weight reduction containers & equus/firebirds

Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Posts
3,302
Society
Titans of Space
Avatar Name
John Black Knight
Hello, here is another of my old support cases from 5 years ago which i thought to put up for public discussion and more community/mindark awareness in the age of #yoggate - if we fix bugs that effect the playerbase in events can we please also fix bugs that effect universal means of transport ?

History for support case 298015:

2015-02-16 11:05 You wrote:


Hello, im reporting this design issue as a bug as i think its a way to surpass the weight limitations the 'quadwing equus' was designed with for spacetravel.

There is a way to use antigrav containers by stacking them inside each other to achieve effectively unlimited weight carrying capabilities and i know that some equus owners have started using this to bypass the given weight limits for warp and subwarp flights.

Example based on Lux Special Armor Luggage/Lux Second Armor Luggage:
Weight of container:1.5 kg / antigravity factor 0.8
stacking them inside each other leads to the following scaled down weight:
1.5
1.2
0.96
0.768
0.6144
0.49152
0.393216
0.3145728
0.25165824
0.201326592
0.161061274
0.128849019
0.103079215
0.082463372
0.065970698
0.527765581
0.042221247
0.033776997
0.027021598
0.021617278
0.017293823
0.013835058
0.011068046
0.008854437
0.00708355
0.00566684 kg
This means that on the 6th level its already possible to transport 300kg while staying within the limitations operate an equus without being slowed down or not capable to warp.
As the containers get stacked deeper and deeper this increases to an unlimited possibility of weight reduction.
The sales of lux containers has already started to go up since the sales of the equus started and as more and more owners get to know the possibilities of weight reductions.
Unlimited weight transport capabilties on equus mean essentially that alot vip warp flight bussiness will be conducted utilizing equus and their affordable unlimited warp drives while privateers and motherships are not capable to compete.

My suggestion is to either disable antigrav containers for use in space or to remove the possibility of stacking them inside each other - or to just deactivate their antigrav factor while in space.
If weight is going to be an important factor in space transports in the future it will be important to remove weight limitation bypasses early on for the balance of the game.

Kind regards
John
2015-02-16 11:09 You wrote:


This is also not just effecting the balance between equus / privateers and motherships it also allows vast amounts of goods to be transported between planets without risk and while bypassing the universal auction system and therefor not paying any fees to move goods between planets.
2015-02-17 15:27 Entropia Universe Support:


Hi Black,

Thank you for your report, we will investigate and change this accordingly should we confirm this behavior (which with your information we most likely will).

Take care and best of luck in the meanwhile.

Kind regards,
Ulf | Entropia Universe Support

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks in advance for your consideration.

Kind regards
John
 

Alukat123

Stalker
Joined
Jun 20, 2017
Posts
1,566
Avatar Name
Son Alukat Goku
pretty sure that issue got adressed already.
It was a while back that i tried to do exactly that and it didn't work, but not sure atm what happened there exactly.

i think it was that you can't even put 150kg in the second instance as 150kg + 1.5kg would surpass the 150kg the first one can hold.
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Posts
3,302
Society
Titans of Space
Avatar Name
John Black Knight
pretty sure that issue got adressed already.
It was a while back that i tried to do exactly that and it didn't work, but not sure atm what happened there exactly.

i think it was that you can't even put 150kg in the second instance as 150kg + 1.5kg would surpass the 150kg the first one can hold.
They did address the issue to a minor degree, by carrying reduced weights into account on the higher levels, but you can still do very much the same just with lesser max capacity on the containers - so with more containers nothing has changed.
 

atomicstorm

Marauder
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Posts
7,131
Location
Tennessee, USA
Society
Entropialoot.com
Avatar Name
MeLoveYou LongTime FiveDolla
pretty sure that issue got adressed already.
It was a while back that i tried to do exactly that and it didn't work, but not sure atm what happened there exactly.

i think it was that you can't even put 150kg in the second instance as 150kg + 1.5kg would surpass the 150kg the first one can hold.
I know several folks who regularly use this. Although, I do not find this a bug or an exploit. They are anti-gravity boxes after all and further more, space is zero-gravity. :rolleyes:

Biggest thing here would be for pirates to start dropping warp mines OR get rid of space. :)
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Posts
3,302
Society
Titans of Space
Avatar Name
John Black Knight
I know several folks who regularly use this. Although, I do not find this a bug or an exploit. They are anti-gravity boxes after all and further more, space is zero-gravity. :rolleyes:

