Comments

For some of you it won´t be news, as you have been using it after patch already. For the others, it might be.

A. CAPITALS CAN JUMP TO COVERT CYNO
There is currently a bug in covert cyno usage, which can be dropped and normal capital ships can jump to it without problem. Could be fun to use in battles or hotdrops :)

CCP responded to it already:

We have discovered an issue with covert cyno fields that makes it possible for capital ships to jump to them. This is not normal behavior and it is being fixed with the highest priority. We would like to remind everyone that those found abusing this exploit will receive a ban according to our rules and policies.

B. UNGROUPING/GROUPING of all gunnery ships have 3-4x DPS
This was enabled by the 1.1.0 patch, as you can now group/ungroup with ammo loaded (before there was 10 sec timer). The actual bug is that only the TOP gun of a group gets a cycle timer. The others pop out of the group on ungroup and are ready to be fired again right away.

Post on EVE-O got nuked already by CCP, but here is the original post:

Hi CCP and everybody, thank u for boost my tempest!

I have thought all the time what is not good in my arti alpha gang (abbadon\tempest and co).
Yes! – very long ROF. Thank you CCP – u canselled rof for my ship.

How?

0.1 Take any ship
0.2 Ungouping gun
0.3 Shot 1 gun
0.4 grouping gun
0.5 shot all gun-1 with group mode
0.6 ungrouping
0.7 shot all-2 with group mode
0.8 grouping gun

All gannery ship have 3x-4x dps, this is great!

Please, return as it was.

We got a message from our fellow player that confirmed that on TQ. He managed within 1-2 ROF shoot with 36 guns instead of 8 + 4. You have to wait out the last gun on your ship, which starts cycling and than allover again. 1400 maelstrom with 4x gyrostabs can knock out 80-90 or so rounds in a minute…..

59 Comments

  1. IT FTW

    FIRST, umad?

    January 20, 2011 at 8:06 pm Reply
  2. lol

    So wait known exploits get you bans now? I guess that is unless you are in IT.

    January 20, 2011 at 8:17 pm Reply
    1. WonderBoy

      Wait, are you suggesting that IT used this exploit in fleet fights? You can’t be serious now, can you? First, the exploit became only possible in this patch, second, ever tried to group/ungroup guns in heavy lag? This exploit can only work in zero-lag conditions, not in a huge fleet fight.

      If you’re talking about the guy dropping SBUs before the incursion deployment:
      The offending pilot dropped 2 SBUs in a 4 gate system. Thus, you need 3 SBUs online to make it vulnerable. It means there was actually nothing gained by it, it was basically just a huge troll.
      CCP still removed them according to their set of rules.

      I think that explains why he wasn’t banned.

      Plus, did the goon/Test pilot get banned who dropped the TCUs? I think not.

      January 21, 2011 at 11:19 am Reply
      1. lol

        I was talking about he SBU thing. You clearly know very little. When TEST dropped the SBUs it was not classified as an exploit. After CCP decided to start classifying it as an exploit. Their rules state that anyone actively engaging in a known exploit will be open to getting banned. That IT member should have been banned because it is known to be an exploit but he is an IT member so we all know that will never happen. SBUs were still deployed even if there were not enough. It is still an exploit no matter how you spin it.

        January 21, 2011 at 7:28 pm Reply
        1. bozo

          TCU’s god
          And you said he knows very little.

          January 21, 2011 at 8:43 pm Reply
        2. WonderBoy

          I wonder much and know I’m little 😉

          Anyways, since you know so much, please get me the names of characters that used this mechanic and got banned. Because CCP can only be in favour of the IT guy if they banned others but not him.

          (Also, you say “he should be getting banned for dropping 2 SBUs which did no bloody thing to gain any advantage”. WTF. Who is biased here? :p )

          January 22, 2011 at 10:51 am Reply
          1. lol

            “Anyways, since you know so much, please get me the names of characters that used this mechanic and got banned. Because CCP can only be in favour of the IT guy if they banned others but not him.”

            What do you not understand? It was not considered an exploit until AFTER TEST did it. Then everyone who plays the game was informed that it is now an exploit and would result in a ban if done again. IT player used the exploit and gets a much slower response and no ban.

