open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked CCP: Why is a Log-on Trap not an Exploit?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 : last (14)

Author Topic

Mr Bright
Shade.
Mercenary Coalition
Posted - 2006.01.27 16:37:00 - [361]
 

Originally by: eLLioTT wave
Originally by: eLLioTT wave
Originally by: Uggster
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists
Edited by: Rexthor Hammerfists on 26/01/2006 00:44:54
then - Just Add a logged off Filter in the map, for the last 24h, simple.
YARRRR!!
Laughing


Um, did i read this whole thread and miss that?

That is perfect!!! Logged off users in last hour / 2 hours / 24 hours.

So simple! Anyone object? (apart from the lame ppl using logon traps of course)


Hello!? we already have the perfect fix?

look at map shows 200 people logged off in XYZ-12 in the last hour... hmm i wonder what that oculd mean, maybe its just a coincidence...


I think this too could solve the problem at hand. But, its important that one consider all the consequences of an alteration. With this fliter it would also be much easier for an allaince to know where people that "ninja" is logged off. Now there are Pro's and Con's for that - I can see both sides there. The important thing is primarily that every possible outcome and sideeffect is discussed in the open.

I trully hope that the devs will at least look the suggestions over and consider them. The important thing for me, is that we can go from calling a tactic that is borderline exploit to some - and exploit to others. To a state where the tactic is not profitable, and therefor the whole discussion on "lame" becomes a moot point.

Atma Darkwolf
Gallente
Posted - 2006.01.27 17:13:00 - [362]
 

screw logging off.. I still think(and alwys have) that when u log out of eve, your ship, pod, char, etc should STAY wherever you left him(ya, let him warp off 1mil km or whatever) -- Make people more willing ot use stations, and LESS willing to do this ****.

That way u will SEE who's in local, logged on or off. For empire space(crowded systems) just remove this rule and remove all offline people from the local list.(or give a little option to show offline people or not)

Mr Bright
Shade.
Mercenary Coalition
Posted - 2006.01.27 20:08:00 - [363]
 

Originally by: Atma Darkwolf
screw logging off.. I still think(and alwys have) that when u log out of eve, your ship, pod, char, etc should STAY wherever you left him(ya, let him warp off 1mil km or whatever) -- Make people more willing ot use stations, and LESS willing to do this ****.

That way u will SEE who's in local, logged on or off. For empire space(crowded systems) just remove this rule and remove all offline people from the local list.(or give a little option to show offline people or not)


Problem would be that any conenction loss would spell certain doom to anyone in 0.0. Imagine having your power die for an hour becuase the cable is cut, or your PC dies etc etc. if you where to stay in space regardless of being online or offline - you would seriously start to casue people all kinds pains.

However, one could think several solutions that would cloak or mask the ship when you was offline - sorta a power down thing like earlier mentioned in the thread. Besides this, your suggestion would also bring more power to local in stead of less..... I dont think many would agree on that detail.


0August0
Gallente
Gooch Unlimited
Posted - 2006.01.27 20:15:00 - [364]
 

For those who want delays and other logoff/login penalties what happens when you CTD?

I've CTD'd in some hairy situations and i'd be pretty po'd if i had to wait several minutes to log back in.

Dukath
Evolution
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2006.01.27 20:39:00 - [365]
 

Originally by: Mr Bright
Originally by: Atma Darkwolf
screw logging off.. I still think(and alwys have) that when u log out of eve, your ship, pod, char, etc should STAY wherever you left him(ya, let him warp off 1mil km or whatever) -- Make people more willing ot use stations, and LESS willing to do this ****.

That way u will SEE who's in local, logged on or off. For empire space(crowded systems) just remove this rule and remove all offline people from the local list.(or give a little option to show offline people or not)


Problem would be that any conenction loss would spell certain doom to anyone in 0.0. Imagine having your power die for an hour becuase the cable is cut, or your PC dies etc etc. if you where to stay in space regardless of being online or offline - you would seriously start to casue people all kinds pains.

However, one could think several solutions that would cloak or mask the ship when you was offline - sorta a power down thing like earlier mentioned in the thread. Besides this, your suggestion would also bring more power to local in stead of less..... I dont think many would agree on that detail.




I disagree. Persistant ships will have no negative effect on 99% of the crashes since the ship autowarps to a safe anyway. You'll be logged in again before your safespot can be found. And really, how often does your power go down for hours or your computer dies? Besides you still got insurance on your ship for situations like that.

If ccp makes it so that having a cloak online automatically cloaks your ship after an emergency warp then even CTDs will have no effect to those people who are willing to sacrifice something for extra safety. Those that don't... well its still their choice.

Tenacha Khan
TunDraGon
Posted - 2006.01.27 20:44:00 - [366]
 

I think a simple fix for this would be:

If your ship has disapeared from space before you log back in, it takes a few minutes to get warmed up, during this time you cant warp, accept gangs or activate modules. After a few minutes it then warps back to the point where the person logged off.

