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 : ... 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 ... : last (14)

Author Topic

Elenia Kheynes
Caldari
Avatars of Doom
Apocalyptica.
Posted - 2006.01.24 18:05:00 - [181]
 

Originally by: Oveur
Logging on and off has been a mess since day 1. The problem is not ideas to solve it or anything like that, the problem is implementing them after the fact, when a lot of other gameplay is dependant on said logic.

For example, IMO we should never have removed ships from space at all, because I think that's cool and more realistic. However, that's simply not feasible to implement today.

We've implemented other failsafes to address this problem. Some of you might remember when you popped up right on the same location you logged out in - and you didn't even warp away then! Very Happy

But doing anything more drastic has serious consequences. Who knows what situation you were in when you get disconnected? What if there are two of you against three and you are winning.

Pop goes your internet connection - and your ship starts to warp away. You frantically try to reconnect. But no, the flavor of the month is to prevent log-on traps, therefore when reconnecing, your ship is powered down and it takes 2 minutes to "recharge". Yay for you and yay for your friend.

Oh, and if people have problems with how I reply on the forums, just go read some other thread. My replies are usually my personal opinion and I do it for my amusement to reply, not yours.


what about some changes to cloaking device ? Ships having one fitted would warp away and cloak if they log off.
Since I have a very sucky internet connection (the kind that disconnects half of the time when phone rings) I guess I'd fit one ;p

But on the overral, current system is the less annoying for players ^^
Tho I'm still a bit annoyed by the 30 minutes log off timer (especially due to an event where I warped to the wrong BM, jumped to a local with a good 25 hostiles with one at stargate aggro'ing me and all this just at the time I had to leave to eat... And this in a system where your best safespot can never be at more than 7 au from closest celstial object ;.; )

Freya Selene
M. Corp
-Mostly Harmless-
Posted - 2006.01.24 18:17:00 - [182]
 

Originally by: Rumata
What enemies - such and tactics.
You wanted fight only at a triple superiority in numbers? We have forced you to fight at double yours superiority in numbers.
dont waste your time crying on this forum - go on test server and train pvp.
Yes, logind trap is lame tactics. This is tactics against lamers who can only cry and blob.
nuff said


You counted the ships right?

We had a gang of aprox 20 with 50% frigs. Ye blobbing....

As for logoff tactics.. its not a tactic its not superior thinking but its abusing game mechanic simple fact. Logoff and login to avoid battle or to trap an enemy has never been a part of any gameplay design.

Its the chicken way. No tactics involved at all.

Sarmaul's Alt
Posted - 2006.01.24 18:22:00 - [183]
 

Login Trap Video?

I log off, my ship warps to within 1m km from where I logged off. When I log back in, my ship automatically warps to the location I logged off.

Surely this is the defination of a login trap?

Things of note:

1) The second clip is cut short due to WMM throwing a strop. Nothing I could do would make it play the full clip. Rest assured though, that is the same gate I logged off at

2) I'm using an alt char as I'm forum banned for another hour or so, but as a dev is currently reading the forums this looked quite important

3) I'm probably missing something really obvious about how this isn't a login trap, so please go gentle with me

4) Yes I'm sorry for using WMM.

000Hunter000
Gallente
Missiles 'R' Us
Posted - 2006.01.24 18:44:00 - [184]
 

Edited by: 000Hunter000 on 24/01/2006 18:46:33
Hm... how about a solution for the logging off and logging on problems (some people were also complaining about how logging off is too easy to use as an escape button.)

If u log off in space u warp to a 'safespot' but ur ship remains there for 15 minutes so they still may be able to find ur ship.

If u log on in space u appear in that 'safespot' but can't do anything for 5 minutes (u are desorientated from the signal los and your pod is recalibrating to regain control of the ship bla bla bla excuse Very Happy ) That way logon ganking should be a thing of the past and no more easy escape button if ur in a low sec no station system.

EDIT: there are probably drawbacks to this, but atleast it's an idea.

