open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked RageCaging: Bannable or Not?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic

Daxation
Posted - 2011.07.18 17:39:00 - [1]
 

So, I listened to the Goonswarm's "State of the Goonion". I had to have a good laugh. But that's not the point of this post.

I know what RageCaging is, and from what I've heard from several people, it's much like Smart Bombing Jita undock, or popping out thousands of jetcans.


The question I have is; Is this a bannable offense? POS Shields inhibit/are to protect you, but if you can't jump out of a "Safe Spot" then whats the point of having POS shields if you can just anchor a bubble and keep people from jumping?


I'm also going to mention the incident with IT Alliance & their enemies when they were ragecaged. The GM's popped their bubbles.

So, I'd like to know CCP & Players. Is this a bannable offense and if it isn't, should it be?

Jack Tronic
Posted - 2011.07.18 17:49:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Jack Tronic on 18/07/2011 17:49:30
Originally by: Daxation
So, I listened to the Goonswarm's "State of the Goonion". I had to have a good laugh. But that's not the point of this post.

I know what RageCaging is, and from what I've heard from several people, it's much like Smart Bombing Jita undock, or popping out thousands of jetcans.


The question I have is; Is this a bannable offense? POS Shields inhibit/are to protect you, but if you can't jump out of a "Safe Spot" then whats the point of having POS shields if you can just anchor a bubble and keep people from jumping?


I'm also going to mention the incident with IT Alliance & their enemies when they were ragecaged. The GM's popped their bubbles.

So, I'd like to know CCP & Players. Is this a bannable offense and if it isn't, should it be?



The GM's didn't pop the bubbles that were messing with IT, a bug triggered the bubbles to offline which has since been fix.


You also do not seem to understand what ****caging means, they aren't going out and ****caging poses in hostile systems. It's a focused tactic requiring 24/7 camping of the poses or else people can just burn out of the bubbles and run away.

Taedrin
Gallente
Kushan Industrial
Posted - 2011.07.18 17:49:00 - [3]
 

AFAIK, there is no rule against deploying bubbles around a POS. There ARE, however, rules against deploying so many cargocontainers, bubbles, etc such that it causes lag.

Thus, whether or not the cage is a bannable offense or not is up to the GM who is reviewing the petition, similar to how decloaking cans and banning works.

Overall - use your common sense. If you do not like how a GM handles a situation, file a petition (and then escalate it if you get a copy+pasta)

Jack Tronic
Posted - 2011.07.18 17:51:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Taedrin
AFAIK, there is no rule against deploying bubbles around a POS. There ARE, however, rules against deploying so many cargocontainers, bubbles, etc such that it causes lag.



Actually GMs aren't allowed to touch bubbles anymore, I've attempted to petition DRF dead systems with HUNDREDS of bubbles anchored on them. The senior GMs even said nope.

Daxation
Posted - 2011.07.18 17:51:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Taedrin
AFAIK, there is no rule against deploying bubbles around a POS. There ARE, however, rules against deploying so many cargocontainers, bubbles, etc such that it causes lag.

Thus, whether or not the cage is a bannable offense or not is up to the GM who is reviewing the petition, similar to how decloaking cans and banning works.

Overall - use your common sense. If you do not like how a GM handles a situation, file a petition (and then escalate it if you get a copy+pasta)


Very true. But wouldn't this just be an exploit, one of the many CCP fails to fix every patch that comes out?

Thanks for not trollin' as well. Looks like I'll be droppin' bubbles on peoples POS's just to f*ck with them now. :)

Llambda
Space Llama Industries
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:02:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Llambda on 18/07/2011 18:02:19
Obviously not bannable, obviously should not be bannable. I'm baffled that anyone would even ask this.

Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:08:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Llambda
Edited by: Llambda on 18/07/2011 18:02:19
Obviously not bannable, obviously should not be bannable. I'm baffled that anyone would even ask this.


It depends on the situation. 500 would be banable if you read the TOS at all.