- If you in a fight with players and crash you then have 15mins to log back in else the above will happen.

- If you are in a fight with npcs and crash you then have 2mins to log back in else the above will happen.

- If you just crash without agression you then have 1min to log back in else the above will happen.

- If you log out in a station you do not suffer from any form of warm up timer

- If players try to circumvent it by taking aggression logging out and then logging back in before the timer runs out (rinse and repeat till an available target), their ships will always remain in space and will be scannable to scouts and they will be seen on map under "ships in space".

This would be quiet easy to implement as it runs off another feature and from what I see doesnt have any draw backs. So what you thin of this idea, some feedback would be great so I can make this another crusade (aint had one in ages)Laughing

Mr Bright
Shade.
Mercenary Coalition
Posted - 2006.01.27 21:21:00 - [367]
 

Originally by: Tenacha Khan
I think a simple fix for this would be:

If your ship has disapeared from space before you log back in, it takes a few minutes to get warmed up, during this time you cant warp, accept gangs or activate modules. After a few minutes it then warps back to the point where the person logged off.

- If you in a fight with players and crash you then have 15mins to log back in else the above will happen.

- If you are in a fight with npcs and crash you then have 2mins to log back in else the above will happen.

- If you just crash without agression you then have 1min to log back in else the above will happen.

- If you log out in a station you do not suffer from any form of warm up timer

- If players try to circumvent it by taking aggression logging out and then logging back in before the timer runs out (rinse and repeat till an available target), their ships will always remain in space and will be scannable to scouts and they will be seen on map under "ships in space".

This would be quiet easy to implement as it runs off another feature and from what I see doesnt have any draw backs. So what you thin of this idea, some feedback would be great so I can make this another crusade (aint had one in ages)Laughing


Sounds like a good balanced way to get it in. At least to me Very Happy
Though during the "warm up time" should the ship be cloaked - just to prevent any chance of you being gutted while defenceless. Of course the player would still appear in local - to give a heads up on the trap in question... might even give the system time to balance out the lagspikes before any confrontation can occur.

So thumbs up, start the campaign trail Smile

Tenacha Khan
TunDraGon
Posted - 2006.01.27 21:59:00 - [368]
 

Originally by: Mr Bright


Sounds like a good balanced way to get it in. At least to me Very Happy
Though during the "warm up time" should the ship be cloaked - just to prevent any chance of you being gutted while defenceless. Of course the player would still appear in local - to give a heads up on the trap in question... might even give the system time to balance out the lagspikes before any confrontation can occur.

So thumbs up, start the campaign trail Smile


I thought of that problem, but just once the warm up period is long enough to allow other people to know they are about to get warped on but not too long to allow people to probe the safespot and gank.

Realisticy if someone logs off at safespot and logs back on the next day, its still going to take a covert ops several minutes to get a signature due to finding probe points and such.

If somebody loses connection at gate and isnt able to log back in for a long period of time, true they will be sitting 1.000.000km from gate (immobile during warm up), but also if there is a covert ops there ready to launch probes it will still take 2mins to get a warp in on the ship.

In all honesty I dont see the situation of someone losing connection for long period of time and happen to log back into a system that happens to have a guy who just happens to have probes at the ready and scanner going just incase the new local crashed at the gate he is at. Sure its possible, but will really only create a few sad faces where as this login cheat is causing lots of sad faces.

Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
Posted - 2006.01.27 22:10:00 - [369]
 

Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 27/01/2006 22:11:13
Originally by: Tenacha Khan
I think a simple fix for this would be:

If your ship has disapeared from space before you log back in, it takes a few minutes to get warmed up, during this time you cant warp, accept gangs or activate modules. After a few minutes it then warps back to the point where the person logged off.

- If you in a fight with players and crash you then have 5mins to log back in else the above will happen.

- If you are in a fight with npcs and crash you then have 5mins to log back in else the above will happen.

- If you just crash without agression you then have 5min to log back in else the above will happen.

- If you log out in a station you do not suffer from any form of warm up timer

- If players try to circumvent it by taking aggression logging out and then logging back in before the timer runs out (rinse and repeat till an available target), their ships will always remain in space and will be scannable to scouts and they will be seen on map under "ships in space".

This would be quiet easy to implement as it runs off another feature and from what I see doesnt have any draw backs. So what you thin of this idea, some feedback would be great so I can make this another crusade (aint had one in ages)Laughing


Almost 10/10.


YARRRR!!

Mr Bright
Shade.
Mercenary Coalition
Posted - 2006.01.27 22:14:00 - [370]
 

Just mentioned it, to cover all bases. I find it rather important that the solution does not create any unwanted side effects. Therefore I will keep bringing any areas to light that might possibly be the cause of trouble with teh sugestion. Even though I agree its a tiny minority that might be hit by anything Smile

Anyways, I do think your suggestion is pretty spot on - and it lies close to some of my own suggestions in this htread as well as others. To me its not who says it, but that it is discussed and hopefully implemented.