Scorpyn
Caldari
Infinitus Odium
Posted - 2006.01.24 18:46:00 - [185]
 

Edited by: Scorpyn on 24/01/2006 21:25:56
Originally by: Oveur
But doing anything more drastic has serious consequences. Who knows what situation you were in when you get disconnected? What if there are two of you against three and you are winning.

Pop goes your internet connection - and your ship starts to warp away. You frantically try to reconnect. But no, the flavor of the month is to prevent log-on traps, therefore when reconnecing, your ship is powered down and it takes 2 minutes to "recharge". Yay for you and yay for your friend.

I have a suggestion for that...

Instead of logging on/off the way you do now, implement a "shutdown ship" and a "activate ship" feature.

Shutdown Ship : Activate it, then it takes 10 minutes for the ship to cloak, at which time you will also disappear from all channels and appear as logged off to anyone trying to communicate with you. You will also not have any access to the market, map, station services, evemail and so on (the screen should probably go blank with a "activate ship" button in the middle of it). This should be automatically activated 5 minutes after you log off (so after 15 minutes without connection you would be logging back on to a cloaked ship).

Activate Ship : Immediately show up in local, but the ship remains cloaked for 5 more minutes ("while powering up all the modules" or some other very scientific reason).

That way, it doesn't really matter if you stay logged on or off, and the logon traps won't really be doable that way. To prevent logon traps to happen from within stations, just apply the same system there.

(The details would have to be worked on of course but you get my idea I hope, and I believe it would be very much doable.)

Edit2 : Deleted previous edit which was made due to being too tired and unable to read properly.

Montague Zooma
Imperial Dreams
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2006.01.24 18:56:00 - [186]
 

Eve is a harsh and unforgiving world. I totally accept that.

It never fails to amaze me how Eve is full of macho PVP "kill them all" types...who instantly turn into "carebears" who go crying to the devs once somebody comes up with a very deadly and effective tactic.

Log in traps are officially not exploits. They're in the tool box. Use them or disdain them as your sense of honor dictates. Just don't whine about them. All's fair in love and Eve.

As a Babylon 5 fan...I think it's kinda cool. It's like Captain Sheridan with his fleet gathered in hyperspace, waiting for the right time to strike. It sucks to be on the receiving end, but that's the way Eve is. Complaining about login traps reminds me of the Minbari whining about the destruction of the Black Star. OK, enough with the B5 fanboy references.

Don't cry about it. Set up your own trap and make your enemy wish he'd never tried it in the first place.

Admittedly, a map feature showing logins/logoffs could be pretty useful.

j0sephine
Caldari
Reikoku
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2006.01.24 19:08:00 - [187]
 

"Log in traps are officially not exploits. They're in the tool box. Use them or disdain them as your sense of honor dictates. Just don't whine about them. All's fair in love and Eve."

I don't really see it as whining, to be honest. It's simply calling the person who resorts to the meta-gaming like that exactly what they are -- unskilled player.

If this hurts their delicate feelings to the point they start crying about spade being called spade and how people should stop, then it's tough but solution is simple. Drop the lame tactics. Or accept being constantly reminded of lack of skill is going to be part of price to get those kills.

Montague Zooma
Imperial Dreams
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2006.01.24 19:11:00 - [188]
 

People win fights because they lack skill? Golly, I should be the king of PVP then! Laughing

j0sephine
Caldari
Reikoku
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2006.01.24 19:18:00 - [189]
 

"People win fights because they lack skill?"

Lack of individual skill doesn't prevent winning, provided large enough numbers and lack of significant technological edge... 'tis nothing new, as any mob with torch lights and pitchforks can tell you -.o

Rumata
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2006.01.24 19:26:00 - [190]
 

what is definition of "login trap" ?

2 situation :

1)near station gang 5 BSs and 15Bs logged off - on login screens
on the start of battle(5on5) all make login and warp into battle

2)Situation of RAT.
1 RAT. dread start battle on moon 3-1. second dread on safespot aligned to planet 3. BS support logged off in system 1j from battle. we make logon regroup on ss, make gang, and going to help to our dreads

is these cases are same login trap ?



