open All Channels
seplocked Warfare & Tactics
blankseplocked Can-cloud an exploit?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Kael'Jierr
Posted - 2011.01.05 05:30:00 - [1]
 

Just curious, I had the idea (from a long while ago) that dropping a bunch of cans around a gate to decloak ships was a no-no? Lost a bomber recently to exactly this...

If not then, is such a prepared gate vitually impassable without superior firepower or insta-align?


GavinGoodrich
Posted - 2011.01.05 11:02:00 - [2]
 

Most you can put on grid is 6 cans, with the intent to decloak. Anything more than that is petitionable at this time.

Othran
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2011.01.05 12:32:00 - [3]
 

If its a bubble you are allowed to place one can for each "catch point".

ie if your bubble catches from 10 celestials and 5 gates (unlikely I know) then you can place 15 cans - IF AND ONLY IF THEY ARE REQUIRED.

Most common tactic I see is to leave T1 drones out at the relevant distances and claim you left them behind. Petitioning will get them removed but unless you have a batphone it'll take a while.

o/ Gav, hope you lads are having fun in Fountain - I hear there's no shortage of supercaps ;)

debbie harrio
Posted - 2011.01.06 11:46:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Othran
If its a bubble you are allowed to place one can for each "catch point".

ie if your bubble catches from 10 celestials and 5 gates (unlikely I know) then you can place 15 cans - IF AND ONLY IF THEY ARE REQUIRED.

Most common tactic I see is to leave T1 drones out at the relevant distances and claim you left them behind. Petitioning will get them removed but unless you have a batphone it'll take a while.

o/ Gav, hope you lads are having fun in Fountain - I hear there's no shortage of supercaps ;)



Wrong, anything over 6 cans is an exploit, doesn't matter how many catch points there are, same as anything over 6 bubbles is also an exploit.

KaemosFZ
Caldari
Almost Outta Beer
Posted - 2011.01.06 17:21:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Othran
If its a bubble you are allowed to place one can for each "catch point".

ie if your bubble catches from 10 celestials and 5 gates (unlikely I know) then you can place 15 cans - IF AND ONLY IF THEY ARE REQUIRED.

Most common tactic I see is to leave T1 drones out at the relevant distances and claim you left them behind. Petitioning will get them removed but unless you have a batphone it'll take a while.

o/ Gav, hope you lads are having fun in Fountain - I hear there's no shortage of supercaps ;)
Drones don't decloak anymore =/

Othran
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2011.01.07 20:41:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: debbie harrio
Wrong, anything over 6 cans is an exploit, doesn't matter how many catch points there are, same as anything over 6 bubbles is also an exploit.


Want to quote a source for that? 6 bubbles on a grid is an exploit? You're having a laugh.

debbie harrio
Posted - 2011.01.08 09:51:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Othran


Want to quote a source for that? 6 bubbles on a grid is an exploit? You're having a laugh.


No I'm not having a laugh, I am just passing on information that I have studied and followed, the sources are plentiful if you can be bothered to look, ignorance is no excuse to exploit.

having 6 bubbles on grid is acceptable, more is classed as an exploit due to lag, several useless care bear nullsec renters have been petitioned successfully for bubbling up the gate in their favourite dead end systems and it was deemed to be an exploit if there were more than 6.

There are several threads with this information in, the most famous one I can think of is when Pandemic Legion petitioned against IT alliance for having 15+ bubbles on a gate and a GM or Dev destroyed them leaving 6 up and that is classed as the arbitrary number allowed.


It has been confirmed by GM also.

May I ask why on earth you would want to put up more than 6 anyway unless you are intentionally trying to lag out your prey?

The information is there, I have read it myself, if you can't be bothered to follow the rules because you like to have an advantage due to exploiting then let the consequences hit you when you are petitioned.

