Is it a exploit to log off on a mothership to deliberately avoid lootable?

[aia]

Originally Posted by John Black Knight

I dont think you are anywhere reasonable asking to kill one of the main selling points of the mothership. Considering that those ships when upgradet reach several K SI the passengers wouldnt be lootet either way except if another mothertship showed up - but that couldnt get in close as all have the same speed currently.

I think the escape pod thing was if the mothership was destroyed - not automatically for anyone who logged out from a mothership.

Otherwise it would be silly around space stations with tons of escape pods for people who "live" in motherships when they log out for the day.

[Stave Petty]

John, these are the words of Kim, not me, its something that was in development and its to stop people logging out to avoid lootable space.

It's not me asking, just me mirroring what a official employee said.

And the whole point of this thread is to see if what was said is still valid since it was removed, and I believe it was removed as JC Removed some swearing aimed at Kim from the opening post, and Kim was mostly responding to that.

What I or anyone else thinks about the plans doesnt matter in this thread, all this thread is for is to get ma to clear up some misunderstandings.

If any of you feel strong enough against it after this thread gets a official response, then by all means respond with what's on your mind or make a dedicated thread about it.

Just whatever you do, don't try to make it as if me roughly quoting what a official said then me expressing my thoughts how it may be possible to share knowledge and to try and get an official to clear up if that point still stands or not, is me suggesting such an idea and trying to get them to put it in action.

[JohnCapital]

Originally Posted by Stave Petty

I believe it was removed as JC Removed some swearing aimed at Kim from the opening post, and Kim was mostly responding to that.

Could you point me toward the exact post that was modded and I'll try to see if I can find it? TY.


--mod hat off--
As for the issue of whether this is an exploit. Yes, dumping all loot into one avatar and then having it log off for the express purpose of keeping it safe against all attacks is an exploit.

However, it is an exploit that is very difficult for MA to code any deterrent against.


I'm personally sick of seeing comments like "MA coded it that way, so it's not an exploit".

Loopholes are a fact of life, especially in the game world. We all know this. However, there's some easy ways to determine if it's an exploit. (Hint: making yourself immune from any damage at all is classic god mode exploiting, regardless of how it's done.) And no, mega armor + mod fap is not god mode. They still die. (crits, etc.) And just because of coding restrictions/problems leaving the exploit ingame does not mean it's ok.

Frankly those of you arguing against this know I'm right. You're simply trying to justify actions you know to be wrong.
--/mod hat off--

[Mischief]

Originally Posted by JohnCapital

...As for the issue of whether this is an exploit. Yes, dumping all loot into one avatar and then having it log off for the express purpose of keeping it safe against all attacks is an exploit.

However, it is an exploit that is very difficult for MA to code any deterrent against.


I'm personally sick of seeing comments like "MA coded it that way, so it's not an exploit".

Loopholes are a fact of life, especially in the game world. We all know this. However, there's some easy ways to determine if it's an exploit. (Hint: making yourself immune from any damage at all is classic god mode exploiting, regardless of how it's done.) And no, mega armor + mod fap is not god mode. They still die. (crits, etc.) And just because of coding restrictions/problems leaving the exploit ingame does not mean it's ok.

Frankly those of you arguing against this know I'm right. You're simply trying to justify actions you know to be wrong.

Hear, hear!
If I were to elaborate on that I say - yup.

[Stave Petty]

JC, this is the thread in question

Http://entropiaforum.com/forum/ask-m...e-no-risk.html

Kim deleted his comment after you edited the op


Edit

Appears the post describing the solution and the reason why its not here stil exsists

Originally Posted by Kim|MindArk

The important thing to understand here is that the implementation of Space to Entropia is a process that will take a great deal of time just as it took a long time for the regular gameplay to reach its present state.

We could very well have been developing the space expansion for years if we waited for everything to be perfected before release.

The original design specs for the various spacecraft describes that players who DC or log out while in flight would be ejected into an escape pod which would be a very vulnerable target. This was not included in this release, presumably because of a shortage of time but as far as I know those specs haven't been scrapped.

Originally Posted by Kim|MindArk

We would ofcourse try to make it as fair as possible. Its designed to prevent abuse and not to punish people with bad connectivity. I dont know what the final thing will look like but these concerns will be looked into.

This was the removed comment, people are using the fact the post was deleted as an excuse to ignore the fact it said its an exploit and that Kim explained how their developing a fix

Well that was nice, right back at you. Now can we keep the discussion above ghetto high school level please?


We are very well aware of the situation and no ofcourse it's not OK and we will eventually implement a fix for it.

[Kitsune]

Amazing that no reply has been given by MA about this .

[mastermesh]

Frankly those of you arguing against this know I'm right. You're simply trying to justify actions you know to be wrong.

I agree with you, BUT, in a game environment with a Real Cash Economy that is claimed to be a safe environment by the game developers, they really should program the damned exploits out BEFORE releasing the problematic coding out to the general public for use! If they do release the problematic coding they should put a top priority on fixing it instead of sitting around twiddling their thumbs waiting for support tickets to roll in, counting each one of them and putting priority only on the issues that get the most amount of support tickets...

Since we all are paying salaries to the coders through decay costs, etc., they should be doing their jobs, and so far that's not being done at the level that it should be. An exploit is simply using coding that had a side effect they did not intend for it to have. If they don't like those side effects they should be testing the coding more prior to releasing it to the public for use.

Of course, no one at MA is probably reading this, or at least not the ones that need to be reading it for it to have any impact, so I'm not sure why I even bother typing it...

[Stave Petty]

As Kim said, We could very well have been developing the space expansion for years if we waited for everything to be perfected before release

[wisdom]

In my mind, avoiding being looted in a mothership is not an exploit at all. This is how motherships were advertised to work in the vu12.0 release notes (http://www.entropiauniverse.com/entr...e/space-guide/)


"A destroyed mothership will be transferred to the closest available space station as will its crew and passengers."


With this statement in mind, I shelled out a considerable amount of my hard earned cash to buy a mothership, so I will be transported to the nearest space station, rather than looted, as would be the case if using other types of spaceships. The price paid was higher, partially because the other bidders had the same statement in their minds.


I do not think Mindark would ever use the cheap trick of withholding noteworthy information (the likelihood of being looted if mothership is destroyed). They have higher integrity than that.

[aia]

Originally Posted by wisdom

"A destroyed mothership will be transferred to the closest available space station as will its crew and passengers."

On the other hand, if that is what they stated, they never said that crew and passengers would retain their loot. And if that is what they stated, it would also mean that logged-out passengers would arrive at space station and remain there, and not automatically re-join the ship when it moves ahead.

(Personally I'm mostly upset that lootable space was implemented without warning with no chance to transfer stackables to "right" planet before lootable space came into effect and became the only way to move between planets. And I guess MA doesn't care about that. And no I won't use something that's in the "grey area" between ´exploit´ and ´allowed´ to safely move some of the stackables to where they belong (=where they originally were crafted or looted before the space VU).)