DUST Search - CCP's view on CPM members(s) actively involved in current broken AWOXing sys...

Lance 2ballzStrong wrote:

zeroknexus wrote:

Lance 2ballzStrong wrote:

zeroknexus wrote:

**** THREADNOUGHT ALERT ****

Lol, yet another awoxing thread that is turning into a threadnought, you guys just don't get it do you?

Fact 1 : CCP are fully aware of the situation. You guys do understand they actually designed the game to be like this right?

oh? "The game is designed to be like this"? Please read:

CCP Praetorian wrote:

Hey guys.

Cool thread, full of good ideas!

We agree that it would be better to be able to restrict access to PC battles, and are currently discussing how we would implement that.

What we are discussing is doing this in phases, i.e. start with giving CEO's and directors the ability to kick from matches, set roles on members that you want participating in PC matches, to forming up into larger teams prior to the PC match taking place. We will add this to the roadmap and share more details in few weeks time for feedback and discussion.

There ya go Blink

Why would they fix something what was suppose be part of the game?

CCP are not fixing a broken mechanic, they are improving one that, at the moment, is working as designed

*Facepalm*...**** that...*facewall*...

Working as designed? if that was true then they won't be talking about CEO's being able to restrict access to PC.

Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Cross Atu Conspiratus Immortalis League of Infamy 996	Posted - 2013.05.20 18:33:00 - [61] - Quote zeroknexus wrote: ** THREADNOUGHT ALERT ** Lol, yet another awoxing thread that is turning into a threadnought, you guys just don't get it do you? Fact 1 : CCP are fully aware of the situation. You guys do understand they actually designed the game to be like this right? Your facts are wrong right at fact 1. CCP has confirmed several times and locations (including a thread that is as of this post on the front page in this very section of the forums) that they are working towards integrating features which prevent the specific situation this thread is discussing. Being clever and playing the meta game is not equivalent to pressing "join battle" with hostiles in your squad. I'm honestly surprised by how many players seem to think that the cloak and dagger meta in EVE can be described as the same phenomena displayed but leaning on an unfinished game mechanic within a barely past release build of D514. Figured the EVE players present would have more pride in their work if nothing else.
zeroknexus DUST University Ivy League 5	Posted - 2013.05.20 18:34:00 - [62] - Quote Ninjanomyx wrote: I see DUST Uni still has Spais.....guess they'll never learn. And you are bad @ Spaiwerk considering you publicised yourself, throwing caution to the wind. Bad Spy in Bad Corp, Balance achieved. lol :)
Severance Pay Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy 217	Posted - 2013.05.20 18:40:00 - [63] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: They already said they're going to make it harder. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=833365#post833365 CCP Praetorian wrote: Hey guys. Cool thread, full of good ideas! We agree that it would be better to be able to restrict access to PC battles, and are currently discussing how we would implement that. What we are discussing is doing this in phases, i.e. start with giving CEO's and directors the ability to kick from matches, set roles on members that you want participating in PC matches, to forming up into larger teams prior to the PC match taking place. We will add this to the roadmap and share more details in few weeks time for feedback and discussion. Punishing CPM members involved would be stupid since they're just using the game mechanics CCP put in place. Dude, it is an exploit. That is something other games ban anyone for, even in EVE. Nobody wants their fondest creation perversely exploited for evil, CCP included. The banhammer is coming for you, and if it misses we won't.
zeroknexus DUST University Ivy League 5	Posted - 2013.05.20 18:45:00 - [64] - Quote Cross Atu wrote: I'm honestly surprised by how many players seem to think that the cloak and dagger meta in EVE can be described as the same phenomena displayed but leaning on an unfinished game mechanic within a barely past release build of D514. Dust will never have fully finished game mechanics, it will continue to change over the years just as Eve has (it took them 10 years to "fix" the crimewatch mechanic and people still moan it's broken) As the saying goes "....but you cannot please all of the people, all of the time"
Lance 2ballzStrong SyNergy Gaming EoN. 1760	Posted - 2013.05.20 18:46:00 - [65] - Quote zeroknexus wrote: ** THREADNOUGHT ALERT Lol, yet another awoxing thread that is turning into a threadnought, you guys just don't get it do you? Fact 1 : CCP are fully aware of the situation. You guys do understand they actually designed the game to be like this right? oh? "The game is designed to be like this"? Please read: CCP Praetorian wrote:** Hey guys. Cool thread, full of good ideas! We agree that it would be better to be able to restrict access to PC battles, and are currently discussing how we would implement that. What we are discussing is doing this in phases, i.e. start with giving CEO's and directors the ability to kick from matches, set roles on members that you want participating in PC matches, to forming up into larger teams prior to the PC match taking place. We will add this to the roadmap and share more details in few weeks time for feedback and discussion. There ya go Why would they fix something what was suppose be part of the game?
zeroknexus DUST University Ivy League 5	Posted - 2013.05.20 18:52:00 - [66] - Quote Lance 2ballzStrong wrote: zeroknexus wrote: ** THREADNOUGHT ALERT Lol, yet another awoxing thread that is turning into a threadnought, you guys just don't get it do you? Fact 1 : CCP are fully aware of the situation. You guys do understand they actually designed the game to be like this right? oh? "The game is designed to be like this"? Please read: CCP Praetorian wrote:** Hey guys. Cool thread, full of good ideas! We agree that it would be better to be able to restrict access to PC battles, and are currently discussing how we would implement that. What we are discussing is doing this in phases, i.e. start with giving CEO's and directors the ability to kick from matches, set roles on members that you want participating in PC matches, to forming up into larger teams prior to the PC match taking place. We will add this to the roadmap and share more details in few weeks time for feedback and discussion. There ya go Why would they fix something what was suppose be part of the game? CCP are not fixing a broken mechanic, they are improving one that, at the moment, is working as designed
