anyone who tells these people not to set their drones to aggressive is wasting their time. |
Lugalbandak
Anunnaku Warfare Corp.
282
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:25:00 -
[55] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Lugalbandak wrote: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... haha silly man , you ever do pvp in this game? According to my killboard ... yes! :D
so if i killed a falcon with drones that are agrissve cause im perma jammed thats a expliot in your vision , got it sir! The police horse is the only animal in the world that haz his male genitals on his back |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4572
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:27:00 -
[56] - Quote
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. . |
Lugalbandak
Anunnaku Warfare Corp.
282
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:28:00 -
[57] - Quote
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.
yeah w8 your killboard (amezing btw lol) AFK seems to be the problem lol The police horse is the only animal in the world that haz his male genitals on his back |
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:29:00 -
[58] - Quote
Lugalbandak wrote:so if i killed a falcon with drones that are agrissve cause im perma jammed thats a expliot in your vision , got it sir! Which is a completely different case. Last I've checked, a falcon is not a structure and actually needs a pilot. You're too aggressive. It's a game. Go get some self respect. Bye. |
Lugalbandak
Anunnaku Warfare Corp.
282
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:29:00 -
[59] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Lugalbandak wrote:so if i killed a falcon with drones that are agrissve cause im perma jammed thats a expliot in your vision , got it sir! Which is a completely different case. Last I've checked, a falcon is not a structure and actually needs a pilot. You're too aggressive. It's a game. Grow up. Bye.
im glad your not working at ccp , patch notes will be hoorible to read & remember The police horse is the only animal in the world that haz his male genitals on his back |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
7102
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:31:00 -
[60] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Lugalbandak wrote:so if i killed a falcon with drones that are agrissve cause im perma jammed thats a expliot in your vision , got it sir! Which is a completely different case. Last I've checked, a falcon is not a structure and actually needs a pilot. You're too aggressive. It's a game. Go get some self respect. Bye. You sound like Infinity Ziona. Are you? Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
|
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:31:00 -
[61] - Quote
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? |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3893
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:31:00 -
[62] - 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. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4572
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:33:00 -
[63] - Quote
If you are still fearful then make sure you don't have a TCU or Depot deployed.
OR
Make sure your drones are not set to aggressive, because, you know they will be aggressive.
Sorry, but going AFK with drones out and a MTU so you can go watch a movie and farm ISK is not really great game play. And if this whole thing still burns your butt up. Go kill these jerks who are up to no good. Many are. Most of the time people refer to the as The Regulators.
Bad. Ass. . |
Slave A00073078
Northern Raven Reconnaissance Syndicate
8
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:33:00 -
[64] - Quote
Dunno whether it's a bug or not, but it's damned funny. I mission to keep sec status up, so don't effect me one bit since I never loot. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3893
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:34:00 -
[65] - 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. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4572
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:34:00 -
[66] - 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? The mission runners are not going suspect. Randoms are hunting those who are preying on the mission runners. . |
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:35:00 -
[67] - Quote
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. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3894
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:37:00 -
[68] - 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. |
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:37:00 -
[69] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote: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. Well, sometimes it is. Sometimes it isn't. You are flawless, right?
I noticed this happening. People coming after others who go suspect. I thought that was a single guy only and not common ... That's actually nice! |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
7103
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:37:00 -
[70] - 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. el oh el Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
|
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:38:00 -
[71] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote: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. What do I care about exactly? |
Kate stark
1015
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:39:00 -
[72] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote: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.
with the language barrier the OP isn't exactly the clearest post on the forums. Even i mistook their meaning when i read it this morning. Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:39:00 -
[73] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:el oh el You disagree? Don't you think that the more people know of this, the more use it and the more people will cry about it, which leads to CCP patching it?
|
Kate stark
1015
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:40:00 -
[74] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote: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. What do I care about exactly? dunno, *maybe* this topic since you keep posting in the thread. Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:43:00 -
[75] - Quote
Kate stark wrote:dunno, *maybe* this topic since you keep posting in the thread. I'm not sure he knows either, so I thought I'll ask. Of course I do keep posting, they keep doing it too. :) I have five more minutes of time to kill! |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
7103
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:43:00 -
[76] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:el oh el You disagree? Don't you think that the more people know of this, the more use it and the more people will cry about it, which leads to CCP patching it? That's more or less what we're trying to avoid. CCP has a tendency of doing that when players with a conscience simply allow things to fester while the unwashed masses cry for their highsec justice from evil griefers. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:45:00 -
[77] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Magna Mortem wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:el oh el You disagree? Don't you think that the more people know of this, the more use it and the more people will cry about it, which leads to CCP patching it? That's more or less what we're trying to avoid. CCP has a tendency of doing that when players with a conscience simply allow things to fester while the unwashed masses cry for their highsec justice from evil griefers. I don't see how it's avoidable ... |
Kate stark
1017
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:46:00 -
[78] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Kate stark wrote:dunno, *maybe* this topic since you keep posting in the thread. I'm not sure he knows either, so I thought I'll ask. Of course I do keep posting, they keep doing it too. :) I have five more minutes of time to kill! "lol just trolling, lol" is not really saving much face when people know that you're mad. Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4572
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:47:00 -
[79] - Quote
I'm actually write an article about all this and this new level of player interaction and such. I'll go into more detail, but one thing I saw in an ice belt made me smile. A couple ice miners used an Orca to swap to a couple of AFs, Kitsune and a Crow when one of there buddies in a mission had their MTU attacked by a player. What really helped was the warp speed changes. They were on that guy fast and saved the mission runner. The bad guy who went suspect had four warp core stabs fit and escaped. Coward. lol
Anyways, just another example of players filling in for law enforcement. One of the best additions to the game in a while in my opinion. Sure it is not leading headlines because it is not thousands of nerds in 10% TiDi, but it is pretty cool. . |
Xercodo
Xovoni Astronautical Manufacturing and Engineering
3077
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:50:00 -
[80] - Quote
I would consider it a bug on the basis that drones shouldn't be attacking anyone when aggressive unless they attack me directly.
Also if they are set to guard another fleet member. The drones are guarding me when aggressive, not my assets.
I say this as a person that uses combat drones pretty rarely now as most cases my Paladin can one shot them or snipe them after MJD'ing out. Just in case anyone had the idea I was a butthurt rattlesnake pilot or something. The Drake is a Lie |
|
Kate stark
1017
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:51:00 -
[81] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:A couple ice miners used an Orca to swap to a couple of AFs, Kitsune and a Crow when one of there buddies in a mission had their MTU attacked by a player. and that is the player driven content we need more of. Unfortunately the game provides very little reason to provide it. Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
Kate stark
1017
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:52:00 -
[82] - 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.
Also if they are set to guard another fleet member. The drones are guarding me when aggressive, not my assets.
I say this as a person that uses combat drones pretty rarely now as most cases my Paladin can one shot them or snipe them after MJD'ing out. Just in case anyone had the idea I was a butthurt rattlesnake pilot or something.
they did attack you, the MTU is yours.
the difference is, if some one attacks the person you are guarding, the limited engagement is between those two players and not you hence the drones lack of action. Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
Magna Mortem
the noise a cow makes while mating
54
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:53:00 -
[83] - Quote
Kate stark wrote:Magna Mortem wrote:Kate stark wrote:dunno, *maybe* this topic since you keep posting in the thread. I'm not sure he knows either, so I thought I'll ask. Of course I do keep posting, they keep doing it too. :) I have five more minutes of time to kill! "lol just trolling, lol" is not really saving much face when people know that you're mad. I'm not trolling. I had no idea this would escalate so easily. I still consider it as a bug and I still believe that it'll get declared an exploit and get patched. If not, then I'll use it too, but considering the masses of people who will start doing this, I really don't see how that won't happen. Aaaand i'm off. o7 |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3895
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:54:00 -
[84] - 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. |
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
84
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:54:00 -
[85] - Quote
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. |
Kate stark
1017
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:54:00 -
[86] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Kate stark wrote:Magna Mortem wrote:Kate stark wrote:dunno, *maybe* this topic since you keep posting in the thread. I'm not sure he knows either, so I thought I'll ask. Of course I do keep posting, they keep doing it too. :) I have five more minutes of time to kill! "lol just trolling, lol" is not really saving much face when people know that you're mad. I'm not trolling. I had no idea this would escalate so easily. I still consider it as a bug and I still believe that it'll get declared an exploit and get patched. If not, then I'll use it too, but considering the masses of people who will start doing this, I really don't see how that won't happen. Aaaand i'm off. o7
i wouldn't call it an exploit. I'd call it unintended behaviour at best. And to be honest, i think it adds something to the game so i doubt CCP will bother "fixing" it. Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4575
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:58:00 -
[87] - Quote
"I set my drones to be aggressive and they were aggressive. CCP please fix this." - AFK Mission Runner . |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9132
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:59:00 -
[88] - Quote
Kate stark wrote:Magna Mortem wrote:Kate stark wrote:Magna Mortem wrote:Kate stark wrote:dunno, *maybe* this topic since you keep posting in the thread. I'm not sure he knows either, so I thought I'll ask. Of course I do keep posting, they keep doing it too. :) I have five more minutes of time to kill! "lol just trolling, lol" is not really saving much face when people know that you're mad. I'm not trolling. I had no idea this would escalate so easily. I still consider it as a bug and I still believe that it'll get declared an exploit and get patched. If not, then I'll use it too, but considering the masses of people who will start doing this, I really don't see how that won't happen. Aaaand i'm off. o7 i wouldn't call it an exploit. I'd call it unintended behaviour at best. And to be honest, i think it adds something to the game so i doubt CCP will bother "fixing" it.
There is nothing to fix. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Kate stark
1018
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 11:59:00 -
[89] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:There is nothing to fix.
i agree. Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4575
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:00:00 -
[90] - Quote
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. . |
|
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3896
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:04:00 -
[91] - 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. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
7105
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:10:00 -
[92] - Quote
I really wouldn't be surprised if there's actually a way. and either nobody's figured it out yet or someone has and has been inconspicuous enough not to get noticed. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
Haygrove
Sturmgrenadier Inc
2
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:11:00 -
[93] - Quote
Mobile Tractor Units (MTU's) are one of the few things in this game that require no skill at all to use, and are very profitable... if you are careful. That this happens to mission runners without some warning is unfortunate for some, but also can serve as a wake up call that no bonus in Eve Online comes without some measure of risk. Really though, some sort of announcement should go out from the Dev/GMs on this as so far these units have been hailed as skill-less free ISK makers, when in reality they have risks just like anything else in this game.
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
14932
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:13:00 -
[94] - Quote
It's relatively easy to avoid if you're paying attention, pull your drones in when a member of the mission inspectorate visits. |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
406
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:14:00 -
[95] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Kate stark wrote:Magna Mortem wrote:Kate stark wrote:dunno, *maybe* this topic since you keep posting in the thread. I'm not sure he knows either, so I thought I'll ask. Of course I do keep posting, they keep doing it too. :) I have five more minutes of time to kill! "lol just trolling, lol" is not really saving much face when people know that you're mad. I'm not trolling. I had no idea this would escalate so easily. I still consider it as a bug and I still believe that it'll get declared an exploit and get patched. If not, then I'll use it too, but considering the masses of people who will start doing this, I really don't see how that won't happen. Aaaand i'm off. o7
Its not a bug, its simply the logical extension of the existing rules, and the rules surrounding deployables.
As a very dedicated droneboat pilot (who has near perfect skills for a mach, yet missioned in a domi), I think its also perfectly acceptable. Why does a golem point (with 75m3 unbonused drones) have them on aggressive for anyway. if that pilot doesn't direct them, then they will likely expend themselves on targets they can barely or not break the tank for. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17890
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:21:00 -
[96] - Quote
ElQuirko wrote:But if you really need the "bug" described: Despite the fact that the safety system prevents going suspect or criminal and does not prevent combat, the idea that another capsuleer can force a limited engagement without going criminal themselves is not in keeping with how the safeties mechanics work. If you shoot another person's wreck you get concordokkened - why is it that this situation is any different? Because the convenience of personal mobile structures is that the convenience comes at the cost of increased exposure GÇö they are very explicitly and deliberately not something that triggers CONCORD. And no, the safeties have absolutely nothing to do with keeping you out of limited engagements. In fact, they too are explicitly and deliberately excluded from what safeties control.