Kalle Demos
Amarr
Helix Protocol
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:08:00 - [8]
 

Goons have more members and pets than any other coalition.
Goons have more spies than any other alliance.
Goons have more ISK and resources than any other alliance.
Goons know more exploits and tricks than any other alliance.
Goons RMT more than any other alliance
Goons have more supercaps than any other alliance

Even with all these and many more benefits, Goons still fail so hard and die to the first alliance that attack them

Llambda
Space Llama Industries
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:15:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Cipher Jones
Originally by: Llambda
Edited by: Llambda on 18/07/2011 18:02:19
Obviously not bannable, obviously should not be bannable. I'm baffled that anyone would even ask this.


It depends on the situation. 500 would be banable if you read the TOS at all.


Dropping 500 isn't what this is about, if you read the OP at all.

Daxation
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:29:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Llambda
Originally by: Cipher Jones
Originally by: Llambda
Edited by: Llambda on 18/07/2011 18:02:19
Obviously not bannable, obviously should not be bannable. I'm baffled that anyone would even ask this.


It depends on the situation. 500 would be banable if you read the TOS at all.


Dropping 500 isn't what this is about, if you read the OP at all.


Dropping more than 25 bubbles in any location is bannable. I've already been banned for that. I drop 35 Large T2 bubbles On a gate. :P

The OP was a mere question; Can you do it or will you get banned? It's an exploit from whatever way you look at it. No it shouldn't be bannable, but then again, shouldn't it? Or should CCP just fix it to where the bubbles to effect ships on the inside of the "forcefield". so basically, you log out, and log back in, your f*cked.

Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:32:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Llambda
Originally by: Cipher Jones
Originally by: Llambda
Edited by: Llambda on 18/07/2011 18:02:19
Obviously not bannable, obviously should not be bannable. I'm baffled that anyone would even ask this.


It depends on the situation. 500 would be banable if you read the TOS at all.


Dropping 500 isn't what this is about, if you read the OP at all.


The OP did not give a number if you comprehended the post at all.

Apparently 25 is the limit, according to forum hearsay at this point. The TOS forbid it, but don't give a number.

Dr DustRemover
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:33:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Daxation
Originally by: Llambda
Originally by: Cipher Jones
Originally by: Llambda
Edited by: Llambda on 18/07/2011 18:02:19
Obviously not bannable, obviously should not be bannable. I'm baffled that anyone would even ask this.


It depends on the situation. 500 would be banable if you read the TOS at all.


Dropping 500 isn't what this is about, if you read the OP at all.


Dropping more than 25 bubbles in any location is bannable. I've already been banned for that. I drop 35 Large T2 bubbles On a gate. :P

The OP was a mere question; Can you do it or will you get banned? It's an exploit from whatever way you look at it. No it shouldn't be bannable, but then again, shouldn't it? Or should CCP just fix it to where the bubbles to effect ships on the inside of the "forcefield". so basically, you log out, and log back in, your f*cked.


I think intent plays a role. You need tons of large bubbles to keep supers trapped inside a Large POS. There's no other way to do it.

Putting 50 bubbles on a gate or in a belt is overkill and doesn't accomplish any goal other than to lag.

baltec1
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:36:00 - [13]
 

Whats wrong is your super carrier stuck?

Llambda
Space Llama Industries
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:39:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Llambda on 18/07/2011 18:45:28
Edited by: Llambda on 18/07/2011 18:43:47
Originally by: Cipher Jones
Originally by: Llambda
Originally by: Cipher Jones
Originally by: Llambda
Edited by: Llambda on 18/07/2011 18:02:19
Obviously not bannable, obviously should not be bannable. I'm baffled that anyone would even ask this.


It depends on the situation. 500 would be banable if you read the TOS at all.


Dropping 500 isn't what this is about, if you read the OP at all.


The OP did not give a number if you comprehended the post at all.

Apparently 25 is the limit, according to forum hearsay at this point. The TOS forbid it, but don't give a number.


Oh, I did comprehend it. You clearly didn't, so I'll draw it out in crayon for you.