Nguruthos IV Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 9	Posted - 2013.05.20 19:02:00 - [67] - Quote zeroknexus wrote: Lance 2ballzStrong wrote: zeroknexus wrote: ** THREADNOUGHT ALERT Lol, yet another awoxing thread that is turning into a threadnought, you guys just don't get it do you? Fact 1 : CCP are fully aware of the situation. You guys do understand they actually designed the game to be like this right? oh? "The game is designed to be like this"? Please read: CCP Praetorian wrote:** Hey guys. Cool thread, full of good ideas! We agree that it would be better to be able to restrict access to PC battles, and are currently discussing how we would implement that. What we are discussing is doing this in phases, i.e. start with giving CEO's and directors the ability to kick from matches, set roles on members that you want participating in PC matches, to forming up into larger teams prior to the PC match taking place. We will add this to the roadmap and share more details in few weeks time for feedback and discussion. There ya go Why would they fix something what was suppose be part of the game? CCP are not fixing a broken mechanic, they are improving one that, at the moment, is working as designed So when they fix the code where gunners being shot out of dropship/lav turrets get glitched and can't re-enter the vehicle.... They're not fixing a broken mechanic, they're improving the way it's designed too right? Technically there is no such thing as a bug, a bug is when your program allows for something you did not intend. These can be accidental, or oversights. A bug is all subjective to the developer as per their intentions. If anyone honestly thinks CCP intended all this nonsense and it wasn't just a result of poor forethought and or "releasing" from beta too soon then you suffer from some serious distortions in reality.
Lance 2ballzStrong SyNergy Gaming EoN. 1763	Posted - 2013.05.20 19:08:00 - [68] - Quote zeroknexus wrote: Lance 2ballzStrong wrote: zeroknexus wrote: ** THREADNOUGHT ALERT Lol, yet another awoxing thread that is turning into a threadnought, you guys just don't get it do you? Fact 1 : CCP are fully aware of the situation. You guys do understand they actually designed the game to be like this right? oh? "The game is designed to be like this"? Please read: CCP Praetorian wrote:** Hey guys. Cool thread, full of good ideas! We agree that it would be better to be able to restrict access to PC battles, and are currently discussing how we would implement that. What we are discussing is doing this in phases, i.e. start with giving CEO's and directors the ability to kick from matches, set roles on members that you want participating in PC matches, to forming up into larger teams prior to the PC match taking place. We will add this to the roadmap and share more details in few weeks time for feedback and discussion. There ya go Why would they fix something what was suppose be part of the game? CCP are not fixing a broken mechanic, they are improving one that, at the moment, is working as designed Facepalm...**** that...facewall... Working as designed? if that was true then they won't be talking about CEO's being able to restrict access to PC.
Nguruthos IV Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 9	Posted - 2013.05.20 19:15:00 - [69] - Quote Lance 2ballzStrong wrote: zeroknexus wrote: Lance 2ballzStrong wrote: zeroknexus wrote: ** THREADNOUGHT ALERT Lol, yet another awoxing thread that is turning into a threadnought, you guys just don't get it do you? Fact 1 : CCP are fully aware of the situation. You guys do understand they actually designed the game to be like this right? oh? "The game is designed to be like this"? Please read: CCP Praetorian wrote:** Hey guys. Cool thread, full of good ideas! We agree that it would be better to be able to restrict access to PC battles, and are currently discussing how we would implement that. What we are discussing is doing this in phases, i.e. start with giving CEO's and directors the ability to kick from matches, set roles on members that you want participating in PC matches, to forming up into larger teams prior to the PC match taking place. We will add this to the roadmap and share more details in few weeks time for feedback and discussion. There ya go Why would they fix something what was suppose be part of the game? CCP are not fixing a broken mechanic, they are improving one that, at the moment, is working as designed Facepalm...**** that...facewall... Working as designed? if that was true then they won't be talking about CEO's being able to restrict access to PC. fanboys and trolls, nothing more. Oh well, there's one more thing. I won't mention it exactly, I'll let your imaginations run wild with this one. But it factors in largely and involves a certain kind of butt kissing, for a certain kind of reason, to a certain kind of person, cause of a certain kind of gender difference. It's not an intellectual honest position to claim all this is working as intended or just a case of HTFU/ [Meta-Gaming] Everyone knows this and the only ones claiming otherwise are players who need to exploit or currently are relying on it.
Deadeyes Anterie Ill Omens EoN. 553	Posted - 2013.05.20 19:16:00 - [70] - Quote It's not a clear cut issue. None of us know what CCP thinks on the issue because they haven't commented on it. Nobody will get banned for exploits (not that I am saying this is an exploit), and they never have been on a CCP game. That said just because it's in the game doesn't mean it is intended. There are some game breaking bugs in EvE and if you use them you can get in trouble. Perfect example is when wormholes boosting tracking disruptors gave you a negative value, and the game treated it as an infinite value and allowed perfect firing from 150km. In that case it's clearly not part of the game design. Those who took advantage of it got massive ISK fines. Jenza is playing a dangerous game, anyone who doesn't think CCP intended this behavior is seeing her in the same light as those who abused broken EvE mechanics for personal gain. I'm sure there won't be any fines, but I'm not sure CCP put any thought into battle queue priority. Just because you can do it doesn't mean you have the right to do it (just like those who could use perfect aiming bugs didn't have the right to use them). To me the proper approach is to petition CCP and check if this gameplay is indeed intended, or I assume as a member of the CPM you have some method to contact them (at least I hope). That or follow Kains approach and suggest they change the mechanics even you admit in this thread are kind of broken.