Tenacha Khan
TunDraGon
Posted - 2006.01.27 22:19:00 - [371]
 

Originally by: Mr Bright
Just mentioned it, to cover all bases. I find it rather important that the solution does not create any unwanted side effects. Therefore I will keep bringing any areas to light that might possibly be the cause of trouble with teh sugestion. Even though I agree its a tiny minority that might be hit by anything Smile

Anyways, I do think your suggestion is pretty spot on - and it lies close to some of my own suggestions in this htread as well as others. To me its not who says it, but that it is discussed and hopefully implemented.




Sorry, I didnt actually read all the replies. I started to get irrationaly angry after reading several replies that supported using the login cheat, so I skipped the rest for the sake of preserving my keyboard. whatever ccp states, I still look at this as cheating, and I really cant abide cheating in any game.

Mr Bright
Shade.
Mercenary Coalition
Posted - 2006.01.27 22:25:00 - [372]
 

Couldn't agree more. Which is why I have kept up to date in this thread - and indeed read all 13 pages.... Anyhow, just goes to show I see this problem as serious enough to listen to "socalled" players calling "login traps" "superior tactics". Just seems like such a handicapped way of playing, and yes it is an exploit in my eyes - and actually according to the Eula it might be - though the dev says otherwise atm since they cant regulate it with their resources.

The case with the thread is actually to think up solutions to combat the dispicable lame excuse of a tactic for some feeble players..... Maybe a bit harsh, but thats how I call it.

Caleb Paine
State War Academy
Posted - 2006.01.27 22:39:00 - [373]
 

How about this;

- if you log on within 5 minutes (or 10 or whatever is to be condered enough time to reconnect from a CTD) after being logged out you warp back to your original spot.

- if you log in after said period you will warp to a random spot in that system. It could be explained as your navigation computer having lost the actual location to warp back to, due to an odd time anomaly.

It would not hurt someone who experienced an actual CTD. I would not hurt anyone who logged in after an extended downtime as he didn't really care where he logged in the first place. i WOULD bother the login exploiter/camper. It would need a lot more effort from them to not only time the login, but also they would have to be lucky enough to actually time the logout.

Yes, it could be done by having a scout in another system who'd tell them when to log off. But it makes it more difficult and that's always a bonus. And it wouldn't, in any way, interfere with normal gameplay.

Atma Darkwolf
Gallente
Posted - 2006.01.28 01:58:00 - [374]
 

sorry, but that would help out guys who are trying to escape a legit kill... log off mid warp, end up somewhere else in system when u log back in, the guy chasing you dosnt havea clue where u ended up?

No, sorry, I still support the persistant ships idea... if u are stupid enough to log out in space, let someone with some time and skill with probes find you(can ONLY find your ship with probes if within 5000 km, probe can't detect a unpowerd/powerd down ship from further away?)

if u crash, u still warp off 1 mil km..so no complaints there..
If you have to go away for (1 day, 15 weeks, whatever you decide to say) and u CAN'T BLOODY WELL RIGHT CLICK, STATIONS, DOCK, well then, chances are u won't ever be found anyways(the 5000km thing with probes.. u warp off 1mil km in random direction, it is VERY unlikley that a probe could find you, even if fired off in 'the same direction' you warped off in when u logged... the tiniest shift of even 1 mm would land the probe hundreds of thousands of km away from where you were. BUT if someone found you, they deserve the easy kill.)

It worked in other games.. and sometimes yes, it really sucked(but in those 'other games' we didn't get the luxury of 'free' stations to dock at.)

I just wish people in eve(and MOST DEFINTLY myself) would stop being so carebear, and I also wish that more realistic things happened. The warping though plantets thing I can see/accept (You are in a warp bubble which reduces gravity to 0, and u basicaly 'slide' though the planet, or you are in hyper space and not really in real space anyways, either works for me) but the bumping into asteroids/other ships = ... nothing? (ugh!), the little tiny horseshoe shaped asteroid BELTS which are 50 km accross at best(WTF, do the designers of the game even know what an asteroid belt IS? and how big they are?) And of course, whole missle fiasco...

Will they add in these? I doubt it. I won't hold my breath for any 'log in tactic countermeasure' since they did the easy thing and said 'it's a legal tactic, deal with it'


Nebuli
Caldari
Capital Construction Research
Pioneer Alliance
Posted - 2006.01.28 02:17:00 - [375]
 

Originally by: Tenacha Khan
Originally by: Mr Bright
Just mentioned it, to cover all bases. I find it rather important that the solution does not create any unwanted side effects. Therefore I will keep bringing any areas to light that might possibly be the cause of trouble with teh sugestion. Even though I agree its a tiny minority that might be hit by anything Smile

Anyways, I do think your suggestion is pretty spot on - and it lies close to some of my own suggestions in this htread as well as others. To me its not who says it, but that it is discussed and hopefully implemented.