The OP was asking about a specific tactic. That specific tactic does not require 500 bubbles, nor would it particularly benefit said tactic to use 500 bubbles, so right off the bat, your Captain Obvious drivel regarding the intentional-disruption-of-service articles of the TOS is clearly irrelevant. That's a completely different "tactic" (for lack of a better term) with completely different gameplay consequences.

Furthermore, the OP also elaborated on precisely what they personally believed to be an issue:

Quote:
The question I have is; Is this a bannable offense? POS Shields inhibit/are to protect you, but if you can't jump out of a "Safe Spot" then whats the point of having POS shields if you can just anchor a bubble and keep people from jumping?



To wit, the OP clearly felt there is an issue merely with the act of trapping someone, and was obviously not inquiring about intentionally doing something to cause lag or otherwise "unplayable" conditions.

It's a subtle nuance; I'm not surprised you missed it.

Dark Reignz
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:47:00 - [15]
 

***** Legion Butt Hurt alt thread detected..... R.A.P.E CAGES FTW Twisted Evil

Uuali
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:49:00 - [16]
 

CCP, protecting big alliances and monocle wearers since 2003 (monocles since a few months ago). lol!

Does the term "silent investors" mean anything?

Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:51:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Kalle Demos
Goons have more members and pets than any other coalition.
Goons have more spies than any other alliance.
Goons have more ISK and resources than any other alliance.
Goons know more exploits and tricks than any other alliance.
Goons RMT more than any other alliance
Goons have more supercaps than any other alliance

Even with all these and many more benefits, Goons still fail so hard and die to the first alliance that attack them


Hi Kalle. You still mad?

Kalle Demos
Amarr
Helix Protocol
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:55:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Feligast
Originally by: Kalle Demos
Goons have more members and pets than any other coalition.
Goons have more spies than any other alliance.
Goons have more ISK and resources than any other alliance.
Goons know more exploits and tricks than any other alliance.
Goons RMT more than any other alliance
Goons have more supercaps than any other alliance

Even with all these and many more benefits, Goons still fail so hard and die to the first alliance that attack them


Hi Kalle. You still mad?


Meh im always mad and angry

Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:56:00 - [19]
 

I noticed. Can I get you ice cream or something? Would it help you cheer up?

Kalle Demos
Amarr
Helix Protocol
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:57:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Feligast
I noticed. Can I get you ice cream or something? Would it help you cheer up?


Wow and I thought I was the only one who spammed F5 every 5 seconds Shocked

Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:58:00 - [21]
 

Arbitrary numbers are arbitrary. People have done it with 500 bubbles and people have done it with only a few. There is a line that one can cross when going from securing a POS to intentionally causing lag and the line is not drawn in the sand. OP specifically asks if it is a banable offense, and clearly it is not banable at a small number, and banable at some higher number.

You may go back to eating your crayon now.




Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:59:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Kalle Demos
Originally by: Feligast
I noticed. Can I get you ice cream or something? Would it help you cheer up?


Wow and I thought I was the only one who spammed F5 every 5 seconds Shocked


v0v Just got a lucky hit, was the first F5.

Painpill
Posted - 2011.07.18 19:02:00 - [23]
 

FYI your allways able to jump out of a [email protected] pos, i hereby redirect you to the X13 glorius escape from H-W last year Laughing

Llambda
Space Llama Industries
Posted - 2011.07.18 19:03:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Cipher Jones
Arbitrary numbers are arbitrary. People have done it with 500 bubbles and people have done it with only a few. There is a line that one can cross when going from securing a POS to intentionally causing lag and the line is not drawn in the sand. OP specifically asks if it is a banable offense, and clearly it is not banable at a small number, and banable at some higher number.

You may go back to eating your crayon now.






So basically, your "reading comprehension" consists of completely ignoring the specifics of what the OP actually said, and instead furnishing a response that is only relevant to tangentially related issues. Roger.

Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.18 19:15:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Llambda
Originally by: Cipher Jones
Arbitrary numbers are arbitrary. People have done it with 500 bubbles and people have done it with only a few. There is a line that one can cross when going from securing a POS to intentionally causing lag and the line is not drawn in the sand. OP specifically asks if it is a banable offense, and clearly it is not banable at a small number, and banable at some higher number.