Biggest thing here would be for pirates to start dropping warp mines OR get rid of space. :)
the zero gravity is a nice argument outside entropia, but when mindark creates an item like the equus and firebird and adds a stat called maxed carried weight:100kg while giving the item an unlimited mu free warpdrive you can bet it was designed this way for a reason which very likely was to avoid that a luxury interceptor would be used to instant tp cargo between planets.
The equus sales were preannounced by mindark with the promise of upcomming cargo missions btw (which included introduction of auction fees and creation of a cargo mission loot pool) which to this day have not seen the light of day.
But weight limitations were intended in this context.
 

atomicstorm

Marauder
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Posts
7,131
Location
Tennessee, USA
Society
Entropialoot.com
Avatar Name
MeLoveYou LongTime FiveDolla
the zero gravity is a nice argument outside entropia, but when mindark creates an item like the equus and firebird and adds a stat called maxed carried weight:100kg while giving the item an unlimited mu free warpdrive you can bet it was designed this way for a reason which very likely was to avoid that a luxury interceptor would be used to instant tp cargo between planets.
The equus sales were preannounced by mindark with the promise of upcomming cargo missions btw (which included introduction of auction fees and creation of a cargo mission loot pool) which to this day have not seen the light of day.
But weight limitations were intended in this context.
I disagree. It is still very valid inside entropia. When you die, you float in zero-g, not fall with full gravity. The UL warpdrive was the incentive to buy these overpriced clunkers ($5000) at a time when they obviously need the cash. There had to be a lure to get people to buy them. The fact is your argument only works if they never introduced anti-gravity boxes. The way they work now is logical. The way you want them to is illogical. You want them to restrict a feature in the game to not be used in space for the benefit of motherships/privateers who do not need this mechanic. The trade off with these ships is the ability to withstand fire pressure. Equus is weak in this area. They do not need to be handicapped any further.
 

Phillip J-Fry

Guardian
Joined
Feb 18, 2010
Posts
241
Society
Classified
Avatar Name
Phillip TheTank J-Fry
I don't have a stake in space travel but I nest about a dozen anti grav containers in my inventory so I can carry around all my non lootable items everywhere I go. This saves me time that I don't have to spend moving things to and from planet storage. I would be sad if I lost the ability to do this.
 

kingofaces

Alpha
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Posts
632
Location
US
Avatar Name
Tony KingofAces Hans
Maybe it’s getting too meta, but on the no gravity in space thing, that wouldn’t omit weight limits in the real world. The more mass you have, the more energy it takes to accelerate at the same rate, even in space. It actually makes sense with the Equus/Firebird to a degree that too much of a loaf slows them down. Technically it should mean it just takes longer to reach top speed since there basically isn’t air resistance in space, but we’re not playing one of those space simulator games where you have to plot trajectories and know some calculus either.
 

forgo

Elite
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Posts
3,359
Location
US
Society
Freelancer
Avatar Name
Forgo Forgorth Lundain
I guess I am confused on a 5 year old support case being brought up.

The effects have been in place since the game started with anti-grav.

If you have 9 boxes deep and have some kind of item weighing 150 kg, its nearly 30 kg but that box is full

So the 8th is unable to put as much, and had a diminished weight bonus so 120kg ends up being like 40kg

ect ect until the overall weights hit the max and then you limited, not to mention these boxes can only carry 10-20 things.

Overall there might be 500kg gained with that many boxes, but then again to get anything you want, or even anything put in them right.....is a clicking nightmare.

Considering most people carry many K's of kg for warping I don't see this as the warp fee sucking issue you do.

Because lets face it, you want to destroy competition to keep it all for yourselves. Between being upset that Warp mines are in safe space (no method in which to instill fear driving warp business) and trying to limit already limited warp ships...just shows your tenacity to do anything and everything to maintain excessive fees upon the player base. *business is business sometimes

May as well start mentioning the "safe logout bug" that your ships have enjoyed all these years in PVP space.



Between a pathfinder and a equus, a @50k investment is still significant.

I would argue logout warping is a far more critical bug in the areas you are more concerned with in this thread:

This is also not just effecting the balance between equus / privateers and motherships it also allows vast amounts of goods to be transported between planets without risk
There simply is no business for these ships with any significant weight by either passenger or pilot without annoyance (getting naked and leaving everything behind) and time wasting.... the one thing warps are intended to save. Lets remember just how light 100 kg is (the start of the weight limit) between 2 people if even 1 has gear.

Not meaning to nitpick too much, or pick a fight. I might have a warp ship like these, but its just a waste of time to use them this way with people. It just does not seem you understand the effects of the antigrav factor and limitations those boxes have......and didn't even bother to check in 5 years.
 