Sorry, I didnt actually read all the replies. I started to get irrationaly angry after reading several replies that supported using the login cheat, so I skipped the rest for the sake of preserving my keyboard. whatever ccp states, I still look at this as cheating, and I really cant abide cheating in any game.


QFT I stopped reading the thread for these exact reasons, cant see how anyone can condone cheating realy, and I also dont care how much CCP say its fine, think the only reason they do is to simply make their life a little easier rather than actualy agreeing with it.

Lardarz B'stard
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
Posted - 2006.01.28 02:22:00 - [376]
 

its a tactic, not an exploit

i dont use it, and i think its quite georgemichaelesque, however,

you can't say that 70 people who happen to have just finished watching celebrity big brother and all decide to log onto eve and check their skills and then happen to have a nice opportunity presented for pvp are exploiting. Its outside the game mechanics, therefore isnt an exploit.

please get over it, or incorporate it into your strategy




Fallout2man
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2006.01.28 04:24:00 - [377]
 

Originally by: Auman


Log in tactics are not neccessary to score kills unless you suck at Eve. You can ambush people perfectly well while staying in game.


Having a mobile fleet attack a stationary target is not an ambush. An ambush is where you and a large fleet wait hidden for a ship to come by, then spring out of the shadows and attack. As-is this is not possible with how local works, it gives everyone ominescence.

Fallout2man
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2006.01.28 04:38:00 - [378]
 

Edited by: Fallout2man on 28/01/2006 04:39:36
It seems almost everyone is looking at this "problem" in the worst ways. The only reason this "problem" exists is because STEALTH WHILE LOGGED IN IS IMPOSSIBLE IN EVE. To fix this "problem" we need to fix local, fix scanning and create a way to allow sensors, cloaks, jammers, etc to actually impact the ability to find or hide from people in system. If this is possible then this "log on trap" will become a minor issue because it is not necessary to properly set up an ambush.

While ambushes aren't necessary for kills however that is besides the point, this game needs stealth added to its dimension of gameplay, real stealth. The ability to enter a system, and possibly hide, either from pursuers, the local controlling alliance, etc. This would also lessen the issue of alts being used as spies in the sense of scouting systems, as you'd need a high-up character with good skills and a properly fitted ship to really scan the system and confirm it empty or "safe."

The "log on trap" is a symptom of a greater problem that NEEDS addressing. And people need to realize that and we need to deal with that. These proposed band-aid fixes would make eve even worse than it already is as without proper addressing it'd even further remove stealth from the game, and eve desperately needs some real stealth gameplay so that there is an actual point to covert ops ships.

I mean, say my corp wants to go on an anti-pirate sting, so we take a mining barge and hauler out to a heavily pirated system and cloak a group of six stealth bombers in the asteroid field hoping to catch pirates lured in by our honey-pot. Any smart pirate which notices six other corp-members all in the same corp and using the currently ominescent scanner will notice where we are, that we're all together, and likely vacate. Only a total moron would fall for that trap as-is.

This is not necessary for kills but IT IS NECESSARY FOR STRATEGY, we need more strategy, and less blobbing if eve's going to survive. A key element of strategy is intelligence and lack thereof, which means proper stealth and evasion are necessary components to add a needed level of depth to the game. As these things do not currently exist players have invented a pseudo work around known as the log on trap to get around this.

Yet here you are all decrying the log on trap and its "sneakyness" yet ignoring the very thing which created this situation to begin with, lack of stealth in eve. I cannot stress enough how important it is to realize these things. Let's make eve an intelligent game that requires thinking and planning, and not just blobs of weapons and someone smart enough to push the fire button.

j0sephine
Caldari
Reikoku
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2006.01.28 06:15:00 - [379]
 

"I mean, say my corp wants to go on an anti-pirate sting, so we take a mining barge and hauler out to a heavily pirated system and cloak a group of six stealth bombers in the asteroid field hoping to catch pirates lured in by our honey-pot. Any smart pirate which notices six other corp-members all in the same corp and using the currently ominescent scanner will notice where we are, that we're all together, and likely vacate. Only a total moron would fall for that trap as-is.

This is not necessary for kills but IT IS NECESSARY FOR STRATEGY, we need more strategy, and less blobbing if eve's going to survive."


I marked the relevant parts.

Now, please do simple math, put two and two together and riddle me this: if possibility of stealth is introduced in game in such manner, what "smart pirate" is going to ever attack anything that looks remotely like a trap, without enough firepower to fry the bait in three seconds and get the hell out?