And no, you can't force anyone to engage with you. You can only trick them. The solution to that is to not be tricked. There is no bug.
Magna Mortem wrote:The drones should never agress with green safety, but they do. Sure they should. The safeties are only there to keep you away from S- and C-flags. That is all. Again, no bug.
All of these behaviours are as intended and as described. There is no bug, no exploit, not even any kind of undocumented feature (for once) since all of this has been described in detail in the various devblogs that deal with the mechanics involved. Don't want your drones to take aggressive actions against legitimate targets? Then don't tell them to. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Mizhir
Euphoria Released Triumvirate.
48309
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:24:00 -
[97] - Quote
GÖÑ Marlona Sky
This is brilliant One Man Crew - The official Bringing Solo Back contest
SCL5 Winner |
Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
129
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:25:00 -
[98] - Quote
Mizhir wrote:GÖÑ Marlona Sky
This is brilliant
If in doubt...do...excessively. |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1235
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:27:00 -
[99] - Quote
CCP wants more PvP in High-Sec so they're doing it by forcing people to shoot mobile tractor beams deployed by people that use drones as a weapon system thereby tricking them into combat.
Yup, makes perfect sense to me. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17890
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:30:00 -
[100] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:CCP wants more PvP in High-Sec so they're doing it by forcing people to shoot mobile tractor beams deployed by people that use drones as a weapon system thereby tricking them into combat. Forced GÇö adj.
1. the most misapplied word in the EVE vocabulary. 2. does not mean what you think it means. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
admiral root
Red Galaxy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
640
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:35:00 -
[101] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:CCP wants more PvP in High-Sec so they're doing it by forcing people to shoot mobile tractor beams deployed by people that use drones as a weapon system thereby tricking them into combat.
Tricking them how? When any of us deploy drones we have the option to set them passive or aggressive. One of those choices can lead to mission runners ending up with their drones getting them into a limited engagement and the other can prevent it. That's not tricksy, it's error (or not, if they've got friends waiting to pounce) or it's laziness on the part of the mission runner. No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff |
Haygrove
Sturmgrenadier Inc
3
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:38:00 -
[102] - Quote
And we all know how up to date the Drone Interface is. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
14932
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:45:00 -
[103] - Quote
Haygrove wrote:And we all know how up to date the Drone Interface is. We all know that the drone interface is, to put it bluntly, shite. That doesn't make what the OP is describing a bug or an exploit, especially when it's trivially easy to avoid. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17893
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:48:00 -
[104] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Haygrove wrote:And we all know how up to date the Drone Interface is. We all know that the drone interface is, to put it bluntly, shite. That doesn't make what the OP is describing a bug or an exploit, especially when it's trivially easy to avoid. Especially when this part of the drone interface is pretty darn easy and actually works. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Bel Tika
Dirty Rotten Scoundrel's Not.Safe.For.Work.
58
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:50:00 -
[105] - Quote
theres a drone interface? |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1235
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 12:55:00 -
[106] - Quote
Bel Tika wrote:theres a drone interface?
So I'm told. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Alice Ituin
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
20
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:03:00 -
[107] - Quote
What's the point of the green safety when you can still do stuff that gets you a limited engagement timer? When you set your drones to aggressive you don't get a warning that his might make you a legal target. One or the other needs fixing. |
Kate stark
1022
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:03:00 -
[108] - Quote
Alice Ituin wrote:What's the point of the green safety when you can still do stuff that gets you a limited engagement timer? When you set your drones to aggressive you don't get a warning that his might make you a legal target. One or the other needs fixing.
the point of the green safety is to prevent a suspect flag. Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5345
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:05:00 -
[109] - Quote
Kate stark wrote:Alice Ituin wrote:What's the point of the green safety when you can still do stuff that gets you a limited engagement timer? When you set your drones to aggressive you don't get a warning that his might make you a legal target. One or the other needs fixing. the point of the green safety is to prevent a suspect flag. obviously we need another safety that prevents you from doing anything that makes you engageable by a nonsuicide gank
eg: it would make sure you stay in an npc corp There are no goons. The goons; 0.0 dream is over.
Progodlegend said the goal of N3 is to destroy Goonswarm Federation, but in reality NCdot is in Fountain due to the fact it is virtually the last place there is action. ~NC., Fountain 2013 |
Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
129
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:05:00 -
[110] - Quote
Tippia wrote:The safeties are only there to keep you away from S- and C-flags. That is all. Again, no bug. All of these behaviours are as intended and as described. There is no bug, no exploit, not even any kind of undocumented feature (for once) since all of this has been described in detail in the various devblogs that deal with the mechanics involved. Don't want your drones to take aggressive actions against legitimate targets? Then don't tell them to.
If in doubt...do...excessively. |
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
129
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:07:00 -
[111] - Quote
edit: lol, never mind If in doubt...do...excessively. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
7106
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:10:00 -
[112] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Kate stark wrote:Alice Ituin wrote:What's the point of the green safety when you can still do stuff that gets you a limited engagement timer? When you set your drones to aggressive you don't get a warning that his might make you a legal target. One or the other needs fixing. the point of the green safety is to prevent a suspect flag. obviously we need another safety that prevents you from doing anything that makes you engageable by a nonsuicide gank eg: it would make sure you stay in an npc corp We need another safety that turns PVP off entirely. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
Ariel Dawn
F9X
1158
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:10:00 -
[113] - Quote
If you use drones, don't use a MTU if you suspect people may try to blow you up. Anybody who can dress themselves in the morning can figure this one out. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
14933
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:12:00 -
[114] - Quote
Alice Ituin wrote:What's the point of the green safety when you can still do stuff that gets you a limited engagement timer? When you set your drones to aggressive you don't get a warning that his might make you a legal target. One or the other needs fixing. When someone has a pop at an MTU they go suspect, the crimewatch rules say that you can shoot at a suspect, entering a limited engagement, without Concord getting in your face; weapons you can use to do so include drones. Working as intended as far as I can see. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
7106
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:16:00 -
[115] - Quote
I didn't actually intend my drones to be aggressive when they were set to aggressive... Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5345
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:22:00 -
[116] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Alice Ituin wrote:What's the point of the green safety when you can still do stuff that gets you a limited engagement timer? When you set your drones to aggressive you don't get a warning that his might make you a legal target. One or the other needs fixing. When someone has a pop at an MTU they go suspect, the crimewatch rules say that you can shoot at a suspect, entering a limited engagement, without Concord getting in your face; weapons you can use to do so include drones, which admittedly behave like a Clowder of Felis Catus under the influence of psychoactive substances. Working as intended as far as I can see. clearly the answer is to make it concordable to shoot mtus
and mobile depots. There are no goons. The goons; 0.0 dream is over.
Progodlegend said the goal of N3 is to destroy Goonswarm Federation, but in reality NCdot is in Fountain due to the fact it is virtually the last place there is action. ~NC., Fountain 2013 |
Casanunda
Church Of The Eternal Cosmic Confidence Trick
142
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:24:00 -
[117] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:clearly the answer is to make it concordable to shoot mtus
and mobile depots. You're so droll, I think I wub you
The fact that I am not a gazillionaire Gallente aristocrat with the sexual capacity of a rutting rhino is a constant niggle. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5345
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:28:00 -
[118] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Alice Ituin wrote:What's the point of the green safety when you can still do stuff that gets you a limited engagement timer? When you set your drones to aggressive you don't get a warning that his might make you a legal target. One or the other needs fixing. When someone has a pop at an MTU they go suspect, the crimewatch rules say that you can shoot at a suspect, entering a limited engagement, without Concord getting in your face; weapons you can use to do so include drones, which admittedly behave like a Clowder of Felis Catus under the influence of psychoactive substances. Working as intended as far as I can see. clearly the answer is to make it concordable to shoot mtus and mobile depots. actually wait
with green safety, you can accept a duel, right? it shouldn't let you There are no goons. The goons; 0.0 dream is over.
Progodlegend said the goal of N3 is to destroy Goonswarm Federation, but in reality NCdot is in Fountain due to the fact it is virtually the last place there is action. ~NC., Fountain 2013 |
Logan Revelore
Minimal Solutions Aurora Irae
10
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:33:00 -
[119] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote: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.
I think the issue here is that the drones are automatically engaging a player with a suspect flag.
According to the OP as I read it there are two scenarios where the drones should behave the same way in both scenarios, but they don't.
Scenario 1: Enemy player shoots his MTU, the enemy gets a S-flag. The drones automatically attack him if they're set to aggresive mode, which triggers the limited engagement.
Scenario 2: Enemy loots a wreck, the enemy gets a S-flag. The drones do not automatically attack him if they're set to aggresive mode, so the limited engagement is never entered.
Problem with scenario 1 is that it's possible for a player with green safety setting to get into a situation where he's a legitimate target, without him ever doing anything to cause this, other than forgetting that his drones are set to aggresive and trusting that they won't do anything to put him in this situation in the first place. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17895
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:37:00 -
[120] - Quote
Logan Revelore wrote:Problem with scenario 1 is that it's possible for a player with green safety setting to get into a situation where he's a legitimate target, without him ever doing anything to cause this, other than forgetting that his drones are set to aggresive and trusting that they won't do anything to put him in this situation in the first place. GǪand other than deliberately deploying a mobile structure that is purposefully designed to allow conflicts to be generated. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
129
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:40:00 -
[121] - Quote
there is no issue here, just rather clever development of high sec mechanics If in doubt...do...excessively. |
Titus Phook
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
30
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:51:00 -
[122] - Quote
As a self confessed carebear, I find the "OMG my drones aggressed someone because they were set to aggressive" carebear tears hilarious. To all those whining about the Tractor Unit and Depot mechanics, learn to carebear. They said I could be anything I wanted, so I became fabulous. |
dexington
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
901
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:55:00 -
[123] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪand other than deliberately deploying a mobile structure that is purposefully designed to allow conflicts to be generated.
if it is purposefully designed to allow conflicts to be generated, why does it not state it more clearly and why does it only work with drones? I'm a relatively respectable citizen. Multiple felon perhaps, but certainly not dangerous. |
Kate stark
1022
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 13:58:00 -
[124] - Quote
dexington wrote:Tippia wrote:GǪand other than deliberately deploying a mobile structure that is purposefully designed to allow conflicts to be generated. if it is purposefully designed to allow conflicts to be generated, why does it not state it more clearly and why does it only work with drones?
because guns can't be set to aggressive? Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5345
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 14:10:00 -
[125] - Quote
Kate stark wrote:dexington wrote:Tippia wrote:GǪand other than deliberately deploying a mobile structure that is purposefully designed to allow conflicts to be generated. if it is purposefully designed to allow conflicts to be generated, why does it not state it more clearly and why does it only work with drones? because guns can't be set to aggressive? Guns need the kind of fine tunes autonomy that drones get.
Also, gun assist. There are no goons. The goons; 0.0 dream is over.
Progodlegend said the goal of N3 is to destroy Goonswarm Federation, but in reality NCdot is in Fountain due to the fact it is virtually the last place there is action. ~NC., Fountain 2013 |
Kate stark
1022
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 14:17:00 -
[126] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Kate stark wrote:dexington wrote:Tippia wrote:GǪand other than deliberately deploying a mobile structure that is purposefully designed to allow conflicts to be generated. if it is purposefully designed to allow conflicts to be generated, why does it not state it more clearly and why does it only work with drones? because guns can't be set to aggressive? Guns need the kind of fine tunes autonomy that drones get. Also, gun assist.
screw drones, buff guns? Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this. |
Skeln Thargensen
The Scope Gallente Federation
328
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 14:19:00 -
[127] - Quote
Yep, found this out the hard way.