Last edited:

pelzak

Dominant
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Posts
456
Location
Poland
Society
Guess Who
Avatar Name
Grand Master Pelzak PRO
I think that warp should be avalible only for thoose with 100 lvl in space pilot lol :D
 

Alainax

Elite
Joined
Dec 6, 2010
Posts
3,850
Location
Normandie
Society
Titans of Space
Avatar Name
Alaina Bonnie Knight
I guess I am confused on a 5 year old support case being brought up.
I think it is due to the recent "bugs" that have been brought to light, and the on going discussion on using/abusing the in game mechanics to ones on gain, to the detriment of others, and what really constitutes as an exploit.


The Equus/firebird came with unlimited free warp drives essentially allowing their buyers almost completely free travel - but now quite often charging passengers for the privilege. In order to balance this, they came with a weight limitation. So they were not designed to be cargo ships.

However, shortly there after some people realised they could abuse this feature as detailed, and completely getting around about the weight limitation.

So as the ship* is now not being used as intended, and is providing an advantage that wasn't intended, is this sort of thing deemed as ok by the community? And therefor, where does the line fall between what exploits are "ok" and which are not.

I think that warp should be avalible only for thoose with 100 lvl in space pilot lol :D


Love it :D


* Some not all, I know many Equus owners who refused to do this as know it was not as was intended.


Maybe it’s getting too meta, but on the no gravity in space thing, that wouldn’t omit weight limits in the real world. The more mass you have, the more energy it takes to accelerate at the same rate, even in space. It actually makes sense with the Equus/Firebird to a degree that too much of a loaf slows them down. Technically it should mean it just takes longer to reach top speed since there basically isn’t air resistance in space, but we’re not playing one of those space simulator games where you have to plot trajectories and know some calculus either.
This^

If we are going down the real world gravity route, bear in mind that the equus land planet side. So unlike the large warp space ships, these small ships need to be able to break the atmosphere barrier. They get the overweight limit whilst on planet. I took this as meaning as a warp ship they had to be light enough to carry not only the warp capabilities, but to be able to break through the atmosphere (differing from a standard quad that doesn't have to carry the warp capabilities ;) )
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Posts
3,302
Society
Titans of Space
Avatar Name
John Black Knight
I disagree. It is still very valid inside entropia. When you die, you float in zero-g, not fall with full gravity. The UL warpdrive was the incentive to buy these overpriced clunkers ($5000) at a time when they obviously need the cash. There had to be a lure to get people to buy them. The fact is your argument only works if they never introduced anti-gravity boxes. The way they work now is logical. The way you want them to is illogical. You want them to restrict a feature in the game to not be used in space for the benefit of motherships/privateers who do not need this mechanic. The trade off with these ships is the ability to withstand fire pressure. Equus is weak in this area. They do not need to be handicapped any further.
I dont think you have fully seen the 'potential' of stacking antigrav containers yet.
Example:
If i stack 12 lux rifle luggage containers inside one another and put 145kg on the lowest lvl, thats 10kg for the avatar on the top lvl.
Someone who 'invested' 2-4kpeds in such containers at current market price could easily transport 1-2,000kg with an equus/firebird per 3min warp flight between planets.

I have no problem with someone getting the 0.8 antrigav benefit from a single container, or even from 20 such containers if he/she chooses to use them on the top level, but when people stack them inside each other really deep thats where the issue occurs.

And regarding the price argument, i didnt see any yog horror owners making the argument that they spent over 10k ped for that faster reload/drill boost to compete with those other hunters that had a better weapon and how they would deserve what they payed for...

In regards to forgo who seems to love having a go at me each opportunity he sees fit, you are making that yog horror argument right there - just because you own an equus or firefird or can use one when you need to, doesnt mean that you 'deserve' an 'advantage' from an item that was clearly not intended.
Equus and firefird do have this carried weight limitation and when players carry weight it slows these vehicles down and if players carry to much weight it makes it impossible to warp in these vehicles - the deep stacking of antigrav containers is what get players to experience a 'yog horror' - like benefit in which an item/player can compete in an area that wasnt intended.
Interceptors are fast and great vip transports for passengers - and they can be - but they should not be cargo transports as thats clearly not what they were designed for.

And just because a bug has been around for many years, like yog horror drill effect, doesnt mean that it has to be accepted.
Just because deep stacking is convenient for players planetside, doesnt mean it has to be possible in space - one of my suggestions to fix it was in fact to only remove the antigrav effect while in space, then all weight would add up in situations where it matters to keep items balanced.
 
Last edited:

Alukat123

Stalker
Joined
Jun 20, 2017
Posts
1,566
Avatar Name
Son Alukat Goku
I dont think you have fully seen the 'potential' of stacking antigrav containers yet.
Example:
If i stack 12 lux rifle luggage containers inside one another and put 145kg on the lowest lvl, thats 10kg for the avatar on the top lvl.
Someone who 'invested' 2-4kpeds in such containers at current market price could easily transport 1-2,000kg with an equus/firebird per 3min warp flight between planets.
11 lux rifle luggages are 16,5kg so you could put 133,5kg on the lowest level.
12 lux rifle luggage are about 600 PED, which means for 1335kg of cargo it costs 6k PED.