When people are facing unknown, they blob up. Yet you expect them for some reason to undergo collective lobotomy, and fall for obvious baits like that meat, hook and sinker with force conveniently small enough to enable your own blob easy gank. Why?

(it was all discussed already in the most recent and not so recent "nerf local cuz i can't kill stuff >.<" threads...)

Fallout2man
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2006.01.28 07:36:00 - [380]
 

Originally by: j0sephine


I marked the relevant parts.

Now, please do simple math, put two and two together and riddle me this: if possibility of stealth is introduced in game in such manner, what "smart pirate" is going to ever attack anything that looks remotely like a trap, without enough firepower to fry the bait in three seconds and get the hell out?


Because the ratio of smart people to stupid people is actually rather small. The stupid people who do things like enter 0.0 to rat or mine without escorts seems from all the complaining to be relatively high. Enough so that if we remove the obvious "He must be able to see me so why isn't he running as soon as I entered the system" then you add that level of tension. Alliances or large pirate corps may blob up in certain cases yes, however for many the risk of a trap may be worth the reward, it all depends on your perspective.

Since we also remove the easy ability to identify people in the system that means that realistically speaking these traps will only be set up by a relatively small percentage of smart people with proper skills and equipment and therefore traps will not be as common to begin with. Furthermore the ability to properly detect traps will be equally rare so many will condition themselves towards the risk due to the sheer lucerativeness of 0.0.

Then there's also the very obvious fact that this allows alliances to really get intel on their enemies in war, scout their fleet movements, etc. and report it back to HQ so they can plan their offensives properly. All in all I've thought about it a lot and a general qualitative increase would occur.

Quote:
When people are facing unknown, they blob up. Yet you expect them for some reason to undergo collective lobotomy, and fall for obvious baits like that meat, hook and sinker with force conveniently small enough to enable your own blob easy gank. Why?

(it was all discussed already in the most recent and not so recent "nerf local cuz i can't kill stuff >.<" threads...)


Yes, I participated in that thread as well. I can't help but bring it up here because people are all begging to remove the only thing eve has that compares to a stealthy ambush. Nobody is aware of the real whys or reasons behind all of this so I felt it necessary to inform everyone and hopefully get an intelligent discussion about it going.

j0sephine
Caldari
Reikoku
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2006.01.28 08:21:00 - [381]
 

"Because the ratio of smart people to stupid people is actually rather small."

Then why use their existence as justification for need to nerf local?

Smart people are few, and will still easily avoid traps because they are well, smart. While stupid people are aplenty, and easy prey even in current circumstances.

In other words the "fix" fails to address the supposed problem, i.e. people with brains actually being able to utilize these brains to their best benefit...


"Since we also remove the easy ability to identify people in the system that means that realistically speaking these traps will only be set up by a relatively small percentage of smart people with proper skills and equipment and therefore traps will not be as common to begin with."

Realistically speaking, i'd guess it'll instead mean high chance for about every current gatecamp to have at least equal additional cloaked forces, as backup and additional protection from trouble. Because --like mentioned before-- it doesn't take brains to set up this sort of "you guys hide in the bush over here and when something comes, jump it and smack it over the head" approach.

In other words no, there's nothing about this tactics that'd make it some sort of rare tool of refined, highly skilled gamers. After all, current log on traps are done out of desperation by these who are exact opposite of that image, so to speak.


"Then there's also the very obvious fact that this allows alliances to really get intel on their enemies in war, scout their fleet movements, etc. and report it back to HQ so they can plan their offensives properly."

As opposed to how it's now? Thought the main complaint about local was exactly that, extremely easy way to keep yourself updated on the state of enemy force... ^^;


"Nobody is aware of the real whys or reasons behind all of this so I felt it necessary to inform everyone and hopefully get an intelligent discussion about it going."

Well, the argument about no ability to catch people with their pants down, as justification for log on traps... was mentioned throughout this thread quite a few times, actually.

Mr Bright
Shade.
Mercenary Coalition
Posted - 2006.01.28 09:43:00 - [382]
 

Edited by: Mr Bright on 28/01/2006 09:43:42
Even if there was added a way to bring more stealth into the game (which is a feature I support btw), it would not alter the fact - that you then have one kind of stealth that would be:
a: detectable with the right skills mod. (Counter stealth)
b: Force the players wanting to hide to actually train skills and fit modules to achive that.

On the stark contrast we have the logon trap which would, under your suggestion still be possible. This requires:
a: no expenditure of modules or skill training
b: cannot be detected unless someone actually saw you log off.
c: is considered by some as lame and others as an exploit(though not official)

Now, By all means - lets bring stealth tech into the game and counter stealth of course. But even with that in the game, it doesn't change the simple fact that log on traps requires NO ingame sacrifices of vulnurabilities.