You may go back to eating your crayon now.






So basically, your "reading comprehension" consists of completely ignoring the specifics of what the OP actually said, and instead furnishing a response that is only relevant to tangentially related issues. Roger.


Quote:
The question I have is; Is this a bannable offense?


I directly answered that question in the first post I made. I elaborated on the second post I made. To answer the question yet again; "There is some ceiling as to how many bubbles you can legitimately put down without knowingly lagging the server, which is a violation of the TOS. CCP has not publicly published this number."

I hear silver is the best flavor.


Llambda
Space Llama Industries
Posted - 2011.07.18 19:18:00 - [26]
 

Edited by: Llambda on 18/07/2011 19:22:26
Quote:

To answer the question yet again; "There is some ceiling as to how many bubbles you can legitimately put down without knowingly lagging the server, which is a violation of the TOS. CCP has not publicly published this number."



Again, you are answering a question that wasn't ****ing asked. At no point in the OP did they ask how many bubbles is okay. They asked if the tactic of trapping someone with warp bubbles is okay. These are two completely separate issues, and the question you keep answering is, again, only tangentially related. There was no issue of quantity, there was no question of induction of unplayable conditions.

However, in no circumstances is the mere act of simply trapping someone an offense. You may, in the process, break some other rule, but that wasn't what was asked.

Here is the meat of their question, for you, a third time:

Quote:
The question I have is; Is this a bannable offense? POS Shields inhibit/are to protect you, but if you can't jump out of a "Safe Spot" then whats the point of having POS shields if you can just anchor a bubble and keep people from jumping?



The answer to this question is an unqualified, "No". Preventing someone from warping out of their POS is not an offense of any kind.

Leeroy McJenkins
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.07.18 19:42:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Feligast
I noticed. Can I get you ice cream or something? Would it help you cheer up?


Yo can I get some of that ice cream?

Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.07.18 19:44:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Leeroy McJenkins
Originally by: Feligast
I noticed. Can I get you ice cream or something? Would it help you cheer up?


Yo can I get some of that ice cream?


Only if you look me in the eyes while you're licking it.

Leeroy McJenkins
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.07.18 19:51:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Feligast
Originally by: Leeroy McJenkins
Originally by: Feligast
I noticed. Can I get you ice cream or something? Would it help you cheer up?


Yo can I get some of that ice cream?


Only if you look me in the eyes while you're licking it.


Deal.

Daxation
Posted - 2011.07.18 20:06:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Llambda
Edited by: Llambda on 18/07/2011 19:22:26
Quote:

To answer the question yet again; "There is some ceiling as to how many bubbles you can legitimately put down without knowingly lagging the server, which is a violation of the TOS. CCP has not publicly published this number."



Again, you are answering a question that wasn't ****ing asked. At no point in the OP did they ask how many bubbles is okay. They asked if the tactic of trapping someone with warp bubbles is okay. These are two completely separate issues, and the question you keep answering is, again, only tangentially related. There was no issue of quantity, there was no question of induction of unplayable conditions.

However, in no circumstances is the mere act of simply trapping someone an offense. You may, in the process, break some other rule, but that wasn't what was asked.

Here is the meat of their question, for you, a third time:

Quote:
The question I have is; Is this a bannable offense? POS Shields inhibit/are to protect you, but if you can't jump out of a "Safe Spot" then whats the point of having POS shields if you can just anchor a bubble and keep people from jumping?



The answer to this question is an unqualified, "No". Preventing someone from warping out of their POS is not an offense of any kind.


Notice how you ignored the fact that I said "jump" not warp? I see ragecaging as an exploit because the warp disruption bubble overlaps into the shields, thus nullifying the point of having a shield. Why don't we just allow people to be locked & shot at inside the pos. It'd just clear this whole issue up. Thanks CCP for being once again for being absolutely worthless...


Pages: [1] 2 3

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