What's the weight limit on MS?
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Posts
3,302
Society
Titans of Space
Avatar Name
John Black Knight
11 lux rifle luggages are 16,5kg so you could put 133,5kg on the lowest level.
12 lux rifle luggage are about 600 PED, which means for 1335kg of cargo it costs 6k PED.

What's the weight limit on MS?
no, because the weight of the weight reduction containers themselfs gets reduced as well.
And no again just because one container is listed for +50 doesnt make it the market price, check history.

PS: besides the intend is not to argue on the numbers a fewped up or down, kg back or forth - the intend of the example was to show the possibility and the stacking doesnt have to stop at 12 containers nore does it mean that one cant have multiple of such stacks or combine different types of antigrav containers.
 

Alukat123

Stalker
Joined
Jun 20, 2017
Posts
1,566
Avatar Name
Son Alukat Goku
no, because the weight of the weight reduction containers themselfs gets reduced as well.
And no again just because one container is listed for +50 doesnt make it the market price, check history.
it's not +50, it's 50 PED each.... TT is ~20 PED...
i don't have to check market history =)

pls, tell me, what's the weight limit on MS?
 
Last edited:

Starkiller

Stalker
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Posts
1,639
Location
Portugal
Society
Freelancer
Avatar Name
Bendak Starkiller Mandalore
This discussion is so meaningless to the whole community that most people bothering with it have some level of attached bias to it, me included. Whoever reads this just needs to figure out who is who on these smaller matters. I believe I am very neutral on the matter but I'll be accused of bias nonetheless so whatever.

You be the judge.

Another point to write in the beggining is this: You don't write the narratives. MindArk does, yet you guys seem to be pretty good at it, from space pirates to abuses...

So let's begin.

I dont think you have fully seen the 'potential' of stacking antigrav containers yet.
Example:
If i stack 12 lux rifle luggage containers inside one another and put 145kg on the lowest lvl, thats 10kg for the avatar on the top lvl.
Someone who 'invested' 2-4kpeds in such containers at current market price could easily transport 1-2,000kg with an equus/firebird per 3min warp flight between planets.

I have no problem with someone getting the 0.8 antrigav benefit from a single container, or even from 20 such containers if he/she chooses to use them on the top level, but when people stack them inside each other really deep thats where the issue occurs.

And regarding the price argument, i didnt see any yog horror owners making the argument that they spent over 10k ped for that faster reload/drill boost to compete with those other hunters that had a better weapon and how they would deserve what they payed for...

In regards to forgo who seems to love having a go at me each opportunity he sees fit, you are making that yog horror argument right there - just because you own an equus or firefird or can use one when you need to, doesnt mean that you 'deserve' an 'advantage' from an item that was clearly not intended.
Equus and firefird do have this carried weight limitation and when players carry weight it slows these vehicles down and if players carry to much weight it makes it impossible to warp in these vehicles - the deep stacking of antigrav containers is what get players to experience a 'yog horror' - like benefit in which an item/player can compete in an area that wasnt intended.
Interceptors are fast and great vip transports for passengers - and they can be - but they should not be cargo transports as thats clearly not what they were designed for.

And just because a bug has been around for many years, like yog horror drill effect, doesnt mean that it has to be accepted.
Just because deep stacking is convenient for players planetside, doesnt mean it has to be possible in space - one of my suggestions to fix it was in fact to only remove the antigrav effect while in space, then all weight would add up in situations where it matters to keep items balanced.
It's funny how you never adress the "log out abuse" exploit or "secure warping" - for short, that also potentialy uses third party software to make it "secure", totally bypassing in-built game mechanics (lootable pvp - lootable; ingame chat and being online to move a character amongst others) by allowing players to be instanced from point A to point B bypassing the risks involved from space traveling (lootable space - risking whatever you are transporting - be it 5 kg or 40000kg) rendering all transport of personel or "cargo" (Guess why the cargo missions cant exist?) in a mothership or privateer "safe" by simply not being available ingame to be looted.

It's also funny how you don't mention the amount of ped amassed from said abuse, since the introduction of the new versions of the spaceships but are very keen to point how the equus owners are profiting off the anti gravity boxes, even though one method is totally free (guess which one) and the other requires further ped investment into more items from the game systems and players crafting tables ( since the boxes are craftable).