Tenacha Khan
TunDraGon
Posted - 2006.01.28 16:11:00 - [383]
 

Originally by: Atma Darkwolf
sorry, but that would help out guys who are trying to escape a legit kill... log off mid warp, end up somewhere else in system when u log back in, the guy chasing you dosnt havea clue where u ended up?

No, sorry, I still support the persistant ships idea... if u are stupid enough to log out in space, let someone with some time and skill with probes find you(can ONLY find your ship with probes if within 5000 km, probe can't detect a unpowerd/powerd down ship from further away?)

if u crash, u still warp off 1 mil km..so no complaints there..
If you have to go away for (1 day, 15 weeks, whatever you decide to say) and u CAN'T BLOODY WELL RIGHT CLICK, STATIONS, DOCK, well then, chances are u won't ever be found anyways(the 5000km thing with probes.. u warp off 1mil km in random direction, it is VERY unlikley that a probe could find you, even if fired off in 'the same direction' you warped off in when u logged... the tiniest shift of even 1 mm would land the probe hundreds of thousands of km away from where you were. BUT if someone found you, they deserve the easy kill.)

It worked in other games.. and sometimes yes, it really sucked(but in those 'other games' we didn't get the luxury of 'free' stations to dock at.)

I just wish people in eve(and MOST DEFINTLY myself) would stop being so carebear, and I also wish that more realistic things happened. The warping though plantets thing I can see/accept (You are in a warp bubble which reduces gravity to 0, and u basicaly 'slide' though the planet, or you are in hyper space and not really in real space anyways, either works for me) but the bumping into asteroids/other ships = ... nothing? (ugh!), the little tiny horseshoe shaped asteroid BELTS which are 50 km accross at best(WTF, do the designers of the game even know what an asteroid belt IS? and how big they are?) And of course, whole missle fiasco...

Will they add in these? I doubt it. I won't hold my breath for any 'log in tactic countermeasure' since they did the easy thing and said 'it's a legal tactic, deal with it'




Firstly there are not stations in every system in eve, secondly it doesnt matter how far the ship is away, you can still scan probe it and kill it during the 15min log off timer.

Personally Im all for the persistant ships, I enjoy roleplaying in eve to the point that as a pirate I do not insure my ships because I dont think pirates should be able to. Face it that the majority of players in eve dont like full on imersion and if persistant ships in space were to be brought in, lots would whine that they cant log off, players couldnt npc hunt in 0.0 either as the good spots are usually far away from stations.

to sum that idea up, persistant ships is a good idea, but taking into account all the player styles, it is not very feasable.

I agree with you on the random warp point, it would just be an easy way for players to escape being killed.

As for the stealth proposals, I think stealth ships, such as covert ops and stealth bombers should be masked in local. Having entire fleets doing it would in the long term ruin gameplay, much like the log in cheat.

Ive used cloaked bs around bait a fair few time, and it does work if you put some thought into it.

Mr Bright
Shade.
Mercenary Coalition
Posted - 2006.01.28 18:29:00 - [384]
 

Well, I think some form of stealth could be beneficiary - and cloak s not showing up in local could be fine as well. BUT, this is not really the thread about either of those two suggestions.

This is about the lame "tactic" of log in traps - and how we can work towards finding a solution to remove them from the game. To me log in tranps just reek of exploit - but the Devs have stated its not (primarily becuase they cant police it efficiently as far as I can tell). So lets try and get more suggestions and discussion about the suggestions there are at hand.

One have to agree that the size of the thread now already indicate that something should at least be considered against this lame "tactic". If any of the suggested ideas have holes etc - them bring them forth and lets discuss them openly.... Free discussion is always the best way to solve a problem.

Fallout2man
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2006.01.29 01:56:00 - [385]
 

Edited by: Fallout2man on 29/01/2006 01:58:26
Originally by: j0sephine

Then why use their existence as justification for need to nerf local?


Because even an idiot can use local or the omnipotent scanner? And most idiots that do go in 0.0 know the second someone else warps in the system they need to leave pronto. The system as it exists now is so easy even the idiots can and do often make use of it at severe detriment to the game.

Quote:
Smart people are few, and will still easily avoid traps because they are well, smart. While stupid people are aplenty, and easy prey even in current circumstances.


This depends on how stupid, there is a small percentage who don't check local like their life depended on it, but most know to immediately leave the second someone else appears, there is no chance to ambush or surprise anyone except by gate ganking since their only real hope is to take someone out as they try to desperately leave the system. So while the majority of mildly stupid people can use local with the minority of very stupid people not, an advanced tactical scanning system involving skills, modules, etc. would only really be usable by people who weren't such idiots and perhaps force some people to think more about where they go and what they do. It'd also add needed tactical depth to things like alliance wars.

Quote:
In other words the "fix" fails to address the supposed problem, i.e. people with brains actually being able to utilize these brains to their best benefit...