Lance 2ballzStrong SyNergy Gaming EoN. 1763	Posted - 2013.05.20 19:20:00 - [71] - Quote Nguruthos IV wrote: fanboys and trolls, nothing more. Oh well, there's one more thing. I won't mention it exactly, I'll let your imaginations run wild with this one. But it factors in largely and involves a certain kind of butt kissing, for a certain kind of reason, to a certain kind of person, cause of a certain kind of gender difference. It's not an intellectual honest position to claim all this is working as intended or just a case of HTFU/ [Meta-Gaming] Everyone knows this and the only ones claiming otherwise are players who need to exploit or currently are relying on it. Edit: Reading and replied to wrong post lol
Nguruthos IV Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 9	Posted - 2013.05.20 19:21:00 - [72] - Quote double post
Crash Monster Snipers Anonymous 311	Posted - 2013.05.20 19:21:00 - [73] - Quote It is simple. The concept is intended... the inability of a corp to deal with the issue in a meaningful way is not. I don't think we need all the text walls around here to fight about it.
Lance 2ballzStrong SyNergy Gaming EoN. 1763	Posted - 2013.05.20 19:22:00 - [74] - Quote Nguruthos IV wrote: Lance 2ballzStrong wrote: Nguruthos IV wrote: fanboys and trolls, nothing more. Oh well, there's one more thing. I won't mention it exactly, I'll let your imaginations run wild with this one. But it factors in largely and involves a certain kind of butt kissing, for a certain kind of reason, to a certain kind of person, cause of a certain kind of gender difference. It's not an intellectual honest position to claim all this is working as intended or just a case of HTFU/ [Meta-Gaming] Everyone knows this and the only ones claiming otherwise are players who need to exploit or currently are relying on it. oh ****, we got a badass in here! Why don't you tell CCP to HTFU Since they're fixing it. I think you might have misread or quoted the wrong person ya i saw the error before you replied.
SoTa of PoP Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 337	Posted - 2013.05.20 19:22:00 - [75] - Quote Crash Monster wrote: It is simple. The concept is intended... the inability of a corp to deal with the issue in a meaningful way is not. I don't think we need all the text walls around here to fight about it. You must be new around here.
Crash Monster Snipers Anonymous 311	Posted - 2013.05.20 19:25:00 - [76] - Quote SoTa of PoP wrote: You must be new around here. I wish.
sQuatch78 DUST University Ivy League 0	Posted - 2013.05.20 21:40:00 - [77] - Quote New Eden's game environment is what sets it apart form most MMOs. And part of that is any way to grief other players and collect their tears. History in Eve has enough examples showing players are always been looking for ways to utilize or break game mechanics to get an edge. It is not a matter of if, but only when this will happen. So having members of the CPM actively voicing their support tells me to a few things: - it brings awoxing under a spotlight and makes everyone aware of it - some members of the CPM at least get what New Eden is all about - they actually know game mechanics to a detail that allows them to abuse them. And to find other game imbalances along the way. and let's look at the alternative to this situation: Without both the scale and the vocal support through CPM (in parts), we wouldn't have this discussion at all. ...and CCP might not be looking at fixing roles, squads or corporations in the near future. ... and we would have a topic polarizing Dust players and thus driving conflict in game. ... and we couldn't point to this case of player griefing each other to attract new players to Dust. anyway, just saying
Vance Alken Commando Perkone Caldari State 112	Posted - 2013.05.20 21:47:00 - [78] - Quote jenza aranda wrote: awoxing is absolutely too easy but shouldnt be impossible. Thats why im suggesting a role that is attached to being able to join corp matches, that way if the CEO/director trusts the wrong person, they only have themselves to blame There should also be a role that controls your team's IFF systems, allowing you to set anyone in-district red or blue. Being set red cuts off all spawn access except for uplinks you've deployed, you can also hack CRUs after the fact to gain a couple of clones. (being set blue would immediately give access to all equipment of course)
SoTa of PoP Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 343	Posted - 2013.05.20 21:52:00 - [79] - Quote sQuatch78 wrote: New Eden's game environment is what sets it apart form most MMOs. And part of that is any way to grief other players and collect their tears. History in Eve has enough examples showing players are always been looking for ways to utilize or break game mechanics to get an edge. It is not a matter of if, but only when this will happen. So having members of the CPM actively voicing their support tells me to a few things: - it brings awoxing under a spotlight and makes everyone aware of it - some members of the CPM at least get what New Eden is all about - they actually know game mechanics to a detail that allows them to abuse them. And to find other game imbalances along the way. and let's look at the alternative to this situation: Without both the scale and the vocal support through CPM (in parts), we wouldn't have this discussion at all. ...and CCP might not be looking at fixing roles, squads or corporations in the near future. ... and we would have a topic polarizing Dust players and thus driving conflict in game. ... and we couldn't point to this case of player griefing each other to attract new players to Dust. anyway, just saying Is this a joke comment? We never had CPM until a few months back and we voiced ourselves well enough. CPM is suppose to organize it to better present it to CCP - not inspire us to rage about it more like they're currently doing.
Marston VC SVER True Blood Unclaimed. 254	Posted - 2013.05.20 22:56:00 - [80] - Quote I don't like the feature right now, all I can say is that they WILL fix it eventually.