And this is why cheap fit domi, standardly. Oh and ECM drones, if that actually works lol. freelance space bum |
Ydnari
Estrale Frontiers Project Wildfire
242
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 14:21:00 -
[128] - Quote
No bugs here, just a few people not understanding the safety rules. Sounds like the people calling "bug" really want a new feature instead, some sort of ultra-green, possibly pink and fluffy, safety setting, that is everything that Green safety is plus blocking any actions that initiate a limited engagement, i.e. you can pretty much only fire on NPCs.
Which would be a bit sad if implemented.
It sure as hell shouldn't go in as a change to green safety, which is fine as it is. -- |
Skeln Thargensen
The Scope Gallente Federation
328
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 14:28:00 -
[129] - Quote
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. freelance space bum |
Miasmos
Aliastra Gallente Federation
36
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 15:04:00 -
[130] - Quote
Risk vs reward.
Reward: mobile depot or tractor. It's a bonus, you get it for the risk and are not entitled for it risk free. Risk: your drones aggro and you get pvp.
Common sense: when someone warps suspiciously to you, pull drones. Less common sense: no documentation of the effect which is blatantly unexpected if you just want to carebear and are not paranoid / clever enough to consider the risk.
Overall: add description about aggressive drones guarding the depots. Problem solved, most depoteers will still fall for it. |
|
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3898
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 15:11:00 -
[131] - 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. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
14933
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 15:12:00 -
[132] - Quote
Miasmos wrote:Overall: add description about aggressive drones guarding the depots. Problem solved, most depoteers will still fall for it. That won't help, some people would continue to mewl about it if you had it neon pink capital letters at the top of the item description.
|
SeenButNotHeard
Doing The Business
96
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 15:19:00 -
[133] - Quote
My guess would be that CCP didn't even think about the situation. Now it is a "feature"
All for it myself. |
Skeln Thargensen
The Scope Gallente Federation
328
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 15:24:00 -
[134] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote: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.
'cos PvP in low/null is so much freer and betterer. i've no idea what people see in highsec PvP and the sheer quantity of whine on here regarding it suggests to me it's best skipped over. freelance space bum |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
486
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 15:28:00 -
[135] - Quote
Sounds like the drone "aggressive" switch needs to be disabled by the safety interlock. You shouldn't be able to set aggressive until you set the safety to yellow.
CCP Punkturis-á "I want to get in on the goodposter circle jerk!"
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9136
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 15:35:00 -
[136] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:Sounds like the drone "aggressive" switch needs to be disabled by the safety interlock. You shouldn't be able to set aggressive until you set the safety to yellow.
Why?
Its fairly clear that aggressive drones will do aggressive things if someone touches your junk. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1235
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 15:42:00 -
[137] - Quote
because! mom said so. go to your room
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
804
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 15:55:00 -
[138] - Quote
Now I need to use my fail fitting skill to do something like that. I'm wondering how many ships I will lose... |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
389
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 16:35:00 -
[139] - Quote
My question is: why is shooting at a in space deployable not a concording offense? It is if they engage POS.
Unless your thread is limited to how 'awesum!' Eve Online is, ISD will lock the thread.-á You will find it is particularly common if CCP might have to make a public response to the thread subject, as opposed to bury it in the GM que for the forseeable future and then prohibit telling anyone what the GM said, if it's ever answered at all. |
Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
129
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 16:40:00 -
[140] - Quote
because they wanted this exact mechanic. if you remember how enamoured they were with canflipping ,which led to the current highsec duelling system, then this mechanic makes a lot of sense. its olso got the added side effect of punishing you for afk missioning. If in doubt...do...excessively. |
|
Eram Fidard
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
509
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 16:54:00 -
[141] - Quote
I rat in null sec and have never had this problem.
Mobile Tractor Units have increased my isk/hour quite nicely. Here's my calculations:
1x hub = 26m isk in ~14 minutes (including time warping to the next one) salvage 1x hub in destroyer after MTU does the work = ~10-15m isk in 3 minutes
so, 4x hubs in an hour would net ~104m
or
3x hubs = 78m isk plus 3x salvaged hubs = ~30-45m isk
=108-125m isk per hour
Not bad
Maybe you should stop expecting risk-free isk?
For the record, I doubt CCP will adjust this, whether intended or not, it creates content, and like every type of pvp in hisec, is 100% avoidable, so why are you complaining? Poster is not to be held responsible for damages to keyboards and/or noses caused by hot beverages. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1562
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 17:16:00 -
[142] - Quote
Ran into this in the can flipping days. Just set drones to passive There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... Winter Expansion new ship request |
gfldex
674
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 17:24:00 -
[143] - Quote
As with any newly discovered "feature" that will give a unsuspecting pilot a pvp flag in highsec, it is good advice to as a GM if they are fine with it. I have just done so via a ingame petition. The answer will be provided here in this threat -- as soon as it arrives (HAR HAR HAR).
Given that similar bugs in the can flip days got fixed _real_quick_ and Tippia voting in favour for this being legal, we all know how the outcome will be. If you take all the sand out of the box, only the cat poo will remain. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4583
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 17:33:00 -
[144] - Quote
gfldex wrote:As with any newly discovered "feature" that will give a unsuspecting pilot a pvp flag in highsec, it is good advice to as a GM if they are fine with it. I have just done so via a ingame petition. The answer will be provided here in this threat -- as soon as it arrives (HAR HAR HAR).
Given that similar bugs in the can flip days got fixed _real_quick_ and Tippia voting in favour for this being legal, we all know how the outcome will be.
Do you think you are the first to petition? I petitioned myself and even kept up with several other players who petitioned. Guess what the answers was? [i]"Woking as intended."[/]
But, you let us know if yours is different.
In the meantime I'm going to enjoy watching players enforce the law. Game play that would not exist if the MTU and Depot summoned Concord. . |
Damasi DeFanel
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
5
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 17:37:00 -
[145] - Quote
Lets be fair.... If you are mission running, to get the maximum dps out of your drones you SHOULD be setting them to passive, and co-ordinating them to attack a single target to focus fire.... thus making them more than a tickle.
If you are mining and have defense drones.... they should be passive.... and co-ordinated to attack npc rats when they appear, focused, giving max dps of the drones.
But no.... people like to set up a mission, set up drones, set up the new mobile units, then min screen and watch MLP or something....
All this is doing (and for the better) is giving hi-sec less reason to coast by afking their crap... and actually be involved in the game.
No bug, no exploit, no issues. |
gfldex
674
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 17:44:00 -
[146] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote: Do you think you are the first to petition?
I did not believe so. Playing the game for nearly 10 years now I know very well that complaining with GMs is pretty much the first thing players do.
Marlona Sky wrote: I petitioned myself and even kept up with several other players who petitioned.
That's nice to hear. But why didn't you tell us?
Marlona Sky wrote: Guess what the answers was? [i]"Woking as intended."[/]
POS bowling, and many other "features", used to be "Working as intended" too. Folk keep complaining and when the GMs got bored of reading the same stuff over and over again they forward it to a Dev. Who will then ask a DB dev to do some SQL magic to find out if that problem is persisting and significant. Then it gets fixed. Happened before, will happen again.
If you take all the sand out of the box, only the cat poo will remain. |
Eram Fidard
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
510
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 18:00:00 -
[147] - Quote
gfldex wrote:
POS bowling, <----nope, wrong
and many other "features", <----such as....?
used to be "Working as intended" too. Folk keep complaining and when the GMs got bored of reading the same stuff over and over again they forward it to a Dev. Who will then ask a DB dev to do some SQL magic to find out if that problem is persisting and significant. Then it gets fixed. Happened before, will happen again.
Do you honestly believe that catering to whiners improves this game? Go play a hand-holding theme-park adventure if you want your whining to be catered to, then you can whine even harder each time they nerf your FOTM. Chasing the dream, endlessly, buff nerf buff nerf buff nerf.
Hello Kitty Island Adventure...
<-------thataway
Do you believe your signature or not?? Poster is not to be held responsible for damages to keyboards and/or noses caused by hot beverages. |
gfldex
674
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 18:14:00 -
[148] - Quote
Eram Fidard wrote: Do you honestly believe that catering to whiners improves this game?
No, and I have never stated to do so.
Eram Fidard wrote: Go play a hand-holding theme-park adventure if you want your whining to be catered to, then you can whine even harder each time they nerf your FOTM.
I would not be here after nearly 10 years if I had the intention to play a boring game. Nor did I state that I believe the "feature" discussed here should be changed. That's why I didn't write why it is a bug. Every time a player can get him/herself a flag or getting into PvP without explicitly stating his or her intend, there is a little warning popup that forces the player to acknowledge the intend to get involved in PvP. Neither by launching or setting drones to nasty nor when dropping a mobile tractor thingy will there be any such warning massage. It is therefore not intended by the Devs (who are _not_ GMs whose word means little over time) to have players force other players into PvP with drone agro.
Opps, did I just write that? See, that's what you get from being unfriendly on the interweb!
Eram Fidard wrote:Do you believe your signature or not??
I do. However I do not believe in forum propaganda or in getting cheap kills. Folk like you (unfriendly and unable to use your brain, or unwilling like Tippia) are the cat poo I refer too.
If you take all the sand out of the box, only the cat poo will remain. |
Silvetica Dian
Manson Family Advent of Fate
374
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 18:17:00 -
[149] - Quote
nice work people that touched peoples mission boats to cause this whinefest. makes me want to visit highsec. here is a list of all the fiat currencies that didn't end up at zero value.....and here is a list of the places where a currency pegged to a real commodity has successfully co-existed with compound interest....-á Here is a physics professor explaining why sustainable growth isn't a thing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY |
Winchester Steele
243
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 18:31:00 -
[150] - Quote
Magna Mortem wrote:Tippia wrote:Sentamon wrote:It's clearly a bug, if you think otherwise you're trolling or drunk. To wit, it's such a huge bug that it completely disables people's ability to describe what the bug is. It was there all along, for you to see. The drones should never agress with green safety, but they do. You can call it an oversight, a bug, or shabby game design. Either way, people who do use it for their advantage are exploiting it.
If you werent afk/bot farming missions you wouldnt need your drones set to aggressive and none of this would be of any concern.
Also, please tell me more about how drones set to aggressive shouldn't aggress. ... |
|
Tuttomenui II
Aliastra Gallente Federation
155
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 18:46:00 -
[151] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Marlona Sky you little raskle you!
She tried to get me the other day. I didn't know what she was doing until now. My drones were aggressive, but the tractor unit weren't mine =). |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
3456
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 19:55:00 -
[152] - Quote
Eight pages of the usual suspects trying to justify a mechanic that gives them consequence free PVP.
Am I surprised? Of course not.
As for the mechanic itself. It's perfectly legit at this point. But I believe that it will be changed as it's more likely a coding error that slipped by than an intended mechanic. This is not the first time or the last that CCP has done this.
For now though, either take advantage of it if you are into free kills or don't set your drones to aggressive if you are in a PVE fit ship.
Mr Epeen There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass! |
Na Kahm
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 19:56:00 -
[153] - Quote
[quote=Xercodo]I would consider it a bug on the basis that drones shouldn't be attacking anyone when aggressive unless they attack me directly.