On the contrary, the problem is the lack of tactical depth, in eve the only way to catch someone is be lucky at gate camping or use a log-on attack. Otherwise tactical gameplay is praying they're stupid enough not to use local and that you can get the drop on them or hoping they're really stupid and try to fight back when you know they won't have a chance.

Quote:
Realistically speaking, i'd guess it'll instead mean high chance for about every current gatecamp to have at least equal additional cloaked forces, as backup and additional protection from trouble. Because --like mentioned before-- it doesn't take brains to set up this sort of "you guys hide in the bush over here and when something comes, jump it and smack it over the head" approach.


Why would people gate gank when they don't need to though? The only real reason for gate ganking is because it's impossible to corner someone any other way due to the exact nature of local chat. Gate ganking is done because the only way to catch anyone even moderately stupid is to get them as they're trying to leave via a gate. While gate gankers could use this strategy it'd actually be a lot easier and more fun for them to actively hunt their prey versus gate camping, since now they'd have a chance of success versus waiting hours and hours on end in low/0.0 for someone to pass by.

Quote:
In other words no, there's nothing about this tactics that'd make it some sort of rare tool of refined, highly skilled gamers. After all, current log on traps are done out of desperation by these who are exact opposite of that image, so to speak.


While properly masking and setting up elaborate traps or scanning systems would be rare. There'd be plenty of people making use of the non-omnipotence and a moderately good scanner to find easy prey in systems. It'd reduce gate ganking as it became unecessary to catch people and more exciting active ways of pursuing prey came to be.

Quote:
As opposed to how it's now? Thought the main complaint about local was exactly that, extremely easy way to keep yourself updated on the state of enemy force... ^^;


The difference being right now if you do that they know you're there and therefore any intel you report is useless as they've changed their plans now that they know you know. This'd offer the opportunity for you to catch them without getting caught yourself or for them to move a large fleet in stealth for once perhaps. Oh and forgive me for not reading all 13 pages. :p

Fallout2man
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2006.01.29 02:06:00 - [386]
 

Originally by: Mr Bright
Well, I think some form of stealth could be beneficiary - and cloak s not showing up in local could be fine as well. BUT, this is not really the thread about either of those two suggestions.


The two things are intertwined, the log-on trap exists because there is lack of stealth, one cannot come up without the other.

Quote:
This is about the lame "tactic" of log in traps - and how we can work towards finding a solution to remove them from the game. To me log in tranps just reek of exploit - but the Devs have stated its not (primarily becuase they cant police it efficiently as far as I can tell). So lets try and get more suggestions and discussion about the suggestions there are at hand.


The most simple way to do this is just warp someone in to a random part of the system they logged out in when they return, but also have a log out timer that leaves their ships in X minutes after logout before they vanish. Simple and effective, but should not be put into place BEFORE stealth is addressed as a gameplay element otherwise it will crush whatever little bit of stealth is left.

Quote:
One have to agree that the size of the thread now already indicate that something should at least be considered against this lame "tactic". If any of the suggested ideas have holes etc - them bring them forth and lets discuss them openly.... Free discussion is always the best way to solve a problem.


Which is exactly what I'm doing. I'm merely trying to point everyone to the root of this problem, namely the lack of stealth in eve. Addressing only the "log-on trap" is only addressing the symptom of an even greater problem that exists, so I'd rather draw attention to the root cause so that can be addresed, and by virtue, have this problem mostly taken care of as well.

Mr Bright
Shade.
Mercenary Coalition
Posted - 2006.01.29 09:26:00 - [387]
 

The thing is, I dont see log in traps as "stealth" I see it as exploit CCP cant react against because of the huge amount of work with each such petition... If we can find a way now, to stop this dispicable tactic from being used, then we can move on to making suggestions for fixing local and adding stealth to the game.

Just my humble opinion

j0sephine
Caldari
Reikoku
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2006.01.30 07:36:00 - [388]
 

Edited by: j0sephine on 30/01/2006 07:37:24

"Because even an idiot can use local or the omnipotent scanner? And most idiots that do go in 0.0 know the second someone else warps in the system they need to leave pronto. The system as it exists now is so easy even the idiots can and do often make use of it at severe detriment to the game."

Well, i'd disagree this is something on the level of "idiot player". Someone who knows they need to watch the local, that anyone in 0.0 is their enemy until proven otherwise and that when they think there's something coming they won't be able to handle, then it's best to run ... has most of 'street smarts' EVE requires. If they can actually utilize it, then bully for them because plenty of people can't.

Oh, and given this i don't think it's too much of 'detriment to the game' ... the alternative are common ganks of one trapped guy by overwhelming force they never really had chance to handle. Would it make the game more interesting? To be honest, 'tis doubtful. It's detrimental to the wanna-be ganker, but that doesn't mean the overall game is worse off.


"On the contrary, the problem is the lack of tactical depth, in eve the only way to catch someone is be lucky at gate camping or use a log-on attack."