            “(Also, you say “he should be getting banned for dropping 2 SBUs which did no bloody thing to gain any advantage”. WTF. Who is biased here? :p )”
            It is still using an exploit fuck tard. Anyone using any exploit should result in a ban it is as simple as that. I does not matter if it effective or not it is still an exploit. Nobody was given the chance to attack the TCU before they onlined. This gives them an edge no matter how you look at it. If you really can’t see this then you are just a dumbass fan boy. Also when the TEST TCUs were originally removed they were the only ones to be removed meanwhile various other alliances did the same thing. It wasn’t until test opened a ticket that they were removed. There is bias in CCP and it is unavoidable but don’t act like it isn’t there.

            GL with X13 and FinFleet leaving IT.

            January 23, 2011 at 5:43 am
          2. WonderBoy

            Ah, I see, you now revert to insults.

            Let me kindly explain the subtle differences between an onlining TCU and SBU:

            TCU:
            Anchoring takes 5min, onlining 8h. You need to have control of the sytem and prevent the destruction of the TCU for 8 hours. 1 TCU claims the system and as soon as the claim is up you need to SBU the system before the TCU can be destroyed (if no station/ihub is present).

            SBU:
            Anchoring takes 5min, onlining 3h. Possibility to online as many as you want at the same time (unlike POS modules). You need 51% of the gates in any given system covered to turn the system’s state to “vulnerable”. This means you need to keep control of the system for 3h.

            Since the guy dropped 2 SBUs in a 4 gate system, it means only 50% of the gates were covered, and to attain vulnerability a third SBU would need to get onlined.

            This process takes again 5min + 3h, in which the attacker needs to maintain control of the system.

            This means: NOTHING gained.

            CCP stated they would ban people who attempt to circumvent the possibility to respond to sovereignty claims/challenges.

            As I have laid out, there was absolutely no change in the length of the timeframe that the defenders had time to react to these SBU drops, which, obviously, does not provide a bannable offense.

            (Also, how about you whine about the TCUs that were dropped by other entities during this extended downtime, and where those responsible for the TCU drops didn’t get banned, even though they, unlike the SBU dropper, clearly violated that rule.)

            I know stating facts and reasons do not get me as much attention as throwing a tantrum, drowning all voices of reason in a huge shitstorm. Just look at the kind of politicians that increasingly get elected because of this, and at how the rate of sensible solutions/laws decreased in the same timeframe.

            January 23, 2011 at 7:55 pm
    2. Head Screwed on Correctly

      Lets take the exploit known as sitting a cloaky in a Sanctum or Haven stopping it from despawning, that was an exploit, but because it casued too many issues CCP in terms of petitions decided to no longer class it as such. It should be easy enough to code so that this does not happen. But no, so who is doing this to us, Goons and Test and WI. When is an exploit not an exploit, when its too much hassle to deal with…

      January 21, 2011 at 1:05 pm Reply
  3. Optiplex

    Posting exploits in public does not help the situation at all. At least CCP does know about the issue from what you seem to have posted here. It can be argued that making the information public will force CCP to act quickly, or that you have just put everyone at even odds; however, I don’t see your point for posting about this information. From my perspective, this information damages the community. You not only tempt folks to use said exploits and wreak havoc against each other through nefarious means, but you also you incite players to search for more exploitative bugs that ccp has mistakenly left out in the open. Perhaps the tone of your final statement tells me that you express a little concern about the exploit, but maybe you should report about the problem, rather than unravel how to perform the trick before an audience.

    The exploits don’t bother me that much to be honest. The real question I wan to present: What is your purpose for posting this article?

    January 20, 2011 at 8:24 pm Reply
    1. Joe

      To get readers. Welcome to how the media has always worked.

      January 20, 2011 at 8:34 pm Reply
    2. OMG!!!! EN24 MADE PUBLIC MY I-WIN BUTTON!!! NOW CCP IS GONNA HAVE IT FIXED! AM SO MAD!! @[email protected]

      —–

      Seriously if PL exploits, we shouldn’t report, if TEST or IT exploits, we shouldn’t either…

      Get Real.

      R

      January 20, 2011 at 8:35 pm Reply
      1. The Fat Kid

        Riv i dont think u even bothered to understand what the person was saying rather then just spurting out ur response. its not more about the posting of the exploits but exposing how the exploits are to be used. there is a difference between telling people “how to fire a gun” and “why guns are harmful” the fact is the article just got posted about how to use these exploits in turn would have more folks USING the exploit rather then not get used.In turn what this article is doing is helping assist the community to use the exploit not let them be aware of it.