Nobody attacked mine yet, but as it (MTU) belongs to me if attacked my drones SHOULD attack the person. Alos I mine in Low sec and am never afk John 17 : 23 |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
829
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 20:21:00 -
[154] - Quote
Winchester Steele wrote:Magna Mortem wrote:Tippia wrote:Sentamon wrote:It's clearly a bug, if you think otherwise you're trolling or drunk. To wit, it's such a huge bug that it completely disables people's ability to describe what the bug is. It was there all along, for you to see. The drones should never agress with green safety, but they do. You can call it an oversight, a bug, or shabby game design. Either way, people who do use it for their advantage are exploiting it. If you werent afk/bot farming missions you wouldnt need your drones set to aggressive and none of this would be of any concern. Also, please tell me more about how drones set to aggressive shouldn't aggress. When I started doing missions I used drones set to aggressive frequently to get around NPC damping and jamming, I'd also imagine that for some that's still a thing. |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
805
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 21:10:00 -
[155] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Winchester Steele wrote:Magna Mortem wrote:Tippia wrote:Sentamon wrote:It's clearly a bug, if you think otherwise you're trolling or drunk. To wit, it's such a huge bug that it completely disables people's ability to describe what the bug is. It was there all along, for you to see. The drones should never agress with green safety, but they do. You can call it an oversight, a bug, or shabby game design. Either way, people who do use it for their advantage are exploiting it. If you werent afk/bot farming missions you wouldnt need your drones set to aggressive and none of this would be of any concern. Also, please tell me more about how drones set to aggressive shouldn't aggress. When I started doing missions I used drones set to aggressive frequently to get around NPC damping and jamming, I'd also imagine that for some that's still a thing.
It effectively is pretty cool when dealing with jamming. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4586
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 21:22:00 -
[156] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Eight pages of the usual suspects trying to justify a mechanic that gives them consequence free PVP.
Consequence free you say? Then explain this: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=21040282
He was going around shooting the MTU in peoples missions becoming suspect flagged. I showed up and took the law into my own hands and killed him. . |
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
61
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 22:25:00 -
[157] - Quote
TBH there is no huge problem with an excess of AFK mission running now drones are aggro-ed.
The supposed opposition to AFK missioning and mining is simply a rationalization that allows people to grief weak targets without feeling guilty.
In reality the main reason to leave mission drones on aggressive is for missions that disrupt targeting.
You will almost certainly have the same problem if you deploy FoF missiles when targeting is disrupted.
In both cases being at the keyboard will not avoid your drones targeting the wrong target.
The only solution would seem to be pull in the MTU when targeting is disrupted and you need to go aggressive.
I am not sure how that is "working as intended" but there are bigger oddities with drones - apparently remote repping drones is a bannable offense at GM discretion so I think this is mild in comparison and simply a case of "following the referees call" and pull your MTU in when you need to go aggressive.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17922
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 22:32:00 -
[158] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Eight pages of the usual suspects trying to justify a mechanic that gives them consequence free PVP. Yeah, it's pretty silly that people think that they can just automatically scoop up valuable resources around them without there being some kind of consequence to that automation.
It's a good thing that people like Marlona is around to create some consequence for that lassitude. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Ludi Burek
Toilet Emergency JIHADASQUAD
283
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 23:10:00 -
[159] - Quote
So the "fix" is that the drones should still remain aggressive towards NPCs but not towards an attacker of your deployed assets? They should also remain aggressive in the event of attempted suicide gank amirite? So everything BUT this?
|
Damasi DeFanel
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 23:27:00 -
[160] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:TBH there is no huge problem with an excess of AFK mission running now drones are aggro-ed.
The supposed opposition to AFK missioning and mining is simply a rationalization that allows people to grief weak targets without feeling guilty.
In reality the main reason to leave mission drones on aggressive is for missions that disrupt targeting.
You will almost certainly have the same problem if you deploy FoF missiles when targeting is disrupted.
In both cases being at the keyboard will not avoid your drones targeting the wrong target.
The only solution would seem to be pull in the MTU when targeting is disrupted and you need to go aggressive.
I am not sure how that is "working as intended" but there are bigger oddities with drones - apparently remote repping drones is a bannable offense at GM discretion so I think this is mild in comparison and simply a case of "following the referees call" and pull your MTU in when you need to go aggressive.
Only, generally.... if you are active at your keyboard you will see the person attacking your MTU and would either recall your drones so that they dont get destroyed too, or to high tail it out, or to stop them aggro-ing and making you a target... cause well....
Drones are called that for a reason THEY DONT THINK...
they just Do. |
|
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
61
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 23:31:00 -
[161] - Quote
Damasi DeFanel wrote:Hasikan Miallok wrote:TBH there is no huge problem with an excess of AFK mission running now drones are aggro-ed.
The supposed opposition to AFK missioning and mining is simply a rationalization that allows people to grief weak targets without feeling guilty.
In reality the main reason to leave mission drones on aggressive is for missions that disrupt targeting.
You will almost certainly have the same problem if you deploy FoF missiles when targeting is disrupted.
In both cases being at the keyboard will not avoid your drones targeting the wrong target.
The only solution would seem to be pull in the MTU when targeting is disrupted and you need to go aggressive.
I am not sure how that is "working as intended" but there are bigger oddities with drones - apparently remote repping drones is a bannable offense at GM discretion so I think this is mild in comparison and simply a case of "following the referees call" and pull your MTU in when you need to go aggressive.
Only, generally.... if you are active at your keyboard you will see the person attacking your MTU and would either recall your drones so that they dont get destroyed too, or to high tail it out, or to stop them aggro-ing and making you a target... cause well.... Drones are called that for a reason THEY DONT THINK... they just Do.
Pretty sure FoF missiles will behave in exactly the same fashion.
|
Damasi DeFanel
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 23:37:00 -
[162] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:Damasi DeFanel wrote:Hasikan Miallok wrote:TBH there is no huge problem with an excess of AFK mission running now drones are aggro-ed.
The supposed opposition to AFK missioning and mining is simply a rationalization that allows people to grief weak targets without feeling guilty.
In reality the main reason to leave mission drones on aggressive is for missions that disrupt targeting.
You will almost certainly have the same problem if you deploy FoF missiles when targeting is disrupted.
In both cases being at the keyboard will not avoid your drones targeting the wrong target.
The only solution would seem to be pull in the MTU when targeting is disrupted and you need to go aggressive.
I am not sure how that is "working as intended" but there are bigger oddities with drones - apparently remote repping drones is a bannable offense at GM discretion so I think this is mild in comparison and simply a case of "following the referees call" and pull your MTU in when you need to go aggressive.
Only, generally.... if you are active at your keyboard you will see the person attacking your MTU and would either recall your drones so that they dont get destroyed too, or to high tail it out, or to stop them aggro-ing and making you a target... cause well.... Drones are called that for a reason THEY DONT THINK... they just Do. Pretty sure FoF missiles will behave in exactly the same fashion.
Friend or Foe ("F.O.F") missiles are available in standard-, heavy-, and cruise-launcher sizes. They can be fired without a locked target and will strike the nearest hostile ships or object.
Working as intended then.... as suspect for damaging your own gear = hostile.... am i right?
Again. If a Hi Sec mission runner is NOT afk, and NOT a bot.... Hi Sec runner should have the brains NOT to fire FoF if their stuffs getting shot at....
if they see a yellow blip, and STILL fire off the missiles.... then its their own damned fault and they shouldnt come crying here about it.
Cause and Effect, my friend.
Stupidity, Laziness or Carelessness being the cause....
rage, tears, and a kill mail being the result.
People should take responsibility for their actions and stop blaming "Broken" game mechanics |
Tiberius StarGazer
Trifectas Executor Trifectas Syndicate
371
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 23:37:00 -
[163] - Quote
Simple solution to mission runners.
MJD 100km from the warp in point. Drop tractor, orbit tractor at 100km shooting all the oh so yawnish red crosses, someone comes into site they will have to burn into range of the MTU at which point you have aligned back to it, MJD back, scooped it and thrown a nice try better luck next time in local.
Or the rats aggro em as they burn for it and they have to pull out because of the DPS, that one was amusing. |
Tuttomenui II
Aliastra Gallente Federation
155
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 23:49:00 -
[164] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Eight pages of the usual suspects trying to justify a mechanic that gives them consequence free PVP. Consequence free you say? Then explain this: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=21040282He was going around shooting the MTU in peoples missions becoming suspect flagged. I showed up and took the law into my own hands and killed him.
No honor among gankers =). hehehe. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
14936
|
Posted - 2013.12.23 00:17:00 -
[165] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:My question is: why is shooting at a in space deployable not a concording offense? It is if they engage POS. A POS is a corporate structure and requires a wardec to attack in highsec, an MTU/Depot is a personal structure and seems to be regarded in the same vein as a jetcan for aggro purposes, that's a pretty big difference. CCP also categorically stated that attacking the new structures will not result in Concordokken but merely a suspect flag.
I'll, seriously beginning to hate the post timer, once again I get a 404 ganked and a 36 second timer before I can post. |
Tuttomenui II
Aliastra Gallente Federation
156
|
Posted - 2013.12.23 00:34:00 -
[166] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Cygnet Lythanea wrote:My question is: why is shooting at a in space deployable not a concording offense? It is if they engage POS. A POS is a corporate structure and requires a wardec to attack in highsec, an MTU/Depot is a personal structure and seems to be regarded in the same vein as a jetcan for aggro purposes, that's a pretty big difference. CCP also categorically stated that attacking the new structures will not result in Concordokken but merely a suspect flag. I'll, seriously beginning to hate the post timer, once again I get a 404 ganked and a 36 second timer before I can post.
Actually less than a jet can, If you shoot a jet can you get concordokken. It is almost like they made the only suspect to avoid complaints of the devices being OP.
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1235
|
Posted - 2013.12.23 00:39:00 -
[167] - Quote
Tuttomenui II wrote:
Actually less than a jet can, If you shoot a jet can you get concordokken. It is almost like they made the only suspect to avoid complaints of the devices being OP.
Or lack of coding time or lack of QA time. It also completely runs counter to their whole handholding red/yellow/green safety feature that they spent so much time on. Hell, cant even loot in lowsec without a yellow setting. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
409
|
Posted - 2013.12.23 00:47:00 -
[168] - Quote
Tiberius StarGazer wrote:Simple solution to mission runners.
MJD 100km from the warp in point. Drop tractor, orbit tractor at 100km shooting all the oh so yawnish red crosses, someone comes into site they will have to burn into range of the MTU at which point you have aligned back to it, MJD back, scooped it and thrown a nice try better luck next time in local.
Or the rats aggro em as they burn for it and they have to pull out because of the DPS, that one was amusing.
You are describing a player at the keyboard. This is largely not about that subset of droneboat pilots.
Also in my case its possible for drones to react on the server before my client updates, and also I suspect that I only need be in lockrange of an MTU to go suspect, I might not actually have to hit it. |
Tuttomenui II
Aliastra Gallente Federation
156
|
Posted - 2013.12.23 00:52:00 -
[169] - Quote
Tauranon wrote:Tiberius StarGazer wrote:Simple solution to mission runners.
MJD 100km from the warp in point. Drop tractor, orbit tractor at 100km shooting all the oh so yawnish red crosses, someone comes into site they will have to burn into range of the MTU at which point you have aligned back to it, MJD back, scooped it and thrown a nice try better luck next time in local.
Or the rats aggro em as they burn for it and they have to pull out because of the DPS, that one was amusing. You are describing a player at the keyboard. This is largely not about that subset of droneboat pilots. Also in my case its possible for drones to react on the server before my client updates, and also I suspect that I only need be in lockrange of an MTU to go suspect, I might not actually have to hit it.
In my Domi I have 86km targeting range but my drones reach out to 102km =). But I dont use a tractor unit with my domi i tried it once in a gone berserk mission it was faster to just come back with my noctis, plus there was more loot there than I could carry in the domi. I moved the tractor unit to the noctis, still useless. Makes a great auto looter though. I wish it prioritized the farthest stuff instead of the closest stuff. |
Davon Mandra'thin
Rotten Legion Ops
453
|
Posted - 2013.12.23 00:56:00 -
[170] - Quote
This has always worked like this. It used to be worse. Used to be that if someone stole from your cans whilst you were mining and you had your drones set aggressive they would attack automatically.
Working as intended. Maybe people shouldn't semi-consciously mission run with their drones set to aggressive. |
|
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
409
|
Posted - 2013.12.23 01:02:00 -
[171] - Quote
Tuttomenui II wrote:Tauranon wrote:Tiberius StarGazer wrote:Simple solution to mission runners.