Mnengli Noiliffe
Posted - 2006.01.24 19:26:00 - [191]
 

Originally by: Uncauzi
Originally by: Mnengli Noiliffe
You guys who advocate both making this an exploit and removal of local contradict yourselves, and I'll try to prove this.

1. local is bad and needs to go. RIGHT?
2. no local means that you can't see who's in this system. Because local is bad and needs to go, it's good to be unable to see who's in system. RIGHT?
3. offline means you can't see those who are in system, so discussed "exploit" allows to make others not to see offlined person in system. RIGHT?
4. however, you think that logoff is bad, so not seeing who is in system is bad. RIGHT?

But 4. and 2. contradict each other...


No, 2 and 4 do not contradict each other because not seeing someone in the system isn't bad, it's the method that allowed it is bad. Removing local levels the playing field and the players would adapt accordingly. Also, there'd be no reason for a massive log in which causes lag.

Really, it's quite simple, try and keep up..:)

Also, Avon..good posts.


However, most people here are crying about not being able to predict the blob, not about an ugliness of the method that implements this tactic. Imagine the scale of whinnage that will begin if this kind of tactic became wide-spread and directly supported by game mechanics, which would happen if the local is removed completely as you advocate.

But yeah, I can get your double standards - "we want to use this on others when they come to our system, legitimately, without bothering with TS gang control (which would be the case if local is removed), but if someone uses this on us and right now with somewhat tricky mechanics, it's an exploit".

As about the lag, well that's not something caused by this particular tactic, it's much more wide server problem. You won't call large fleet fights an exploit, even while they do cause massive lag, right?

Freya Selene
M. Corp
-Mostly Harmless-
Posted - 2006.01.24 19:36:00 - [192]
 

Originally by: Mnengli Noiliffe
Originally by: Uncauzi
Originally by: Mnengli Noiliffe
You guys who advocate both making this an exploit and removal of local contradict yourselves, and I'll try to prove this.

1. local is bad and needs to go. RIGHT?
2. no local means that you can't see who's in this system. Because local is bad and needs to go, it's good to be unable to see who's in system. RIGHT?
3. offline means you can't see those who are in system, so discussed "exploit" allows to make others not to see offlined person in system. RIGHT?
4. however, you think that logoff is bad, so not seeing who is in system is bad. RIGHT?

But 4. and 2. contradict each other...


No, 2 and 4 do not contradict each other because not seeing someone in the system isn't bad, it's the method that allowed it is bad. Removing local levels the playing field and the players would adapt accordingly. Also, there'd be no reason for a massive log in which causes lag.

Really, it's quite simple, try and keep up..:)

Also, Avon..good posts.


However, most people here are crying about not being able to predict the blob, not about an ugliness of the method that implements this tactic. Imagine the scale of whinnage that will begin if this kind of tactic became wide-spread and directly supported by game mechanics, which would happen if the local is removed completely as you advocate.

But yeah, I can get your double standards - "we want to use this on others when they come to our system, legitimately, without bothering with TS gang control (which would be the case if local is removed), but if someone uses this on us and right now with somewhat tricky mechanics, it's an exploit".

As about the lag, well that's not something caused by this particular tactic, it's much more wide server problem. You won't call large fleet fights an exploit, even while they do cause massive lag, right?


The reason this issue came up again is becouse of the lag created by those logging back in that causes those allready in the system to lagfreeze.

With the creating this lag fest they not only gain the advantage of supricingly more people to fight but more the issue of being unable to fight.

Weirda
Minmatar
Queens of the Stone Age
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2006.01.24 19:40:00 - [193]
 

just thought would add somewhere in thread:

when you add enemies to buddy list... it lags you additionally when they log on/off. 50 enemies logging on at same time is going to lag you more then anything - probably for several minutes. it seems that you computer will try to generate their image even if it have it cached is why.

buddy list wasn't meant as tactical tool any more then local was... don't screw youself more. if you can see that they are suddenly in/not in local... don't additionaly screw youself by having them as buddy...

j0sephine
Caldari
Reikoku
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2006.01.24 19:45:00 - [194]
 

Edited by: j0sephine on 24/01/2006 19:46:16

"what is definition of "login trap" ?"