L Olonnais
Yarrbear Inc.
Posted - 2011.01.08 18:28:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: L Olonnais on 08/01/2011 18:33:17
Quote:
No I'm not having a laugh, I am just passing on information that I have studied and followed, the sources are plentiful if you can be bothered to look, ignorance is no excuse to exploit. having 6 bubbles on grid is acceptable, more is classed as an exploit due to lag, several useless care bear nullsec renters have been petitioned successfully for bubbling up the gate in their favourite dead end systems and it was deemed to be an exploit if there were more than 6. There are several threads with this information in, the most famous one I can think of is when Pandemic Legion petitioned against IT alliance for having 15+ bubbles on a gate and a GM or Dev destroyed them leaving 6 up and that is classed as the arbitrary number allowed. It has been confirmed by GM also. May I ask why on earth you would want to put up more than 6 anyway unless you are intentionally trying to lag out your prey? The information is there, I have read it myself, if you can't be bothered to follow the rules because you like to have an advantage due to exploiting then let the consequences hit you when you are petitioned.


50% you fail, 50% GM fail

Please do not post GM correspondence. Spitfire

now what ? YARRRR!!

Lord Vigo
Posted - 2011.01.08 18:35:00 - [9]
 

This is about as stupid as the bump mechanic. CCP needs to just ban the idiocy instead of continually trying to plot around it. And as far as the bump mechanic goes, either eliminate the damned thing or cause a crapload of damage to the bumping ship.

Carniflex
StarHunt
Fallout Project
Posted - 2011.01.10 13:13:00 - [10]
 

Interesting. 30 you say. I assume that this is number of bubbles + containers on grid. Quite nice amount of them then.

L Olonnais
Yarrbear Inc.
Posted - 2011.01.10 15:42:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: L Olonnais on 10/01/2011 15:58:27


only one small bubble..


edit: just uploaded a screen, hi Talos ))

http://i53.tinypic.com/2hg8jd5.jpg

debbie harrio
Posted - 2011.01.11 10:54:00 - [12]
 

LOl the IT/PL thing was ratified AFTER your GM correspondence and as far as I know it was set to 6, to tell the truth you only need max 3 to decloak people on a bubble, set in line with the originating celestial and set at different depths in the bubble to account for mass of the ship that will land there.

having 30 on a bubble is just pure overkill and is only there for one reason, to lag out the victim, especially in the fail positions you have them on that screenshot.

Now don't get me wrong, I enjoy playing with bubbles to catch people, to avoid having the victim warp via celestial I will leave the target system empty thus fooling him to a false sense of security, I catch 90% of people this way using 3 containers as set out above.

If I got caught in that bubble I would petition as it is just not needed at all, you are using 30 for one reason and that is petitionable as lag inducing.


Kael'Jierr
Posted - 2011.01.12 02:05:00 - [13]
 

FYI, just got a response back from GM, who tells me that no amount of cans dropped for tactical purposes is an exploit, so long as regular game mechanics are not messed with. Which means to me --> drop all you like, just don't create lag?


Target Painter
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.01.12 09:52:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Kael'Jierr
Which means to me --> drop all you like, just don't create lag?


Pretty much. I don't know why this myth persists of "only such and such amount."

Pirates know it and use it to the fullest.

Othran
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2011.01.14 14:08:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: debbie harrio

May I ask why on earth you would want to put up more than 6 anyway unless you are intentionally trying to lag out your prey?


Approaches to a POS spring to mind. Its quite common to have a few T2 bubbles up to hold up incoming fleets/gangs at the range you want them.

I wasn't talking about having 6 on the gate although a regional gate might justify that.

Oh and the most I've seen is 52 large bubbles - today as it happens in a dead-end ratting system (hello Red Alliance). We'll see whether that's an exploit or not soon enough.

Othran
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2011.01.17 16:29:00 - [16]
 

52 large bubbles is fine.

On that basis it appears that unless your opponent has a dedicated batphone then its fine to do whatever the hell you want Rolling Eyes

Xeln Quuzg
Posted - 2011.01.18 00:50:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: Xeln Quuzg on 18/01/2011 00:56:04
i lost my prowler this way last week. the GM told me as well that this isn't an exploit.