MJD 100km from the warp in point. Drop tractor, orbit tractor at 100km shooting all the oh so yawnish red crosses, someone comes into site they will have to burn into range of the MTU at which point you have aligned back to it, MJD back, scooped it and thrown a nice try better luck next time in local.
Or the rats aggro em as they burn for it and they have to pull out because of the DPS, that one was amusing. You are describing a player at the keyboard. This is largely not about that subset of droneboat pilots. Also in my case its possible for drones to react on the server before my client updates, and also I suspect that I only need be in lockrange of an MTU to go suspect, I might not actually have to hit it. In my Domi I have 86km targeting range but my drones reach out to 102km =). But I dont use a tractor unit with my domi i tried it once in a gone berserk mission it was faster to just come back with my noctis, plus there was more loot there than I could carry in the domi. I moved the tractor unit to the noctis, still useless. Makes a great auto looter though. I wish it prioritized the farthest stuff instead of the closest stuff.
The point is putting the MTU a long way from the aggressor may not significantly delay the aggressor. In all honesty if I was hunting MJD dominix afkers, I'd use an MJD neut domi anyway, jump right to them get aggro from their drones and then shut them down.
|
|
ISD Tyrozan
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
253
|
Posted - 2013.12.23 01:46:00 -
[172] - Quote
Thread has been moved to Issues, Workarounds & Localization. ISD Tyrozan Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department @ISDTyrozan | @ISD_CCL |
|
LittleTerror
Beer and Kebabs
124
|
Posted - 2013.12.23 02:09:00 -
[173] - Quote
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....
you are free to shoot at suspects when your safety is on green as it is not a criminal act, that is the safety settings purpose and it completes the circle of life, the weakest animal here in the circle of life is you. Please be more careful when using your drones |
Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
150
|
Posted - 2013.12.23 12:31:00 -
[174] - Quote
cmon ppl! really. this is thick. If in doubt...do...excessively. |
Romeo Deluxe
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2013.12.23 22:03:00 -
[175] - Quote
There is a simple explanation to some of the replies to this post.
CYA http://i.imgur.com/t6qh47p.jpg
Footnote: my apologies, I can find no good meme for this. |
admiral root
Red Galaxy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
642
|
Posted - 2013.12.24 15:46:00 -
[176] - Quote
ISD Tyrozan wrote:Thread has been moved to Issues, Workarounds & Localization.
Does not compute. It's a whine thread which is why it was posted in general discussion. No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff |
Katrina Oniseki
Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
2679
|
Posted - 2013.12.24 17:17:00 -
[177] - Quote
Didn't drones get you CONCORD'd way back in the day or something? Or shoot your fleet mates?
It's unsurprising that drones are ******* things up again now, but it is mildly surprising that players think this is intended behavior. I'd be surprised if CCP said it's working as intended.
The simple solution for carebears is to set your drones to passive and watch your damned overview. The simple solution for gankers is to milk those shiny mission boats as much as you possibly can before CCP changes it. Ch+½j+ì Katrina Oniseki ~ (RDC) Chief Operations Officer ~ [I-RED] Director of Public Relations |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
501
|
Posted - 2013.12.24 22:16:00 -
[178] - Quote
FoF's wont target a suspect if they have not first opened fire. They wont even do it if you lock them.
The "safety" line is rubbish - it's nothing to do with that, the (percieved?) issue is one players actions provoking another players drones to open a limited engagement, that seems highly questionable.
Imo, it shouldn't work like this. But that's just my opinion. |
Ithillian D'sade
EVE University Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2013.12.25 01:09:00 -
[179] - Quote
I think shooting at an MTU or Mobile Depot should get you Concorded. There are enough ways to PvP in this game without giving more opportunities to the gankers. The person who shows up to your mission pocket and shoots your MTU knows there is really nothing you can do about it because your in a PVE fitted ship. What is the purpose of high-sec anymore when people can scan you down in a mission pocket in high-sec and show up there and either loot your wrecks or kill your MTU all to bait you into PvP, which you will lose because they show in a PvP fitted ship with total advantage. Why give another way to grief mission runners in high-sec? Make shooting MTU's and depot's a Concord death. Low or null are what they are but high-sec is turning into low sec with all the ways ppl can grief mission runners now. |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
824
|
Posted - 2013.12.27 02:53:00 -
[180] - Quote
this is...EXCITING
afk mission runners under threat? players having to defend themselves and eachother?
when can we have MORE such modules? There are no vets in EVE. Only varying levels of Noobery. |
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
1947
|
Posted - 2013.12.27 03:14:00 -
[181] - Quote
This is hilarious, did no one read or listen to how thd new mobile structures worked? Lots of shiney ships will burn! Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
512
|
Posted - 2013.12.27 09:49:00 -
[182] - Quote
I did and I missed the part where it mentioned that drones would attack automagically in the new era of mobile deployables like this, it's not wholly intuitive.
Feels outside the intention of the rules to me (though not the spirit of the game itself), an oversight if you will.
I wonder what happens if they're assigned to guard a person with one out.
Some clarity on if this is working as intended would be good (for both sides of the argument). |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
1947
|
Posted - 2013.12.27 14:42:00 -
[183] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:I did and I missed the part where it mentioned that drones would attack automagically in the new era of mobile deployables like this, it's not wholly intuitive. Feels outside the intention of the rules to me (though not the spirit of the game itself), an oversight if you will. If your drones are out, an set to aggressive they will attack any hostile target in the area. If you have a mobile structure out, it can be attacked with no concord intervention giving the attacker a suspect flag. A player with a suspect flag can be attacked by anyone without concord intervention. What part did you miss? Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
512
|
Posted - 2013.12.27 15:07:00 -
[184] - Quote
That's the thing - they only work like this on mobile structures, which are new.
Remember they do NOT automagically go for flashy reds (or yellows). They have to be directed. The automated defence of the structure is the key difference here - it's not your ship, thus is unexpected behaviour.
YOU are not being attacked, a STRUCTURE is - there is a pretty big difference in drone behaviour expectation, imho.
Edit for clarity: By "work like this" I mean can drag people into LE by baiting drones to automatically attack. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
1947
|
Posted - 2013.12.27 15:22:00 -
[185] - Quote
The structures belong to you, just like jet cans and wrecks. If I shoot your wreck I will get concorded, if I steal from your wreck I get a suspect flag. If you have drones out when I steal from your wreck they will attack me as a new hostile target; if they are set to aggressive.
There is nothing new going on here, other than being able to shoot a structure with concord responding. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
512
|
Posted - 2013.12.27 15:29:00 -
[186] - Quote
Drones do no such thing if you steal from a player, that's the point. That there's never been a way to pull drones into shooting you like this before, i.e. an action that picks up a suspect, rather than criminal flag.
A change of this nature would usually this would be noted at the time in the dev blogs rather than simply implied, which is what makes me think it's iffy/potentially not working as intended. |
gfldex
691
|
Posted - 2013.12.28 10:56:00 -
[187] - Quote
I got my petition reply today and as promised I provide the GMs answer.
This is in my own words because of legal obligation. No really I did rephrase it!
Quote:This is currently classified as a bug, and we hope to have it fixed in the near future. For the moment, we recommend players set their drones to passive. If you take all the sand out of the box, only the cat poo will remain. |
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
16
|
Posted - 2013.12.29 20:49:00 -
[188] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:The structures belong to you, just like jet cans and wrecks. If I shoot your wreck I will get concorded, if I steal from your wreck I get a suspect flag. If you have drones out when I steal from your wreck they will attack me as a new hostile target; if they are set to aggressive.
There is nothing new going on here, other than being able to shoot a structure with(out) concord responding. Ummm, No. Not for quite some time (and by that i mean YEARS) has this worked. It was fixed for a reason. As this will be.
I'll chime in on this with some logic...*gasp!!!*
Okay, if i'm not mistaken, (which i very well could be) back in the day i believe it was possible to get a person's drones to auto-aggress from looting one of their wrecks. (and some ppl apparently believe it is STILL possible) And was that eventually changed to no-auto-aggression? Yes. Because even if the player is active and at the keyboard, it can happen quick enough for the player to not stop the drones.
Also, as the player is used to knowing that drones are not programmed to attack suspects, they will have no reason to worry...until this bug is employed and allakazam! they are now in a LE with a very pvp setup ship who usually has 'neutral' logi waiting to keep him alive, with their pve ship.
If you still want to cry about how this isn't an exploit b/c it is happening (giving you the ability to 'fight' and kill shiney ships) then maybe you should just keep doing this, and enjoy the ban when CCP brings the hammer.
|
Cory Rose
Club Deadspace
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 13:22:00 -
[189] - Quote
Seeing everyone is complaining and whining about this, lets review.
If you engage in PVP activity a warning pops up letting you know that everyone and their mom with the same ticker can now attack you.
If your drones do this without your consent, there is no warning, they just fire ( I laughed so hard I fell out of my chair when my guards did it even when I popped I laughed and had a great conversation with the aggressor afterwards.
I will say that I got everything back and had to refund my insurance payment as SOP, so this very well might be an exploit and then again it might not but the fact a DEV moved this post into issues in my experience means its something they are seriously looking at.
And a quick pro tip, to avoid this whole thing set your drones to passive and command them to fire when someone shoots your MTU go pick it up or watch it pop, your choice.
My reasoning against: again I am not for or against but the last aggressive drone loophole got closed by CCP, and with the same suspect mechanic your drones should autopop Ninja looters but do not, suspect aggression is suspect aggression and all forms should be treated equally and in this case they are not, both the wrecks and MTU's are "owned" by a player and have the same ownership rights so thus should be treated as such.
My reasoning for: Setting yourself to green means you will not take any action that will make "you" a suspect or criminal, the fact that the aggressor is attacking you and your drones are now choosing to see that as the next high priority target is nominal they will attack and you do not have to change your security setting because this will not cause "you" to be a suspect or criminal they are doing what they do when anything attacks you, they fire.
In this matter because of my two opinions on this matter I would have to lean towards the against, unless all suspect aggression against all owned property is treated the same the MTU should not be different than your personal wreck and drones and mechanics should mirror in both situations.
Again all of the speculation is listed towards my refund of my ship, if I had a message of this is a mechanic that is working as intended like I did when I noticed something with the downtime window and got the this is working as intended message.
Just some food for thought, as you were. :P
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8096
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 22:26:00 -
[190] - Quote
gfldex wrote:I got my petition reply today and as promised I provide the GMs answer. This is in my own words because of legal obligation. No really I did rephrase it! Quote:This is currently classified as a bug, and we hope to have it fixed in the near future. For the moment, we recommend players set their drones to passive. Bullshit. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
|
Dark Nanny
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.05 02:59:00 -
[191] - Quote
Damasi DeFanel wrote:Hasikan Miallok wrote:Damasi DeFanel wrote:Hasikan Miallok wrote:TBH there is no huge problem with an excess of AFK mission running now drones are aggro-ed.
The supposed opposition to AFK missioning and mining is simply a rationalization that allows people to grief weak targets without feeling guilty.
In reality the main reason to leave mission drones on aggressive is for missions that disrupt targeting.
You will almost certainly have the same problem if you deploy FoF missiles when targeting is disrupted.
In both cases being at the keyboard will not avoid your drones targeting the wrong target.
The only solution would seem to be pull in the MTU when targeting is disrupted and you need to go aggressive.
I am not sure how that is "working as intended" but there are bigger oddities with drones - apparently remote repping drones is a bannable offense at GM discretion so I think this is mild in comparison and simply a case of "following the referees call" and pull your MTU in when you need to go aggressive.