        January 20, 2011 at 8:58 pm Reply
      2. Optiplex

        Assuming that you are the same “riverini” that writes articles on this website, I will first thank you for delivering EVE related news. I do enjoy reading your articles during my off-time whether it is garbage or eloquent. Now, I will ask you to use your writer’s wit, and actually read my comment. You have made a fundamental misunderstanding of my comment. I didn’t know about these exploits until Czech Lion, had made this post, and if you read his post, you’ll find that obviously EN24 did not make this public. EN24 will help popularize it, though.

        TEST, IT, and PL have nothing to do with what I said.

        January 20, 2011 at 10:55 pm Reply
  4. Vento

    stupid stupid en24

    January 20, 2011 at 8:33 pm Reply
  5. Bagdad Blue

    So CovOps ships finally get a use and it’s called an exploit and CCP works overtime to “fix” it.

    January 20, 2011 at 8:49 pm Reply
    1. Dombidom

      Because no one ever fly covert ops right?

      January 20, 2011 at 9:26 pm Reply
  6. Qaz

    Wait, now we can cycle guns quicker in fleet fights, then again you will need to get them to cycle first

    January 20, 2011 at 9:57 pm Reply
  7. Che Guevara

    I used to play another game online, and came across a well known exploit. I took the time to document the exploit, with a lot of testing between characters, as well as solutions for the exploit. I provided the information to the game developers, who said they would look into it. A month later, it was still not fixed, and there were players abusing the exploit still. I decided to take it a step farther, abused the exploit to the extreme (Becoming the top player in a few hours, killing half the server’s population, and basically flipping off the in-game security forces that were supposed to be all-powerful). Within a few hours, the game was taken down for maintenance, and the exploit was fixed.

    This was not the only exploit I was able to get resolved in that game either, as there was a way to find anyone, anywhere. I became of the possibility of the exploit to exist due to another player ALWAYS being able to find people he was hunting. I spent a few days beating my head against the wall with the problem, and finally narrowed it down to a list of possible tools that could be used to exploit. I contacted the game devs, but they did not give any help. So I talked to a few programmers who played the game, and took some notes. It was like a lightning bolt hit once I compared notes, because it seemed like we all had one seperate piece of the puzzle, but none of us had the rest of the pieces. Using the newfound knowledge, I was able to test and confirm the exploit. I sent this information into the game devs, and again nothing. The exploit was eventually resolved when I used it to kill one of the game devs who was playing under a fake name (But everyone knew he was a game dev.)

    Another exploit with that game, which I didn’t think was an exploit but I asked ahead of time and was told it would be fine, involved sharing player resources in an unconventional manner. Apparently I was the first player to come up with the idea, and the game devs were not entirely sure how it would end up. It ended up exactly as I had explained it would, with my team at the top, miles ahead of anyone else. This quickly led to it being labeled an exploit, and being fixed.

    There were many, many additional exploits that were found in the game, which is common among lower budget games that are not put out by a real studio. The common theme among them, though, is that they were ignored while the exploit was being used in small amounts. The game devs would claim afterword that there had never been enough information to figure out exactly how the exploit was occuring in order to fix it. That was not true, as there were many instances of me sending them pages of documents and hundreds of screenshots detailing the exploit and how it occurs. That’s really what I do, I look at problems, figure out how they occur and then how to fix them. However, the information alone was never enough to spur the game devs to action, there had to be a public example, apparently. And so, once again there would be a public outcry “Oh look, there he goes again!” as I would demonstrate the exploit clearly and publicly for the game devs. The problems would be fixed, and then it was time to find the next exploit. Most of the veteran players admired my abilities, acknowledging that there were problems that needed to be fixed and that while some players were using the exploits secretly, they were not getting fixed until the exploits were used publicly.

    Every time I encountered an exploit, I posted on the forums what exploit I was looking for (Basically, what I was seeing happening, and what I hoped to find in regard to it.) and posted updates on progress. The final post of the thread would be a final update of what I had done with the exploit, which would soon be followed by a game dev posting that the problem had been fixed. In a lot of cases, game devs need public posting of exploits, or public displays thereof, in order to get them to act on it.

    January 20, 2011 at 10:09 pm Reply
    1. mmo doug

      TL;DR
      I play WoW and am ub3r 1337 at vids.