You happen to touch the very crux of matter here.

* it's too difficult to catch people once they start running

what is needed, is a way to deal with this problem that could be actually fun for all involved. To state the obvious, getting ganked by overwhelming force you could never see coming is not fun for at least part of involved players.

Therefore a 'solution' to this "every idiot keeps eye on local yaddayadda" issue should be quite a bit different imo

* discourage logging off as means to escape danger
* encourage chase of players who are aware of danger as viable part of gameplay

see if you can find ways to allow this, instead of invisible fleets making people wake up in clone station out of sudden. And the game might actually wind up more interesting for larger group of participants...


"Why would people gate gank when they don't need to though?"

Because it's still the easiest way to intercept potential targets that have no choice but to pass through certain choke points. Especially when you make it more difficult to track down people in solar systems, the people forming such gate camp included.


"The difference being right now if you do that they know you're there and therefore any intel you report is useless as they've changed their plans now that they know you know."

So, essentially you are given power to easily alter plans of your enemy. Or they can make you think that's what you achieved, and keep you second-guessing what their real intentions are. Until it's too late.

And you complain about lack of tactical depth in game....

Fallout2man
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2006.01.30 09:12:00 - [389]
 

Edited by: Fallout2man on 30/01/2006 09:13:12
Originally by: j0sephine


Well, i'd disagree this is something on the level of "idiot player". Someone who knows they need to watch the local, that anyone in 0.0 is their enemy until proven otherwise and that when they think there's something coming they won't be able to handle, then it's best to run ... has most of 'street smarts' EVE requires. If they can actually utilize it, then bully for them because plenty of people can't.

Oh, and given this i don't think it's too much of 'detriment to the game' ... the alternative are common ganks of one trapped guy by overwhelming force they never really had chance to handle. Would it make the game more interesting? To be honest, 'tis doubtful. It's detrimental to the wanna-be ganker, but that doesn't mean the overall game is worse off.

You happen to touch the very crux of matter here.

* it's too difficult to catch people once they start running


I'd change that too "It's nearly impossible to catch anyone off-guard unless you're really lucky, period."

Quote:
what is needed, is a way to deal with this problem that could be actually fun for all involved. To state the obvious, getting ganked by overwhelming force you could never see coming is not fun for at least part of involved players.


However obviously something doesn't have to be universally fun, otherwise all PvP would be consentual.

Quote:
Therefore a 'solution' to this "every idiot keeps eye on local yaddayadda" issue should be quite a bit different imo

* discourage logging off as means to escape danger
* encourage chase of players who are aware of danger as viable part of gameplay


Generally speaking chasing down a player is nearly impossible unless you've got several people and one of you's fitted for a lot of ECM (or is using an interdictor) otherwise they'll warp to a stargate and by the time you arrive they're gone, and by the time you get to the other side you won't likely be able to find them before they're out to the next system. While pursuit could be fun the problem is there's no real way to outrun anyone because all warp drives fly you at the same speed (3 A.U./sec max), some just can go farther on less capacitor than others.

As well without the ability to track someone's exact location without them being in your system you cannot possibly cut them off at the pass by navigating around and intercepting them, as you've got no way to track them nor know where they're headed really.

Quote:
see if you can find ways to allow this, instead of invisible fleets making people wake up in clone station out of sudden. And the game might actually wind up more interesting for larger group of participants...


While I agree adding more dynamics to chasing would be fun this would offer an equally high level of changes to properly facilitate. New skills, modules, etc. for extreme range scanning, faster warp drives, hacking nav computers (to get his jump course), etc. would also be as big a fix as adding stealth to eve. Arguably both are necessary but I personally feel stealth is a more immediate necessity.

Quote:
Because it's still the easiest way to intercept potential targets that have no choice but to pass through certain choke points. Especially when you make it more difficult to track down people in solar systems, the people forming such gate camp included.


While a few bottlenecks do exist obviously there are few such "must-pass" situations and it'd actually be more tactful to camp belts or other frequented points in system versus gates if stealth is achievable. You'd only want to camp a gate in a system where there's only one (two at most) gates in system, as otherwise there is a means of escape, otherwise the smartest idea is to wait somewhere players will congregate and spring forth from there as it increases the likelyhood of finding someone.

Fallout2man
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2006.01.30 09:16:00 - [390]
 

Originally by: j0sephine
So, essentially you are given power to easily alter plans of your enemy. Or they can make you think that's what you achieved, and keep you second-guessing what their real intentions are. Until it's too late.

And you complain about lack of tactical depth in game....


Tactical depth as in player options for assessing and handling situations. Right now it's sorely lacking. You might be able to play a little psychological warfare in eve like that but my best bet is with the current system it's not exactly ideal.

After all, you can't bluff if your opponent is a card counter (knows exactly what you're capable of in any given situation.)


Pages: first : previous : ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 : last (14)

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