Would say it's when you have part of your fleet hidden out of game (by being logged out) but with pilots on standby and ready to log in and join the fight as soon as it breaks out.

It can be quite fuzzy though; for example, if it happens in the system which is known as 'home base' of your enemy, it's natural to expect when you invade such system, that people who are playing on their alt somewhere else will drop that alt, and within short time log in the character which is somewhere in/near that attacked system, to assist in defense. But this is something that can be expected, so doubt it can be considered "trap". Kind of boils down to intent, really, and that's something that cannot be really proven, only admitted by the side who did (or not) the login thing ^^;;

Mnengli Noiliffe
Posted - 2006.01.24 19:49:00 - [195]
 

Originally by: Freya Selene

The reason this issue came up again is becouse of the lag created by those logging back in that causes those allready in the system to lagfreeze.

With the creating this lag fest they not only gain the advantage of supricingly more people to fight but more the issue of being unable to fight.


As I have said already - So fix the lag, instead of breaking the game till it's playable even with this lag.

Freya Selene
M. Corp
-Mostly Harmless-
Posted - 2006.01.24 19:59:00 - [196]
 

Originally by: Mnengli Noiliffe
Originally by: Freya Selene

The reason this issue came up again is becouse of the lag created by those logging back in that causes those allready in the system to lagfreeze.

With the creating this lag fest they not only gain the advantage of supricingly more people to fight but more the issue of being unable to fight.


As I have said already - So fix the lag, instead of breaking the game till it's playable even with this lag.


Even when hardware upgrades happen lag still accures when people massivly log back on within the same system.

Simply couse the SQL has to deliver information for those that logon but also adjust player view of those allready in the system.

First SQL query will be ... people logon - send data
People logon in system XXX - send locals in XXX data.

Those allready logged on with be the most troubled if lag accures.

This issue is turned arround when people warp into a spot or jump the gates. The locals allready have the data while those just gething there have to wait to recieve there data.

Mnengli Noiliffe
Posted - 2006.01.24 20:03:00 - [197]
 

Interesting insight. I certainly would think of something genious to optimize it all, if only I were a dev...

Dukath
Evolution
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2006.01.24 20:07:00 - [198]
 

Oveur:

What exactly is the reason not to implement persistant ships at the moment. I would agree before the latest content patches but now?

1) fit a cloak, activate it and logoff. The ship should stay cloaked so no problem there
2) log at a POS, the ship should stay in the bubble so no problem there
3) log at a station or outpost, no problme there
4) log in empire, no problem there.
5) you crash? the ship still warps out, so you log in and continue to play.

If you make it so that a ship autocloaks if it has one fitted after the emergency warp even crashes with people who can't log back in are safe.

So pleae enlighten us to the real reason why persistancy is still impossible. With the ease where you can basically place a POS anywhere you want persistancy should be the next step in empire building/defending.

Tullaris Iceblade
Posted - 2006.01.24 20:47:00 - [199]
 

pls for the love of god just stop. stop for a second and think about how small this problem is compared to all the other ones ccp has to deal with every day,
then give thanks that oveur even bothered to reply,
and now stop replying to this thread because it should have died ages ago.
this game aint fair kiddies you win by whatever means neccesary just like real life.

Freya Selene
M. Corp
-Mostly Harmless-
Posted - 2006.01.24 20:51:00 - [200]
 

Originally by: Tullaris Iceblade
pls for the love of god just stop. stop for a second and think about how small this problem is compared to all the other ones ccp has to deal with every day,
then give thanks that oveur even bothered to reply,
and now stop replying to this thread because it should have died ages ago.
this game aint fair kiddies you win by whatever means neccesary just like real life.


/flame

Looks who's telling. Not being bothered to check the rules about sig size, so mods had to spend time removing it and putting a warning instead couse else you would have complained they removed it...... Embarassed

/flame off.