Only, generally.... if you are active at your keyboard you will see the person attacking your MTU and would either recall your drones so that they dont get destroyed too, or to high tail it out, or to stop them aggro-ing and making you a target... cause well.... Drones are called that for a reason THEY DONT THINK... they just Do. Pretty sure FoF missiles will behave in exactly the same fashion. Friend or Foe ("F.O.F") missiles are available in standard-, heavy-, and cruise-launcher sizes. They can be fired without a locked target and will strike the nearest hostile ships or object. Working as intended then.... as suspect for damaging your own gear = hostile.... am i right? Again. If a Hi Sec mission runner is NOT afk, and NOT a bot.... Hi Sec runner should have the brains NOT to fire FoF if their stuffs getting shot at.... if they see a yellow blip, and STILL fire off the missiles.... then its their own damned fault and they shouldnt come crying here about it. Cause and Effect, my friend. Stupidity, Laziness or Carelessness being the cause.... rage, tears, and a kill mail being the result. People should take responsibility for their actions and stop blaming "Broken" game mechanics Being distracted for 5 seconds in a hi-sec L4 mission should not equate to my death at the hands of another capsuleer.
The solution is to allow us to enable a setting - much like the safety - that does not allow us to aggress suspects. That means missiles will find another target or fire into empty space. That means drones will find another target or stay idle. That means manually enabling my guns will give a message, "please remove your suspect engagement restrictions".
That is completely logical, sane and balanced. Arguing against that is basically saying, "I can't kill PVPers so give me some easy people to shoot at".
I don't say this as a risk averse carebear; this character I'm posting on is purely setup for ganking haulers for instance. I enjoy ganking and hi-sec. I don't think hi-sec aggro against PVE players is always a bad thing. It just has to be balanced and make sense. The current mechanics DO NOT! |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
590
|
Posted - 2014.01.05 13:02:00 -
[192] - Quote
FOFs do NOT shoot suspects, not without something else in play. Much like drones.
@James: which bit is bullshit? I don't doubt the reimburse - bug line...maybe. |
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
16
|
Posted - 2014.01.05 20:58:00 -
[193] - Quote
^he says it aint true b/c thats not what his icon Mittani believes. Simple as that. Meanwhile lots of ppl are getting reimbursed, and i'm still waiting for an answer to whether or not i'll get a ban for engaging in this activity. (since i have previously been warned b/c i did something the whole community believed was legit and 'as intended' last year)
It looks like great fun, but not enough fun to justify a ban. I just want to know. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4713
|
Posted - 2014.01.05 22:12:00 -
[194] - Quote
Dark Nanny wrote:Being distracted for 5 seconds in a hi-sec L4 mission should not equate to my death at the hands of another capsuleer.
The solution is to allow us to enable a setting - much like the safety - that does not allow us to aggress suspects. That means missiles will find another target or fire into empty space. That means drones will find another target or stay idle. That means manually enabling my guns will give a message, "please remove your suspect engagement restrictions".
That is completely logical, sane and balanced. Arguing against that is basically saying, "I can't kill PVPers so give me some easy people to shoot at".
I don't say this as a risk averse carebear; this character I'm posting on is purely setup for ganking haulers for instance. I enjoy ganking and hi-sec. I don't think hi-sec aggro against PVE players is always a bad thing. It just has to be balanced and make sense. The current mechanics DO NOT!
You paint a picture like anyone who is suspect can warp in and kill any mission runner they please. That is not the case, not even remotely close. . |
seth Hendar
I love you miners
355
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 16:58:00 -
[195] - Quote
Dark Nanny wrote:Damasi DeFanel wrote:Hasikan Miallok wrote:Damasi DeFanel wrote:Hasikan Miallok wrote:TBH there is no huge problem with an excess of AFK mission running now drones are aggro-ed.
The supposed opposition to AFK missioning and mining is simply a rationalization that allows people to grief weak targets without feeling guilty.
In reality the main reason to leave mission drones on aggressive is for missions that disrupt targeting.
You will almost certainly have the same problem if you deploy FoF missiles when targeting is disrupted.
In both cases being at the keyboard will not avoid your drones targeting the wrong target.
The only solution would seem to be pull in the MTU when targeting is disrupted and you need to go aggressive.
I am not sure how that is "working as intended" but there are bigger oddities with drones - apparently remote repping drones is a bannable offense at GM discretion so I think this is mild in comparison and simply a case of "following the referees call" and pull your MTU in when you need to go aggressive.
Only, generally.... if you are active at your keyboard you will see the person attacking your MTU and would either recall your drones so that they dont get destroyed too, or to high tail it out, or to stop them aggro-ing and making you a target... cause well.... Drones are called that for a reason THEY DONT THINK... they just Do. Pretty sure FoF missiles will behave in exactly the same fashion. Friend or Foe ("F.O.F") missiles are available in standard-, heavy-, and cruise-launcher sizes. They can be fired without a locked target and will strike the nearest hostile ships or object. Working as intended then.... as suspect for damaging your own gear = hostile.... am i right? Again. If a Hi Sec mission runner is NOT afk, and NOT a bot.... Hi Sec runner should have the brains NOT to fire FoF if their stuffs getting shot at.... if they see a yellow blip, and STILL fire off the missiles.... then its their own damned fault and they shouldnt come crying here about it. Cause and Effect, my friend. Stupidity, Laziness or Carelessness being the cause.... rage, tears, and a kill mail being the result. People should take responsibility for their actions and stop blaming "Broken" game mechanics Being distracted for 5 seconds in a hi-sec L4 mission should not equate to my death at the hands of another capsuleer. The solution is to allow us to enable a setting - much like the safety - that does not allow us to aggress suspects. That means missiles will find another target or fire into empty space. That means drones will find another target or stay idle. That means manually enabling my guns will give a message, "please remove your suspect engagement restrictions". That is completely logical, sane and balanced. Arguing against that is basically saying, "I can't kill PVPers so give me some easy people to shoot at". I don't say this as a risk averse carebear; this character I'm posting on is purely setup for ganking haulers for instance. I enjoy ganking and hi-sec. I don't think hi-sec aggro against PVE players is always a bad thing. It just has to be balanced and make sense. The current mechanics DO NOT! this setting does already exist, set you drones to passive, problem solved
this game is pvp based, deal with it, it has been dumbed down way too much already because of ppl unable to use their brain and are too lazy to spend 10 minutes setting up their overview / drones settings and learning the aggro mechanics.
you don't wan't pvp => gtfo from eve |
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
16
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 17:44:00 -
[196] - Quote
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? |
Nariya Kentaya
Always Negative
974
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 20:16:00 -
[197] - Quote
Tippia wrote:What makes you think it's a bug? so, not in highsec often enough to bother learning crimewatch, but isnt the purpose of setting your "guns" green to rpevent any hostile action against another player?
why should drones, the primary weapon system of several ships, be excluded from this? is this just a "sorry or being a ****** and training drone skills" to all mission runners?
just saying, mission runners deal with enough crap using drones, dotn need them aggroing every player that warps into the mission. |
Colman Dietmar
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
24
|
Posted - 2014.01.07 03:38:00 -
[198] - Quote
The real question here is, why does destroying assets in highsec not make you a criminal? Attacking as little as a container will get you concorded, so why is the tractor unit an exception to this rule? |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4719
|
Posted - 2014.01.07 09:06:00 -
[199] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote:Tippia wrote:What makes you think it's a bug? so, not in highsec often enough to bother learning crimewatch, but isnt the purpose of setting your "guns" green to rpevent any hostile action against another player? why should drones, the primary weapon system of several ships, be excluded from this? is this just a "sorry or being a ****** and training drone skills" to all mission runners? just saying, mission runners deal with enough crap using drones, dotn need them aggroing every player that warps into the mission. You are highly misinformed. Let me enlight you and anyone else in here who can't read. If you mouse over the green Enable Safety button in the safety setting window, you will see the following dialog window pop up:
To prevent all actions that would give you suspect or criminal status.
So when you attack a suspect player guess what. Does your status become suspect? No, no it does not. Does your status become criminal? Absolutely not.
So as you can see, it is functioning EXACTLY the way it says it will. Now, who here doesn't understand? . |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4719
|
Posted - 2014.01.07 09:10:00 -
[200] - Quote
Colman Dietmar wrote:The real question here is, why does destroying assets in highsec not make you a criminal? Attacking as little as a container will get you concorded, so why is the tractor unit an exception to this rule? Because the developers designed them this way. Then even went as far as putting out multiple dev blogs and even talked about this very aspect in one or two videos. But the summary is they want the PLAYERS to be the ones to take action. And guess what, that is exactly what is happening. Players are taking action. . |
|
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4382
|
Posted - 2014.01.07 12:00:00 -
[201] - 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. |
seth Hendar
I love you miners
357
|
Posted - 2014.01.08 16:50:00 -
[202] - 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? then you don't understand the purpose of the pve content, wich is to make ppl meet on the field so pvp can occur |
seth Hendar
I love you miners
357
|
Posted - 2014.01.08 17:00:00 -
[203] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:I did and I missed the part where it mentioned that drones would attack automagically in the new era of mobile deployables like this, it's not wholly intuitive. Feels outside the intention of the rules to me (though not the spirit of the game itself), an oversight if you will. I wonder what happens if they're assigned to guard a person with one out. Some clarity on if this is working as intended would be good (for both sides of the argument). they should attack too, provided they are on agressive |
Malacha Syn'Rabies
Strand Technologies
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.08 21:34:00 -
[204] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:ElQuirko wrote:the idea that another capsuleer can force a limited engagement without going criminal themselves Nobody forced you to set drones to aggressive.
As a matter of fact, the initial setting for drones is aggressive. You ARE initially forced to have aggressive drones. Try making a new toon and check for yourself. It certainly doesn't help that the settings for drones and their posture is fairly obfuscated and there is no OBVIOUS indicator that they are defaulted to an aggressive posture. Although unlikely, a pilot could go their entire pod career without having any idea that their drones are set up all wrong for their chosen play style.
This is poor design and we are seeing how easily it is being exploited in combination with the oddness of MTU and other mobile structures becoming an extension of your own ship while deployed. And then yet again with the combination of those two oddities, we have the fact that drones will aggro someone with a limited engagement timer, which also is not clear until that first moment the pretty blue timer pops up.
This sketchy behavior is not a difficult problem to avoid if you know how it all interacts together, but the default setting is working against an unsuspecting pilot--who is merely employing mobile structures and drones together--without any indication that there is a potentially dangerous problem.
This should be treated as a bug, and steps should be taken to fix these design issues so they work together intuitively--rather than as the awfully convenient backdoor "Tears and KM generator" that it currently is. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8226
|
Posted - 2014.01.08 22:00:00 -
[205] - Quote
Malacha Syn'Rabies wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:ElQuirko wrote:the idea that another capsuleer can force a limited engagement without going criminal themselves Nobody forced you to set drones to aggressive. As a matter of fact, the initial setting for drones is aggressive. You ARE initially forced to have aggressive drones. No, nobody forced you to set drones to aggressive. I'd be fine with changing the default to passive, sure. But beyond that you shouldn't get any handouts. My EVE Videos |
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
17
|
Posted - 2014.01.08 23:29:00 -
[206] - Quote
Again i ask, to those who claim drones have always since the beginning 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 shiny mission ships by shooting MTU/MD? 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?
And please ppl, the safety has NOTHING to do with this.stop using it as a reason for/against this being declared a bug. Yes, the safety is 'working as intended', but the drone aggro is not.
And to further note, i petitioned to see if i would receive any negative action for "not exploiting" this "not bug."
The reply was something similar to "We know about this, and it is a bug. Drones were never meant to unintentionally draw their owners into a Limited Engagement."
And please stop with the "then don't use aggressive"....b/c this is the only thing aggressive drones behave like this on. Drones do not auto-engage can-flip-suspects or any other form of suspects, only those that shoot the new deployable's, and only after they have already been shooting NPC's and only while on aggressive. It just seems shady from the start, what with all the special cases that go into making it happen. |
Malacha Syn'Rabies
Strand Technologies
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.08 23:31:00 -
[207] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Malacha Syn'Rabies wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:ElQuirko wrote:the idea that another capsuleer can force a limited engagement without going criminal themselves Nobody forced you to set drones to aggressive. As a matter of fact, the initial setting for drones is aggressive. You ARE initially forced to have aggressive drones. No, nobody forced you to set drones to aggressive. I'd be fine with changing the default to passive, sure. But beyond that you shouldn't get any handouts.