In the end, when you compare both, everyone who is neutral will realize the following:
1 - Anti gravity boxes stretch the equus / firebirds capacities at a PED COST (investment into buying said boxes);
2 - Anti gravity box contents (stackables and all other things that are lootable and placed in them) can still be looted in space should a pvper efectively destroy the ship and kill the occupant carrying the boxes;
3 - Anti gravity boxes do no bypass any in-built system in the game (process from moving from point A to point B follows all in-built guidelines and risks);
4 - Anti gravity boxes are an ingenuity of the intended mechanics of the boxes - MA decides wether it's abuse or not - not the players (like some people narrate);
5 - Anti gravity boxes are still limited by the ships weight capacities meaning you can stack as many as you want, but you will eventually reach the 150kg limit (you can stack hundreds, but it will limit your carry capacity to a point unknown to me at this moment);

VS:
1 - "Log out abuse" or "secure warping" stretches the safety of the motherships / privateers without COST to the system - no further investment into the ships to "secure" anything;
2 - "Log out abuse" or "secure warping" efectively nullifies the reason for Warp - Mines (in built mechanic N1) to exist (since there's nothing to loot when nobody is online);
3 - "log out abuse" or "secure warping" nullifies most of the reason space was wholely lootable except for station pockets - reason why space pvpers are more scarce now and harder to detect (in built mechanic N2);
4 - "Log out abuse" or "secure warping" in order to be 100% secure requires third party software (Chatting systems), bypassing the need to chat to players ingame to get messages across (inbuilt mechanic N3);
5 - "Log out abuse" or "secure warping" allows you to efectively bypass the game mechanics to "safely transport your goods from point A to point B without risk of looting";

I will say it again, it's funny how one side fights over how the other is unfair, yet the only one who is in fact the reason space cargo missions cannot be placed into the game are the ones who really feel screwed over by MindArk for not having developed the systems in the first place. You might want to be careful what you wish for, because when and if cargo missions are a thing, your "log out abuse" might be gone too. Not that that worries any of the business model owners, since they have been making revenue with it since 2012 (8years for the tldr folk).

Repeating: Cargo missions don't exist because it would be exploitable, given out the game engine works, but I bet none of you will bother to preach this with a choir, no, you prefer to stick to your pocket fill :).

One cannot happen until the other is fixed, thus confirming it is a bug and unintended, which by the way is limiting MindArk when it comes to space development. Got to give them credit there.

it's not +50, it's 50 PED each.... TT is ~20 PED...
i don't have to check market history =)

pls, tell me, what's the weight limit on MS?
Boxes never rose in price like OP wrote, i bought mine at tt + 35 years ago and they are strangely enough still tt+35 if not less...


P.S.: I am speculating on how the cargo missions work, but you and me both know how MA works in terms of coding, i could explain into further detail on how the system would be able to efectively work given the current engine limitations, but common sense dictates this: either log out feature disappears OR motherships and privateers get a weight limit - Neither benefitial to the owners, and therefore, never discussed. And out of the two, if they had to choose, guess which one they would choose ;)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Posts
3,302
Society
Titans of Space
Avatar Name
John Black Knight
It's funny how you never adress the "log out abuse" exploit or "secure warping" - for short, that also potentialy uses third party software to make it "secure", totally bypassing in-built game mechanics (lootable pvp - lootable; ingame chat and being online to move a character amongst others) by allowing players to be instanced from point A to point B bypassing the risks involved from space traveling (lootable space - risking whatever you are transporting - be it 5 kg or 40000kg) rendering all transport of personel or "cargo" (Guess why the cargo missions cant exist?) in a mothership or privateer "safe" by simply not being available ingame to be looted.
Please dont derail from the threads topic especially dont try to educate me about log out exploits, i have written about 6 different support cases to mindark on how the loggout stackable issue could be fixed over the years and i am fully convinced that any 'feature' that gives players who 'dont play the game' and edge over players who do (eg. logging out) is a very wrong aproach for a game to have - you just dont want your players to leave your game, you want them to play.

Further on the price of boxes, im not gonna argue with a crafter like alukat on how cheap he potentially could craft them to a mass order, i know the manufacturing costs - but as we have already seen from this thread a number of hunters enjoy deepstacking antigrav boxes for hunting purposes - so already have the gain and the equus owner may not even need to own those boxes him/herself - nevertheless even if the cost to 'upgrade' the equus from interceptor to cargovessel was 10k ped it would still be a whole lot cheaper then getting a privateer and paying mu on every warp as well as needing alot more time to warp and with the disadvantage of dropping passengers at spacestations instead of planet surfaces.
Equus also allow to outrun potential attackers, privateers dont they need si upgrades - unless owners do what starkiller and myself would love to be fixed - that players circumvent the way space transport was originally 'intended'.