Caeli SineDeo Imperfects Negative-Feedback 513	Posted - 2013.05.21 03:33:00 - [81] - Quote I see a lot of people saying this is eve get tough. These mechanics are put here and CPM members should be able to take equal advantage of them as any other player. This is a broken mechanic. Even CCP has said it is. If a CSM member was caught taking advantage of a mechanic that was hugely broken they would not be on the board any longer. Using goons as a example. Goons has thousands of spy's in their alliance. Now with that being said. They are able to control the level of information and the lvl of activities that members have. This means if they create a gaint fleet they can control who joins. And who can add more people to fleet. Also give or take rights away. They are able to be a mass corp and alliance like they want to be because CCP implements the control needed. If CCP all of a sudden walked in and took away these abilities to control goon swarm would crumble like half the other big alliances. Because AWOXing would not be AWOXing anymore it would be just a simple activity. That being said currently in eve people can work there way up the ranks earn rights and maybe earn privilege spots in fleet to allow them to give more information or add saboteurs to fleet. Which I think works great. So yes what is happening in dust right now is severely broken and hurting corps and alliances that want to be major competitors within Planet Conquest. They have no control over who joins. Or who has the right to invite players into the battle. They can not kick before the battle starts. No control what so ever. Most people agree it is severely broken. Then you have CPM member(s) bragging about using this to their advantage. And then also saying they reported it to CCP and have not touched it. These are suppose to be people that are representing DUST future in CPM. The creation of a player based elective. A government of dust that helps give information to CCP to further the gaming experience. CCP picked the first members for us on the bases that they are here for the community and are going to give great representation. But what has currently happened is showing very poor choices in how to represent the community and help fix things. They are hurting the community and bragging about it. We do not let it stand in our local and national governments. Why should we stand by and not question if action should be taken or not with those representing us in this community.
Succendo Goonfeet 20	Posted - 2013.05.21 05:36:00 - [82] - Quote Don't you people get tired of making these awful threads?


Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page