I just returned to this game, and I didn't know about the drone aggression setting until someone mentioned the MTU problem to me. I checked my drones and noticed they were set to aggressive by default. My drones were most definitely FORCED to aggressive, because that is the default, and I had no say in the matter until I discovered that I could change it. I also noticed my brand new alt was defaulted to aggressive drones as well. Granted, they aren't forced to STAY in that posture, which I believe is what you meant by not being forced. But the initial state very much is forced.
I've always hated how stupidly my drones would blunder about without my direction in the past, and I only use them in passive mode now, I love passive mode. None of this MTU ganking business actually affects me directly, however, I did immediately realize how poorly thought out the combination of the new mobile units and the default aggressive behavior of drones could be once I was informed.
The largest problem is that a new or inexperienced pilot has no idea what danger awaits them if they use aggressive drones. Aggressive drones should indicate to the pilot that their drones will attack another player without their direct intervention. The safety switch is a great--already existing--mechanic for this. Drones set to aggressive should yellow your safety, greening it up again should make them passive. It's an easy fix and generally follows the spirit of the safety switch.
Lastly, you mention handouts... Being able to initiate a fight and bypassing the normal criminal action repurcussions in high sec is very much a handout too. One that I fully support if the mechanics supporting this were more transparent. The safety switch is an excellent way to let inexperienced pilots know that their activity could have dangerous consequences. The aggressive drone/mobile device mechanic should not be giving tear collectors free killmail handouts simply because the system is hidden behind a few unpolished design choices. It is bad form, fairly lame, and it does look an awful lot like a bug.
If you yellow up your safety to use aggressive drones and afk mission, mine, whatever... expect to shed some tears. My problem is NOT that it can happen, it is that it is currently happening in a way that is unintuitive, hidden within sketchy interaction mechanics, and without any clear indicators or warnings. It is an unfinished design and currently flawed. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8229
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 06:24:00 -
[208] - Quote
No. Forcing to aggressive would mean you couldn't change it. You always had a say in the matter. Like I said, I'd be fine with changing the default to passive. That's basically what you're also arguing for.
Yes, being able to initiate a fight is a handout. It's a handout to EVERYONE. There's no bypassing the normal repercussions, since the repercussions were explicitly designed this way. Suspect status is part of crimewatch.
Do NOT change the safety switch. It currently exists in a very clearly defined and consistent manner. Green prevents you from taking any action that flags you suspect or criminal. Yellow allows suspect actions but prevents you from taking criminal (or potentially criminal, i.e. smartbombs) actions. Red allows you to take any action, including criminal ones.
Drone aggressive behavior is also very clearly defined and consistent. A drone set to aggressive will automatically attack anyone and anything that attacks you or your assets on grid (such as another drone, a can, a wreck, or a deployable).
Changing either of these leads to unclear and exception-ridden scenarios, which is the entire reason CCP created crimewatch in the first place. Consider this the new can flipping. Teach newbies about it. Don't beg CCP to create exceptions just for your scenario.
The intent was to generate conflict, and I'd say it's definitely succeeded as such. And it's not one-way conflict either. Highsec carebears who would have normally gone about their business solo and not contributing to the game in ANY way are now banding together to destroy people who go suspect by attacking MTUs. That's called emergent gameplay. If the GMs are reimbursing people and calling this a bug then they're ******* ******** and they don't understand this game. My EVE Videos |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8229
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 06:28:00 -
[209] - Quote
asteroidjas wrote:Again i ask, to those who claim drones have always since the beginning 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 shiny mission ships by shooting MTU/MD? 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? Nobody has claimed that, because it would be false. Drones set to aggressive do not automatically attack suspects. They automatically attack anyone who has aggressed you or something belonging to you. This has probably happened many times before, with people who are stupid enough to shoot a player's wrecks or drones. The difference there is that such an action was criminal and they would always get blown up, so the carebear was never at any risk from the LE that was created.
asteroidjas wrote:The reply was something similar to "We know about this, and it is a bug. Drones were never meant to unintentionally draw their owners into a Limited Engagement." It is NOT a bug, it's consistent with how one would expect aggressive drones to behave. That's how they've always behaved.
asteroidjas wrote:And please stop with the "then don't use aggressive"....b/c this is the only thing aggressive drones behave like this on. Drones do not auto-engage can-flip-suspects or any other form of suspects, only those that shoot the new deployable's, and only after they have already been shooting NPC's and only while on aggressive. It just seems shady from the start, what with all the special cases that go into making it happen. No, there's no special case. Drones have to be out and set to aggressive. My EVE Videos |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
590
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 10:07:00 -
[210] - Quote
Could easily be resolved by having drones ignore player assets in their automagical attacking. Drones are enough of a hassle that they don't need this additional hurdle.
I don't buy the claims this is the 'intended' PvP it caused - if it was, it would have been better covered in the dev blogs, this thread wouldnt be moved to this subforum and reimburses wouldnt be happening. As such, I stand by my belief it is an oversight - it's in the spirit of the game regardless though. But I still think it was an accident. |
|
Romeo Deluxe
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
19
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 11:11:00 -
[211] - Quote
Enough with the speculation, read this same thread and it's already been answered. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4048843#post4048843 |
Malacha Syn'Rabies
Strand Technologies
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 14:46:00 -
[212] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:No. Forcing to aggressive would mean you couldn't change it. You always had a say in the matter. Like I said, I'd be fine with changing the default to passive. That's basically what you're also arguing for.
Yes, being able to initiate a fight is a handout. It's a handout to EVERYONE. There's no bypassing the normal repercussions, since the repercussions were explicitly designed this way. Suspect status is part of crimewatch.
Do NOT change the safety switch. It currently exists in a very clearly defined and consistent manner. Green prevents you from taking any action that flags you suspect or criminal. Yellow allows suspect actions but prevents you from taking criminal (or potentially criminal, i.e. smartbombs) actions. Red allows you to take any action, including criminal ones.
Drone aggressive behavior is also very clearly defined and consistent. A drone set to aggressive will automatically attack anyone and anything that attacks you or your assets on grid (such as another drone, a can, a wreck, or a deployable).
Changing either of these leads to unclear and exception-ridden scenarios, which is the entire reason CCP created crimewatch in the first place. Consider this the new can flipping. Teach newbies about it. Don't beg CCP to create exceptions just for your scenario.
The intent was to generate conflict, and I'd say it's definitely succeeded as such. And it's not one-way conflict either. Highsec carebears who would have normally gone about their business solo and not contributing to the game in ANY way are now banding together to destroy people who go suspect by attacking MTUs. That's called emergent gameplay. If the GMs are reimbursing people and calling this a bug then they're ******* ******** and they don't understand this game.
You seem to be responding to other people in this thread rather than me. I applaud the new high sec conflict generation that the mobile structures have introduced. The only area I disagree with you, other than the semantics of the word forced, apparently, is that I feel there should be a clear indicator for the danger aggressive drones introduce. If a pilot wants to run them in that dangerous mode, they should expect consequences even in high sec.
Something new was added (mobile structures) and it clearly has repercussions that may not have been intended by CCP with the introduction of these items. This new category of fielded device is not consistent with previous consequences in high sec, since shooting wrecks, drones, or other fielded items would get the aggressor Concorded in high sec. Thus the addition of the new mobile structures and drone aggression has created a new inconsistency.
I understand that you really like the change "as is" and you strongly feel it is "working as intended."
I feel that the MTU/aggressive drone gank is too sketchy and needs a mechanic that indicates the potential danger to a pilot. I don't really care if CCP uses crimewatch to fix this inconsistent behavior, but they do need some form of indicator. However, I also do not understand why you averse to having crimewatch yellow up if your are using aggressive drones. Is there some negative effect that this would have on the gameplay? You did claim that there would be exception-ridden scenarios generated from this, please enlighten me on what one might be?
It is the lack of indication that is the problem. That is why I am NOT arguing to get rid of the new emergent conflict generation, just make it more consistent by clearly indicating the potential danger.
EDIT: Removed the line about quote confusion... |
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
17
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 14:54:00 -
[213] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:asteroidjas wrote:The reply was something similar to "We know about this, and it is a bug. Drones were never meant to unintentionally draw their owners into a Limited Engagement." It is NOT a bug, it's consistent with how one would expect aggressive drones to behave. That's how they've always behaved.
To answer the first point. you say they've "always behaved" this way. So tell me an example of drones auto-aggressing a suspect that did not shoot one of the new deployables. You bring up the fact it 'happens but concord blows them up before the player is is trouble'....except thats not the same thing. That is a criminal flag for an illegal activity. This is dealing with a suspect flag for NOT illegal activity.
James Amril-Kesh wrote:asteroidjas wrote:....b/c this is the only thing aggressive drones behave like this on. Drones do not auto-engage can-flip-suspects or any other form of suspects, only those that shoot the new deployable's, and only after they have already been shooting NPC's and only while on aggressive. It just seems shady from the start, what with all the special cases that go into making it happen. No, there's no special case. Drones have to be out and set to aggressive.
As to the second point, yes, this is a special case, because up until the release of these new 'mobile deployables' there has not been a way to aggress a player without concord getting involved. The drones react b/c they see the deployable as an extension of the player. So when it gets shot at, (which the shooting is as intended and working just fine), the drones think the player has been shot at and react. That is the bug, the drones seeing the deployable as the player. There is no other item that the player might 'own' with which someone can flag themselves 'suspect' that will automatically draw said player into an unintended LE. That is the special case. It only works with this one NEW type of item, and only when drones are on aggressive and only when they are currently in 'fighting' mode against npc's. That's alot of "only"s for it to not be a special case.
And PS, there have been plenty of ppl (maybe not in this particular thread) who have claimed "hundreds of kills because of this mechanic", but they then are VERY adamant that drones have always auto-aggressed all suspects. Period. (This is a very common thing to see claimed in any online discussion i have had about this matter.) To which i ask, then why is it neccesary to shoot the MTU's in order to get the LE? I have yet to hear any response to this.
PPS: There have been enough 'replies to petitions' posted that have Dev's labeling this as a bug to sufficiently say its very likely labeled a bug internally. Yes, Mittens posted that article and claimed it was not a bug...it doesn't help alot of ppl think this has something to do with the 'safety' setting, which it does not. But Mittens (dare i say it) is not a Dev, and not even CSM, (correct?), and as such, i will take the word from Dev's over his. Only CCP knows 100% if this mehcanic was intentional or not. And as of yet, there has been no official word from them. Just alot of speculation and "i heard so-and-so say such-and-such."
Personally, in my petition CCP may have implied it would be best if i did not use this bug, but they were VERY cryptic in their response to my (since i have a warning on my account), will i get banned retroactively, like the first warning was retroactive after the public announcement? |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8264
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 20:06:00 -
[214] - Quote
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. My EVE Videos |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
604
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 22:38:00 -
[215] - 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.
Meant to post this at the time, got side tracked and a recent thread reminded me.
Kudos for posting the findings, many wouldn't have, especially arguing the side you did.
/doffs cap. |
Sniper Wolf18
Aggressive Diplomacy
9
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 01:31:00 -
[216] - Quote
That's bullshit, in no way should this be considered a bug. What happens if someone attacks your MTU and you launch FOF missiles? I'd bet they would attack the person shooting your MTU. Drones on aggressive are just like FOF missiles, they seek out and destroy whoever is attacking you or your property. Shooting a wreck/jetcan in lowsec/nullsec causes the owner's drones to attack, the same should be said for MTUs in hisec. It shouldn't be considered a bug because morons are losing their ships to it and crying about it, though, the new carebear friendly CCP clearly needs to do everything in their power to make highsec safer. Making the eve experience safer and easier will net more profits in the short-term, but, with star citizen and other upcoming sci-fi space mmos will leave it a ghost-town a few more years down the line. If CCP are worried about bears losing their expensive pinata faction ships in hisec, all they need to is set the default drone option to passive and add a warning along the lines of 'Setting your drones to aggressive will cause them to attack anyone who is attacking you or your property, this feature should be used at your own risk. Autopilot has it's drawbacks, AFK drone usage should too, if you want to play eve using it's built in bot systems, there should be a price to pay. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4394
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 02:18:00 -
[217] - 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. |
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome Caldari State Capturing
821
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 03:43:00 -
[218] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:It's clearly a bug, if you think otherwise you're trolling or drunk.