PS: Nowhere have i asked for players to be punished for years of taking monetary advantage of a flaw in the system, all im asking is for the bugs to get fixed.
 

Starkiller

Stalker
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Posts
1,639
Location
Portugal
Society
Freelancer
Avatar Name
Bendak Starkiller Mandalore
Please dont derail from the threads topic especially dont try to educate me about log out exploits, i have written about 6 different support cases to mindark on how the loggout stackable issue could be fixed over the years and i am fully convinced that any 'feature' that gives players who 'dont play the game' and edge over players who do (eg. logging out) is a very wrong aproach for a game to have - you just dont want your players to leave your game, you want to to play.

Further on the price of boxes, im not gonna argue with a crafter like alukat on how cheap he potentially could craft them to a mass order, i know the manufacturing costs - but as we have already seen from this thread a number of hunters enjoy deepstacking antigrav boxes for hunting purposes - so already have the gain and the equus owner may not even need to own those boxes him/herself - nevertheless even if the cost to 'upgrade' the equus from interceptor to cargovessel was 10k ped it would still be a whole lot cheaper then getting a privateer and paying mu on every warp as well as needing alot more time to warp and with the disadvantage of dropping passengers at spacestations instead of planet surfaces.
Equus also allow to outrun potential attackers, privateers dont they need si upgrades - unless owners do what starkiller and myself would love to be fixed - that players circumvent the way space transport was originally 'intended'.


PS: Nowhere have i asked for players to be punished for years of taking monetary advantage of a flaw in the system, all im asking is for the bugs to get fixed.
This has been derailed from the moment you decided not to counter argue anything written here and not accept the facts I and others key noted for people to read on all space flaws regarding pvp transactions.


The hunters were here when the anti gravity boxes first came to light, and that's how they have been working since inception. Nobody got upset about it until someone lost some pvp money to competitive business models. Until then all miners were happy they could compact their weight, all hunters were happy they could keep running after looting. Even then support cases were made.

The topic is space abuse, one example is the one you open the thread with, the other is the "feature" you, nor any other privateer / Mothership owner knows needs fixing but doesn't really care, cause ya know... They'll fix it eventualy. Right.

Equus cant outrun a sleipnir if using 60 anti gravity boxes filled up with thousands of stackables. The weight limit is never gone. Imagine that kill mail (if there were any in this game) - As longtime wrote, the ship is already limited in it's use for the pricetag it was sold at, cannot be upgraded in any way, can only carry one extra passenger at a time and proof of that is the drop in price after all were sold. Same applies to Firebirds, they're not selling for two reasons: The equus lost face value, and their warp animation is non existant (intended by development team for their reasons)

Privateers can warp without any further costs except Warp drives, which some Mothership owners own UL blueprints for the things, same for welding wire and repairers, nobody speaks of this monopoly though ;) and i wont derail with yet another "not hot topic". And forgot to mention, can warp bypassinh game mechanics with loot, rendering it unlootable (so that little description say its lootable is nullified in privateer and mothership instances)
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Posts
3,302
Society
Titans of Space
Avatar Name
John Black Knight
The topic is space abuse, one example is the one you open the thread with, the other is the "feature" you, nor any other privateer / Mothership owner knows needs fixing but doesn't really care, cause ya know... They'll fix it eventualy. Right.
The topic is deepstacking of weight reduction containers and how it impacts other items and gameplay mechanisms.
Just because you like the advantage you as an equus owner gain from said sideffect doesnt nullify the fact that its a bug.
If you wish to open another thread demanding the logout exploit on motherships and privateers to be fixed, be my guest i will be the first to support you and can list several support case numbers with suggestions.
 

Starkiller

Stalker
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Posts
1,639
Location
Portugal
Society
Freelancer
Avatar Name
Bendak Starkiller Mandalore
The topic is deepstacking of weight reduction containers and how it impacts other items and gameplay mechanisms.
Just because you like the advantage you as an equus owner gain from said sideffect doesnt nullify the fact that its a bug.
If you wish to open another thread demanding the logout exploit on motherships and privateers to be fixed, be my guest i will be the first to support you and can list several support case numbers with suggestions.
The reason I keep coming to this is your narrative on calling it a bug, as they are working as intended. Only a select group of people ever called it a bug. And guess who they are? I will write this again, you don't decide what's a bug or not, MA decides. and it seems that it is still there, like the log out feature. So guess what they decided thus far?

Not to say they won't change their opinion on the matter at some point.

Why would I do that? To make this look like a personal and highly biased dispute like you wrote this thread after a discussion on Discord? Nah, I will just keep adding to the bug lists and explaining to people how stuff is like Forgo did.