Maya Rkell
Third Grade Ergonomics
Posted - 2006.01.24 20:52:00 - [201]
 

Originally by: Dukath
Oveur:

What exactly is the reason not to implement persistant ships at the moment. I would agree before the latest content patches but now?


Because they want a 0.0 population.

Period.

Montague Zooma
Imperial Dreams
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2006.01.24 20:58:00 - [202]
 

Originally by: j0sephine
"People win fights because they lack skill?"

Lack of individual skill doesn't prevent winning, provided large enough numbers and lack of significant technological edge... 'tis nothing new, as any mob with torch lights and pitchforks can tell you -.o


The path to victory involves making the best use of your resources. If a mob with pitchforks can defeat a modern mechanized unit, my hat's off to the strategist behind the mob.

Whatever. Login traps seem a bit lame to me, but then so does gate camping, blowing up defenseless miners, etc. Not everyone has the same sense of fair play. This is simply how the game is played...if the devs allow a tactic, it can be used. It's up to the players to police themselves. If corps can agree to treaties on what tactics can and cannot be used, more power to 'em.

j0sephine
Caldari
Reikoku
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2006.01.24 21:07:00 - [203]
 

"The path to victory involves making the best use of your resources. If a mob with pitchforks can defeat a modern mechanized unit, my hat's off to the strategist behind the mob."

"...and lack of significant technological edge..."

We aren't talking of pitchfork mob beating tank division. But of pitchfork mob beating smaller pitchfork mob. Which takes no skill and no strategist, no matter how much the big pitchfork mob would like to tell themselves otherwise.

(although the small mob beating the bigger one is quite another matter entirely)

Harisdrop
Gallente
Vindicate and Deliverance
Posted - 2006.01.24 21:11:00 - [204]
 

Jump Clones are for what? If you only see 15 pilots local. In the next 5 sec you have 30 in local. Logon Trap my rear.

Montague Zooma
Imperial Dreams
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2006.01.24 22:13:00 - [205]
 

Originally by: j0sephine

We aren't talking of pitchfork mob beating tank division. But of pitchfork mob beating smaller pitchfork mob. Which takes no skill and no strategist, no matter how much the big pitchfork mob would like to tell themselves otherwise.


Well, if I were to use the tactic, it would definitely be because I'm a pitchfork mob up against a tank division. I can certainly see noob corps beset by so-called "griefers" using such a tactic in order to even the score. Jackasses think your corp is easy prey? Lure them to their doom.

We're talking about a tactic that can be used by players of any skill level. You can call people who use the tactic unskilled, but a victory is still a victory. I'm sure the British consoled themselves after losing the American colonies by complaining about how the Yanks didn't play by the rules.

Perhaps PVP should be restricted to one-on-one duels between opponents of equal stature, so skill will receive its rightful due. Like it or not, Eve seems to be all about beating a weaker enemy. Most players choose battles in which they perceive they have an advantage. This tactic is just the latest example of that.

Teamspeak and Ventrilo are external programs that most corps use in order to fight more effectively. There is no in game counter to those programs...those who type lose to those who talk. I suppose that means TS users are unskilled as well?

Nomen Nescio
Posted - 2006.01.24 22:17:00 - [206]
 

Anything which uses outof thegame approach to solve ingame problem is not ONLY lame, but it also shows INGAME PROBLEM people are trying to solve. And if there is ingame problem without ingame solution you, dear devs, should fix it.

And I'm not talking about fixing there results of like "lets dont hide ship on loggoff", its just short sighted solutions for the wrong issues.

Why RAT or anyone else for that matter exersises such outofthe game action over and over again? Whats the question, you devs, should ask, not amuze yourself with "nuff said". Due all respect.


  • We have a WAR in eve there ships have real value. People fight WARs here, not online multiplayer tetris. In a war people will do anything to win. And both sides will do anything, no just "the lame" one

  • Currently there is no ingame solution to catching an enemy oof guard. Ambush is totaly not an option in eve. Any alt or covert or any ship send forward totaly uncovers ALL possible ingame danger.