Oh and CCP hates drones.
There is no bug.
Ill explain the normal order of events so you know what exactly is happening.
1. You have your safety green which means you can shoot at any legit target. 2. The person steals which makes them a legit target - so your drones engage them. 3. You have now entered a limited engagement timer by your own choice. 4. This is the bit where you discover that a T1 frig with a good pilot is better that your officer fit Battleship. 5. Now you must complain on the forums. (Don't forget - Had you won the fight you would not be here and you would be telling all your mates how you beat someone at pvp.)
The fact that you have drones out and set to aggressive is your own fault.
I somehow doubt the person cleaning up your space rubbish deployed your drones and set them to aggressive for you. Or do you want to blame other players with no access to your account for that too??
It is your fault for being an aggressive pilot and using your drones to attack the poor innocent person cleaning up the mess you left in space. Maybe if all you high sec mission runners stopped being so trigger happy and the problem would resolve itself.
If you want to get your soul to heaven, trust in me. Now don't judge or question. You are broken now, but faith can heal you. Just do everything I tell you to do. (Opiate - Tool) |
Sniper Wolf18
Aggressive Diplomacy
9
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 03:53:00 -
[219] - Quote
If CCP is really reimbursing ships for this I'd urge them to revisit every other clever use of game mechanics that have resulted in people dying despite them having no clue that they could even be attacked. I remember killing many tens of people, including one of the first marauders by using the lofty scam, maybe you should start there, hell, why not just give everyone some free SP and ships, I'm sure we've all had a loss of a ship despite never knowing the mechanic was in place and was possible, have you replaced the ships belonging to people who got concorded by giving logi to someone who then got concorded? Hell, why not reimburse everyone who'd been podded when limited engagments were first introduced, despite there being no CCP confirmation of this being possible and it being unprecedented and completely new in terms of hisec PvP.
See, reimbursing ships because of a clever manipulation of strange new game mechanics is a very, very stupid thing to do. |
Malacha Syn'Rabies
Strand Technologies
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 06:20:00 -
[220] - Quote
IbanezLaney wrote:Sentamon wrote:It's clearly a bug, if you think otherwise you're trolling or drunk.
Oh and CCP hates drones. There is no bug. Ill explain the normal order of events so you know what exactly is happening. ... 2. The person steals which makes them a legit target - so your drones engage them. ...
Have you actually tested your explanation? Stealing does NOT cause aggressive drones to engage...
|
|
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron
The Red Circle Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 07:49:00 -
[221] - Quote
I only deployed an MTU once on SiSi, but doesnt it warn you that aggressive drones will defend it? |
Sweetest Mowi
Blaupausen Kompetenz Agentur
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 11:49:00 -
[222] - Quote
A GM answered my Petition and gave me my lost ship back.
Dunno if it is catigororized as an exploit, but it seems at least to be a bug. |
Jowen Datloran
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
785
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 12:00:00 -
[223] - Quote
Sweetest Mowi wrote:A GM answered my Petition and gave me my lost ship back.
Dunno if it is catigororized as an exploit, but it seems at least to be a bug. Why do we have to wait days before a GM or CCP dev make an official respond to these case?
Once again the Internet Layer Fools are going on and on about "the dev blog said this", "the GM said that" , blablabla...
And in the end, it is ONLY CCP who can make a judgment on what is right and what is not.
As it is now, people should just bet on these issues while awaiting the official CCP response: A decade of experience with this game makes me put 10 M ISK on, that this drone behavior is NOT intended by CCP. Mr. Science & Trade Institute, EVE Online Lorebook-á |
Sniper Wolf18
Aggressive Diplomacy
10
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 01:31:00 -
[224] - Quote
Sweetest Mowi wrote:A GM answered my Petition and gave me my lost ship back.
Dunno if it is catigororized as an exploit, but it seems at least to be a bug.
Well that's rather disappointing.
I guess CCP's 2014 plan is "Have your cake and eat it too! AFK mission run all you want, we've even made this handy little device that does even more work for you" I guess the people who make bots for MMOs will be going out of business soon. |
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
24
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 21:30:00 -
[225] - Quote
Sniper Wolf18 wrote: I guess CCP's 2014 plan is "Have your cake and eat it too! AFK mission run all you want, we've even made this handy little device that does even more work for you"...blah...blah... By reimbursing these ships you're sending the message that running missions while AFK and not paying attention is perfectly fine, wanting to mission and have all your wrecks vacuumed up into a neat pile is great too, after all, the more ISK you make the more PLEX you can buy, right?
Again, this has nothing to do with being AFK, as it can happen to a pilot who is very much active and at the keyboard. The timing for this to happen can be nearly instantly...if the aggressor happens to shoot the MTU the second before the players drones kill a target...there is almost nothing the player can do between those two actions to prevent this from happening.
I've watched it happen with my own eyes. Dude came into a mission me and my bro were doing, he flew in as suspect already (from previous target i'm guessing), he started to shoot my bro's MTU, so he scooped it before dude could pop it. But by the time that was done, he was already in an LE. With some luck we got him out unscathed. But the point is the same. And btw, again, the only other ways players can aggress another persons stuff in a manner in which draws the drones defensive aggro...gets you Concorded. So the five minute LE from that drone aggro is countered by the 15 minute criminal flag
Drones on aggressive does not mean AFK. It simply means, i only have X-number of target slots, and i don't want to spend 10-20 seconds to lock a new frigate after my drones have killed the last one.
PS: Have you actually tried to USE one of these MTU's? They are so slow they can take upwards of 30 minutes to 'clear' a room. Most of the time they are dropped, then forgot about till after the mission is turned in...or even after the next. 1k/sec tractor beam grabbing wrecks 50k away with 10 second 'switching' delay...times 30 wrecks...yup...30 minutes. |
Sniper Wolf18
Aggressive Diplomacy
10
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 23:00:00 -
[226] - Quote
asteroidjas wrote:Sniper Wolf18 wrote: I guess CCP's 2014 plan is "Have your cake and eat it too! AFK mission run all you want, we've even made this handy little device that does even more work for you"...blah...blah... By reimbursing these ships you're sending the message that running missions while AFK and not paying attention is perfectly fine, wanting to mission and have all your wrecks vacuumed up into a neat pile is great too, after all, the more ISK you make the more PLEX you can buy, right?
Again, this has nothing to do with being AFK, as it can happen to a pilot who is very much active and at the keyboard. The timing for this to happen can be nearly instantly...if the aggressor happens to shoot the MTU the second before the players drones kill a target...there is almost nothing the player can do between those two actions to prevent this from happening.
This can be prevented from happening by turning your drones to passive, watching D-scan, pulling your MTU the instant you see someone warp into your mission or by having an alt drop the MTU for you. If you fail to do all those four things and your drones aggro someone, you can have an alt/friend in a BB/falcon warp in and ECM them. This is not an unstoppable bug, all it requires is that you pay attention and not be stupid. You complain that you don't have enough target slots, but that's just another admission that you're lazy and don't want to have to lock targets every few seconds and would rather use CCP's built in botting systems with impunity. You claim that it's possible for someone to shoot your MTU the second a rat pops and have your drones aggress them. This is such an unlikely situation that it borders on impossible, unless you are ignoring the person who's just warped into your mission, started to approach your drones (they attack whatever is closest) and then started shooting your MTU, unless you'
Ships were never reimbursed due to losses from mechanics similar to this, such as the lofty scam, which allowed you to be shot just by accepting a fleet invite, there was no warning. This is no different, why should CCP start reimbursing ships now.
CCP - Carebear concession people?
|
Je'ron
The Happy Shooters
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 20:23:00 -
[227] - Quote
Jowen Datloran wrote:Sweetest Mowi wrote:A GM answered my Petition and gave me my lost ship back.
Dunno if it is catigororized as an exploit, but it seems at least to be a bug. Why do we have to wait days before a GM or CCP dev make an official respond to these case? Once again the Internet Layer Fools are going on and on about "the dev blog said this", "the GM said that" , blablabla... And in the end, it is ONLY CCP who can make a judgment on what is right and what is not. As it is now, people should just bet on these issues while awaiting the official CCP response: A decade of experience with this game makes me put 10 M ISK on, that this drone behavior is NOT intended by CCP.
I think CCP dev have made their view on this very clear From the Patch notes for Rubicon 1.1, which is to be release tomorrow
Quote:Drones that are set to aggressive will no longer perform automatic actions against a target if those actions would trigger a new Limited Engagement, unless explicitly instructed to engage that target. |
Sniper Wolf18
Aggressive Diplomacy
13
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 22:04:00 -
[228] - Quote
Interesting, now that CCP are fixing inherent issues with drones can they fix all the other disparities with drones too, such as no drone implants, no overheating for drones, etc? Or is it just the problems with drones that make bears angry that get fixed? |
Je'ron
The Happy Shooters
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 23:13:00 -
[229] - Quote
lol, with a couple of people tried to remember when drones weren't broken, must have been before boot.ini. Got a couple more for you: the Drone UI in general, no drone health display when in bay (keep on launching those near death drones), no T2 resists on T2 drones, heavies being obsolete except for very, very close combat, ECM drones icw stacking penalty |
seth Hendar
I love you miners
402
|
Posted - 2014.01.28 10:42:00 -
[230] - Quote
Sweetest Mowi wrote:A GM answered my Petition and gave me my lost ship back.
Dunno if it is catigororized as an exploit, but it seems at least to be a bug. refunding you the ship is the exploit, drones set as agressive, i you are to dumb to understand what that means, well set them to passive.
/me now waiting for the inevitable "but huuuu then they won't run my mission themselv duh!" |
|
Kalu Alar
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.28 15:16:00 -
[231] - Quote
As per patch Rubicon 1.1 notes:
Drones that are set to aggressive will no longer perform automatic actions against a target if those actions would trigger a new Limited Engagement, unless explicitly instructed to engage that target.
/thread |
seth Hendar
I love you miners
411
|
Posted - 2014.01.28 17:04:00 -
[232] - Quote
yeah, even more dumbing eve down......... |
Sniper Wolf18
Aggressive Diplomacy
16
|
Posted - 2014.01.28 21:04:00 -
[233] - Quote
This makes me rather sad tbh, star citizen probably won't be an unforgiving PvP game, not with as many backers as it has now, they'll have to cater to the casual/dumb masses too. EvE online used to be an uncompromising and unforgiving PvP game, I don't know what to think now, I guess most of the highsec PvP crowd feel the same and don't want to unsub and ragequit as there's nowhere else to go, at least, that's how I feel now anyway. |
Thomas Mayaki
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.02.02 11:13:00 -
[234] - Quote
Kalu Alar wrote:As per patch Rubicon 1.1 notes:
Drones that are set to aggressive will no longer perform automatic actions against a target if those actions would trigger a new Limited Engagement, unless explicitly instructed to engage that target.
/thread
Does that mean if I have ecm drones out on a mining barges they won't work automatically on aggression?
Also won't that mean mining barges no longer create 'killmails ' when they get ganked? |
DSpite Culhach
Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance
265
|
Posted - 2014.02.10 15:04:00 -
[235] - 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.
AFK cloaker was in a fleet. The FC did a fleet warp, then cancelled it and asked everyone else to cancel it also. The AFK cloaker covops warped anyway, and landed on grid 500 meters away from a T1 battleship that was also cloaked up, in a ratting belt, decloakign both ships. Local rats target the Battleship, web/scram it and it dies. I suddenly woke up thinking I had a nightmare, then remembered I can't even fly Amarr Battleships. I add bits to this when I'm bored https://www.dropbox.com/s/foijsawsqolarom/EVE_Online.html |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: [one page] |