You did reply to Forgo though, with something, yet to my post you simply avoided it completely so Ill TLDR it for the folks who can't be arsed:

In the end, when you compare both, everyone who is neutral will realize the following:
1 - Anti gravity boxes stretch the equus / firebirds capacities at a PED COST (investment into buying said boxes);
2 - Anti gravity box contents (stackables and all other things that are lootable and placed in them) can still be looted in space should a pvper efectively destroy the ship and kill the occupant carrying the boxes;
3 - Anti gravity boxes do no bypass any in-built system in the game (process from moving from point A to point B follows all in-built guidelines and risks);
4 - Anti gravity boxes are an ingenuity of the intended mechanics of the boxes - MA decides wether it's abuse or not - not the players (like some people narrate);
5 - Anti gravity boxes are still limited by the ships weight capacities meaning you can stack as many as you want, but you will eventually reach the 150kg limit (you can stack hundreds, but it will limit your carry capacity to a point unknown to me at this moment);

VS:
1 - "Log out abuse" or "secure warping" stretches the safety of the motherships / privateers without COST to the system - no further investment into the ships to "secure" anything;
2 - "Log out abuse" or "secure warping" efectively nullifies the reason for Warp - Mines (in built mechanic N1) to exist (since there's nothing to loot when nobody is online);
3 - "log out abuse" or "secure warping" nullifies most of the reason space was wholely lootable except for station pockets - reason why space pvpers are more scarce now and harder to detect (in built mechanic N2);
4 - "Log out abuse" or "secure warping" in order to be 100% secure requires third party software (Chatting systems), bypassing the need to chat to players ingame to get messages across (inbuilt mechanic N3);
5 - "Log out abuse" or "secure warping" allows you to efectively bypass the game mechanics to "safely transport your goods from point A to point B without risk of looting";
And

Cargo missions don't exist because it would be exploitable, given out the game engine works.
Exploitable for all spaceships except those without warp capabilities.
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Posts
3,302
Society
Titans of Space
Avatar Name
John Black Knight
To your points since last year mindark changed space and put obviously by 'accident' the majority of warp gatepoints into non lootable space - im certain i dont need to explain to you which ones are still in lootable and how to work with that :rolleyes:

Brings me back to my point the number of sideeffects do add up and up making vehicles that were one thing into something much broader.
Still not the point of this thread, if you want deepstacking of weight recution containers and mindark thinks its fine planetside then its fine to me, but i would really like to hear mindarks explanation on why they think its could be 'fine' in space considering they were the ones putting carried weight restrictions on items.
Which brings us back to the topic.
Please fix the deepstacking so items are used for their intended purpose and not to gain advtantage over other players by non intended means.
 

Starkiller

Stalker
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Posts
1,639
Location
Portugal
Society
Freelancer
Avatar Name
Bendak Starkiller Mandalore
To your points since last year mindark changed space and put obviously by 'accident' the majority of warp gatepoints into non lootable space - im certain i dont need to explain to you which ones are still in lootable and how to work with that :rolleyes:

Brings me back to my point the number of sideeffects do add up and up making vehicles that were one thing into something much broader.
Still not the point of this thread, if you want deepstacking of weight recution containers and mindark thinks its fine planetside then its fine to me, but i would really like to hear mindarks explanation on why they think its could be 'fine' in space considering they were the ones putting carried weight restrictions on items.
Which brings us back to the topic.
Please fix the deepstacking so items are used for their intended purpose and not to gain advtantage over other players by non intended means.
They didn't change space cause I wanted it to be so that's for sure, I couldn't care less then, couldn't care less now. But someone did fight it out with claws

I don't even see how the warp gates are that much of an issue. In 5 years I have seen a grand total of 1 (1!) warp mines in space and they were quite disapointed in picking up an equus of all things they wanted. Not to mention someone was until recently hoarding the warp mine blueprints to "prevent their use". Once again, Don't see the point in yet another argument to not reply to anything.

They can't fix what isn't broken, I think this is the part you don't get. They're being used for their intended purpose right now, the fact people extend it whatever profession is just that, and extension of the capabilities.


But yes, you're right, maybe they should just fix it by removing the weight restrictions on a 5k usd ship, since no other ship has weight restrictions (gravity and physics by your logic only seem to apply to some ships, not others) that might fix everything much faster :rolleyes:

Maybe when they fix this, they can also allow your mothership to land in planets too like you've been suggesting for ages aswell, to "even the playfield" ofc but just the motherships
 
Last edited:

Alainax

Elite
Joined
Dec 6, 2010
Posts
3,850
Location
Normandie
Society
Titans of Space
Avatar Name
Alaina Bonnie Knight
Equus were design to be weight restricted - a luxury Calypso personal warp ship.
It was found primarily that another planet partners item (rocktropia boxes) could by pass this. This was clearly not an intentional collaboration.