  • It is 100% effective scouting local + "buddy list" totaly secure any decently orginized group from enemy superior force.

  • The way in which 1 alt character in boon ship can totaly and instanly uncover enemy best fleet of veterans is a joke. I can accept a situation then a specific ship with specific gear and trained char could be a effective scout. But even then if has to be actions of the player which lead to success, not autopilot and icons of the enemy poping up with "online" green bar

  • On top of that, we have a game mechanics which wont allow to catch retreting enemy. You can't catch an enemy on the move if he moves away from your forces. So once you have been scouted and enemy feels weaker there is no way to force the combat

  • But very basic wisdom of human warfare dictates that surprise and intel are the key part of victory. So then RAT can't possibly solve the problem ingame, they have to look for other options and logoff is the perfect one.

  • With loggof traps you can ambush an enemy, you can hide your numbers and ships. You can avoid 100% effective enemy scouting with 100% camuflage. But you can't move like in real war you can have an advantage of shadow but you can't have mobility.

  • The reason people are so ****ed of about logoff traps is that something that used to work 100% - scouting now has 100% of failure. And you, dear CCP can do nothing about it, because you didn't built in the system, so you now you dont control it.



It takes amazing dedication and discipline to keep dozens of people aware and ready to login to fight at a first notice. You dont see that as a feat. All you see is "lameness" because they dont use your ingame tools to show they dedication and discipline.

But guess what? You didnt provide them any.

Freya Selene
M. Corp
-Mostly Harmless-
Posted - 2006.01.24 22:21:00 - [207]
 

Its not a gamebased tactic to logoff/logon.
Its abuse of game mechanics.

Its the same as in CS waiting for the CT to pass the rushpoint then quickly logon on the bomspot and plant the bom.

Its the same as in Q3 you face your enemy you quickly logoff till he passed and log back on to shoot him in the back.

Its the same as being in jail you logoff wait for the guards to panic couse the cell is empty and run arround while keeping the cell open. You logon and run off.

Its the same if during Pearl Harber the USA Fleet had logged off there ships in harber untill the Japanese fighters ran out of fual and had to return to log back on in safe space.

Regardless how many story's comparisons you create the fact is that when you logoff or login that action has Nothing to do with the gameplay on itself. That the result is being abused is miss-use of gamemechanics.

Freya.

Selena Sellion
Posted - 2006.01.24 22:26:00 - [208]
 

Originally by: Rumata
what is definition of "login trap" ?

2 situation :

1)near station gang 5 BSs and 15Bs logged off - on login screens
on the start of battle(5on5) all make login and warp into battle

2)Situation of RAT.
1 RAT. dread start battle on moon 3-1. second dread on safespot aligned to planet 3. BS support logged off in system 1j from battle. we make logon regroup on ss, make gang, and going to help to our dreads

is these cases are same login trap ?





Wow that sounds EXACTLY like what you did to SUPRMS freighter. Or not.

Selena Sellion
Posted - 2006.01.24 22:29:00 - [209]
 

All CCP has to do is

Redesignate Logon traps as an exploit BUT not one which allows the victim to be reimbursed .

That wont up the petition level tooo drastically, but will at least mean the fencesitters will stop doing it.

As with all similar things, the ones that keep doing it will be demolished for their actions.

Nomen Nescio
Posted - 2006.01.24 22:32:00 - [210]
 

Originally by: Freya Selene

....
Its the same if during Pearl Harber the USA Fleet had logged off there ships in harber untill the Japanese fighters ran out of fual and had to return to log back on in safe space.
....
Freya.

And if they only could, they would loggoff. Because in real war there are no "lame winners" and in history books it would be written as an amazing tactical genious of US command. :)

Game came to a point then current mechanics dont allow people to solve a problem in game, but they can solve it out of the game - so they do. You dont have teamspeak built in into the eve, but it helps so people use it. It is ALSO lame because people are using OUT OF THE GAME solutions for ingame problem.




Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 ... : 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