      January 20, 2011 at 10:38 pm Reply
    2. Dear Guerrillero, please contact us for a column position in EN24.com, we really appreciate serious views! ^__^

      [email protected]

      R

      January 20, 2011 at 10:51 pm Reply
    3. Random EVE Player

      Thats an excellent post right there, well explained, well written, good spelling and grammar. I second the suggestiong that you should write for EN24, it seems you definitely have the ability if its something you wanted to do.

      January 21, 2011 at 1:27 pm Reply
  8. Southerner

    I’d like to personally thank Czech for posting not only the exploits, but also how to re-created the exploits.

    As noted above, the more “public” an item of any value becomes, the faster a response to fix said item. (eg. the recent IT SBU/Downtime exploit and whining Testies.)

    To simply say there’s an exploit that does “xyz” is not near robust as explaining there’s an exploit that does “xyz” and it’s accomplished by performing “abc”.

    making “xyz” public creates awareness. making “abc” public forces CCP to do something about it ASAP.

    January 20, 2011 at 10:26 pm Reply
  9. dood

    :ccp:

    January 20, 2011 at 10:34 pm Reply
  10. apu chaun

    There is a working dupe in Eve atm involving market buy orders. Won’t go into details but I’m surprise there hasn’t been more crying over it on EO forums.

    January 21, 2011 at 12:14 am Reply
  11. Eureka

    Exploit information needs to be out in the public to help stamp them out.
    CCP will remove the thread on the official forums to try and stop the spread of the exploit information but what this also seems to achieve is the delay of the required fix from CCP.
    At the very least the usage of the exploit will make for an interesting couple of days, GM’s will reimburse lost gear from petitioners and maybe some people who abused the exploit in a major way will get temp or perm bans.

    So what! It’s an exploit! Use it at your own risk. Have some fun but be aware of the risk.

    January 21, 2011 at 12:59 am Reply
  12. Sick Freak

    eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1452916

    sicki freak wants isk to eat 2 test alliance corpse.lol

    i sent 50 mill.hell he said he will post a pic on evenews24. be funny to see.

    January 21, 2011 at 12:59 am Reply
  13. Captain Hindsight

    Good article. Thanks EN24.

    Just an aside: I know it’s in the article, but it would be a good show of faith on your part if you put a disclaimer at the top of the article in bold stating that using exploits is a bannable offense from EVE Online, and/or you do not promote or endorse people using exploits in-game.

    January 21, 2011 at 12:59 am Reply
    1. The Fat Kid

      this is exactly what i was trying to say… with the way things were worded in the article it was more of the “hey lets do this so u can/will get banned but in the process save the community by using the exploit!!”

      there isnt anything else to add to this, u summed it up perfectly.

      January 21, 2011 at 1:14 am Reply
    2. Terrible Poster

      Or we all use the exploits, err “features”. CCP can’t ban everyone now, can they?

      January 21, 2011 at 1:39 am Reply
    3. Random EVE Player

      Can’t you read? Theres some text from CCP in the 2nd paragraph that clearly says:

      “We would like to remind everyone that those found abusing this exploit will receive a ban according to our rules and policies.”

      Sure they could put this up the top of the post in bold and big red letters, but a) all players should already be aware enough the in game rules to start with – and if you are not its your fault for accepting the eula without reading it or educating yourself on the game rules; and b) if you simply read the very short article, you will clearly see it written anyway.

      I guess its just not possible to please some people is it, they got nothing better to do than pick at trivial shit on EN24.

      January 21, 2011 at 1:32 pm Reply
      1. Captain Hindsight

        Can’t YOU read? I stated that I already know it’s in the article.

        The worst part is, if it wasn’t in the evemail that EN24 quoted, who knows if they would’ve even mentioned that it is against the rules? And yes I know if you play the game, you should know the rules, but honestly, how many people ACTUALLY read ALL the rules of the games they play?

        January 21, 2011 at 7:49 pm Reply
  14. TRAVELER

    This article makes me wonder.. not about the times I was killed by others making use of such exploits but about the lack of information I get about the whole topic.
    I wonder how many more exploits are active out there.
    ..How many are out there that CCP actually knows about.
    ..how many are being taken care of.
    ..how many accounts have actually been banned when they are caught using exploits.
    ..how many pilots have been refunded for their losses when attacked by others using such exploits.