An over sight fits - as If it was intended to be used as a cargo ship, the weight restriction would have been pointless.

So equus able to be used not as intended / exploited to the financial gain of some and detriment of others ( remember it’s an UL warp drive they come with).

Yogs were able to be used not as intended/ exploited to the financial gain of some and detriment of others.

Yet one causes massive uproar, and the other is “ok”.

I’m more just curious to see where the community views the line. When is it ok for something’s to be used not as intended, and when is it not?

To answer that’s up to ma to decide doesn’t fit, as seen with yog gate it was reported previously and nothing happened until community fury.


I wonder if it would be worthwhile creating a massive list of things that can be used “not as intended” and see if we can get some answers on what crosses the line and what doesn’t.

Regarding log out, it’s a moot point in this thread- you are arguing with the one person who has spent more upgrading his ship in space than any others, essentially the one who loses out most from log out.
 

Alukat123

Stalker
Joined
Jun 20, 2017
Posts
1,566
Avatar Name
Son Alukat Goku
maybe MA let's it be that way to have something between equus and MS without actually having to make ships that are between equus and MS ^^
 

Alainax

Elite
Joined
Dec 6, 2010
Posts
3,850
Location
Normandie
Society
Titans of Space
Avatar Name
Alaina Bonnie Knight
maybe MA let's it be that way to have something between equus and MS without actually having to make ships that are between equus and MS ^^
Starfinders and path finders are the in between.

Equus is a quad that can warp, that was specifically weight restricted so that it was not abused/ exploited as a cargo/ transport ship.

It would be blatant hypocrisy for shouting about one exploit whilst using another, those in glass houses and all, so maybe it would be worthwhile to create a list of these “unintended features” like this one - to get some official comment and keep us all right ;)
 
Last edited:

Alukat123

Stalker
Joined
Jun 20, 2017
Posts
1,566
Avatar Name
Son Alukat Goku
why call it an exploit.
Equus is working as intended. Anti-Grav boxes are working as intended.

/thread.
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Posts
3,302
Society
Titans of Space
Avatar Name
John Black Knight
why call it an exploit.
Equus is working as intended. Anti-Grav boxes are working as intended.

/thread.
yog horror was working for its purpose as intended
faster reload was working for its purpose as intended
the issue occured when they got mixed for added benefit as described in many posts in this thread
 

Starkiller

Stalker
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Posts
1,639
Location
Portugal
Society
Freelancer
Avatar Name
Bendak Starkiller Mandalore
yog horror was working for its purpose as intended
faster reload was working for its purpose as intended
the issue occured when they got mixed for added benefit as described in many posts in this thread
1 - No it was not;
2 - No it was not;
3 - The issue was people ommited the exploit for 2 years and took advantage of it to win over many players within game parameter abuse.

None of this is happening with Anti gravity boxes.
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Posts
3,302
Society
Titans of Space
Avatar Name
John Black Knight
1 - No it was not;
2 - No it was not;
3 - The issue was people ommited the exploit for 2 years and took advantage of it to win over many players within game parameter abuse.

None of this is happening with Anti gravity boxes.
The issue with anti grav boxes has been reported many time throughout the years and not just by me, same as the issue with yog horrors.
What changed the dynamic was when things became public and it seems alot of vested interests try to be hypocritical when it comes to anti grav benefits when traveling equus/firebird while totally wanting bans and punishment for people using yog horrors - bugs need fixed even if you loose convenience over it - this includes any and all means of bypassing intended limitations be it for antigrav,weight or lootability.
 

Alainax

Elite
Joined
Dec 6, 2010
Posts
3,850
Location
Normandie
Society
Titans of Space
Avatar Name
Alaina Bonnie Knight
1 - No it was not;
2 - No it was not;
3 - The issue was people ommited the exploit for 2 years and took advantage of it to win over many players within game parameter abuse.

None of this is happening with Anti gravity boxes.
1. It worked perfectly well as intended as a drill bot with faster reload on tools.
2. faster reload buffs work perfectly as intended.
3. The issue came by Using the faster reload drill speed on weapons as that was using it "not as intended"

Just like Equus :)


It was reported, and just like equus nothing happened.

Either we ban the all the "not as intended" or we don't. Equus are great, very cool personal warp ships with some nice UL warp drive, but not intended for mass cargo transportation ( otherwise there would be no weight limit)


The question is where we draw the line on usage of what is intended and what is no, and of course if it is appropriate for anyone get pissed about one, whilst using another.
 
Last edited:
Top