Target Painter
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.01.18 00:54:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Othran
52 large bubbles is fine.

On that basis it appears that unless your opponent has a dedicated batphone then its fine to do whatever the hell you want Rolling Eyes


Originally by: Target Painter
I don't know why this myth persists of "only such and such amount."


MYTH BUSTED.

Disastro
Wrecking Shots
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2011.01.18 12:42:00 - [19]
 

I cant count the number of times people have brought up this topic while they are in the process of being decloaked and killed. This is petitionable! Yeah, whatever. Why would it be? It clearly is not an exploit but a proper use of game mechanics. A number of people have told me they were petitioning me for it while crying in local and strangely i have never recieved any of those nasty in game mails from CCP over it.

Mini McFly
Posted - 2011.01.18 13:08:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: Mini McFly on 18/01/2011 13:11:03


Can spamming a gate, bubble, etc.. I have petitioned this several months ago. I was told by a GM that this is NOT illegal. The GM then said they dislike this only when it cause system lag. He then said there is no limit on the number of cans; therefore, everything can be used. Jet cans, anchored cargo containers, drones, and my choice - probes from an expanded launcher dropped like depth charges.

Fastbikkel
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
Posted - 2011.01.18 14:10:00 - [21]
 

If ccp made gates bigger, lets say 100km from tip to tip, it would be a horrendous chore to hang objects around it, increasing chances of people getting through.

Or,, remove gates altogether. Im sure CCP is aware of the frustrations here, lets see what they will do in time.
For now, just accept it or take another route, that is what i do. I have run into a nice camp with a ****load of cans around the gate myself, so i know the deal.

Target Painter
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.01.20 11:46:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Fastbikkel
If ccp made gates bigger, lets say 100km from tip to tip, it would be a horrendous chore to hang objects around it, increasing chances of people getting through.


While the specifics vary, it's already in-game, known as a regional gate.

Jackhera
Posted - 2011.01.21 21:45:00 - [23]
 

You only need 1 can + 1 small bubble + 1 special item to decloack whatever you want at a 00 gate, eventually somebody might clock on to the tactic but I doubt it.

SomeHardLovin
Reliables Inc
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2011.01.21 22:29:00 - [24]
 

Pics or GTFO.

If you have a link to current instruction that this is an exploit i'd entertain it.. however I can't see how CCP could say using a legitimate game option (jettison) in an inventive way (decloak people in bubbles) is in any way an exploit.

They can say excessive stuff in space MAY cause lag.. but that's their problem. It's not an exploit.

So.. link to a dev blog or EULA or STFU... in my humble opinion. YARRRR!!

Target Painter
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.01.22 03:14:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Target Painter on 22/01/2011 03:15:59
Originally by: SomeHardLovin
Pics or GTFO.

If you have a link to current instruction that this is an exploit i'd entertain it.. however I can't see how CCP could say using a legitimate game option (jettison) in an inventive way (decloak people in bubbles) is in any way an exploit.

They can say excessive stuff in space MAY cause lag.. but that's their problem. It's not an exploit.

So.. link to a dev blog or EULA or STFU... in my humble opinion. YARRRR!!


Whenever someone claims something is an exploit, ask for the petition ID number. The smart ones stop talking right then, the dumb ones actually go to get it... then find out whatever "sploits" you were using were, in fact, legitimate gameplay mechanics.

EDIT: But if they do actually get the petition ID, and a senior GM confirms it, you'd probably be best off not doing it anymore. Or at least not right in front of them.

I miss my old main Crying or Very sad

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.01.22 09:22:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: SomeHardLovin
..So.. link to a dev blog or EULA or STFU... in my humble opinion. YARRRR!!

Originally by: EULA
You may not take any action that imposes an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on the System.

Seems pretty clear to me. If they say it may cause load then doing it is in violation of EULA, not a whole lot of ways to interpret the addendum's .. usually a lot more thought out than the cover-our-ass generic text.


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only