    Perhaps there are too many questions about the exploits topic to list on this post.

    In any case, it’s cool that I’ve found out through this source. Good Job.

    January 21, 2011 at 4:23 am Reply
  15. sour

    i dont see why this post has created all this unrest. a bug as well as its mechanics have been revealed to the broader public and somehow i fail to see how knowledge about it, is a bad thing. indeed i cant see why knowledge generally, can be deemed as a bad thing…

    +1

    January 21, 2011 at 8:50 am Reply
  16. INITer

    Absolutely supported. All exploits should be public, that way yes, the playing field gets leveled and the exploit also gets fixed ASAP. Or should we have let Ev0ke continue to run free POS reactions for a few more years? That wasn’t fixed until it was exposed in public.

    January 21, 2011 at 8:51 am Reply
  17. observer

    After every patch (aka. expansion in EVE) in every game there are some bugs and exploits. Its the way gaming world works. Real company do fix that problems fast and silent, but CCP is way to blind (or too dumb) in their ignorance to do this fast&silent, like normal company. Instead, joke company like CCP, talks about it but fast response is something unknown for them.

    And all of you that wily say “its complex, they need time, they need people, they need money…. they need sex” – wake up people, because not one, not two or five people are working on this project. If CCP devteam can’t make every single patch without major screwups – change it. Fire them. CCp development is INCOMPETENT and unfortunately for all us, this is only company where they can work.

    January 21, 2011 at 9:02 am Reply
  18. Muul Udonii

    Thanks for posting about the exploits. Now we all know not to do it. I’d assumed both bugs were intended; but will now stop using them.

    Because CCP keep the exploits a secret, how do we know we are committing a bannable offence, and have not found an inteesting new intended game mechanic.

    January 21, 2011 at 10:09 am Reply
  19. mintrolio

    CONFRIMIGN I HAV NOT USED EXPIOLTS EVER!

    January 21, 2011 at 11:45 am Reply
    1. YO

      not knowingly at the best of your knowledge is the legal term for it i believe. :)

      January 21, 2011 at 11:52 am Reply
  20. Magni

    So now evenews24 distributes exploits?

    January 21, 2011 at 12:59 pm Reply
  21. Is this exploit fixed in today’s patch? Does anybody know?

    January 21, 2011 at 2:33 pm Reply
    1. buff

      Yes. You can’t group activated modules anymore.

      January 21, 2011 at 5:20 pm Reply
  22. Hax

    Information leaks are generally how some of the worst things are fixed in a much quicker manner than normal. Look how long the moon goo fiasco went on for before it was widely exposed.

    January 21, 2011 at 6:45 pm Reply
  23. testieleaks

    Test Alliance, now bringing espionage to the masses.

    Have you always wanted to be a spy but don’t have the connections?
    Are you mad at your alliance and want to get back at them?
    Are you looking to leave an alliance and want to do some awox’ing before you leave?
    Do you want to steal some assets but don’t have the manpower/experience/Skill points?
    Do you just need some isk and don’t care what you do to get it?

    Then the Test Alliance, Please Inform Program is for you!

    The format is simple.
    1.) Go to this link: https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dF9vM28tNDBmeGJZSGc3SkZ4V0cxS0E6MQ
    2.) You enter the name of an anonymous alt through which we can communicate, and a general description of what you have to offer.
    3.) I evemail the alt to discuss if we are interested and we agree upon terms (isk, percentage of what is stolen, A spot in alliance, anything really).
    4.) You send the more detailed information and providing that it is a. as advertised, b. proven true, and c. not intel we already have (I will try and weed duplicates out in step 2, however if something slips past we will most likely reach some sort of compromise, I dont want to leave you emptyhanded) The deal will go through.
    5.) I send you whatever we agreed upon.

    This can be as anonymous as you want it to be.

    Obviously we aren’t looking for blue intel, and intel pertaining to active enemies will receive better compensation, but we are open to anything you want to tell us.

    I encourage anyone who feels like they got a deal that was anything other than what was expected to post on the forums. Even though we are dealing in shady matters, I can ensure you that this only works if I am a man of my word.

    Happy Spying!

    January 21, 2011 at 8:59 pm Reply
  24. no name

    if you want to complain against CCP and you are from EU use this:

    http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/ecc/index_en.htm

    January 22, 2011 at 12:52 pm Reply

Leave a Reply