weight reduction containers & equus/firebirds

3. The issue came by Using the faster reload drill speed on weapons as that was using it "not as intended"


how's faster drill speed working on weapons being intended? isn't that supposed to be exacavator reload only? :confused:
 
how's faster drill speed working on weapons being intended? isn't that supposed to be exacavator reload only? :confused:

umm.. I said "not" as intended :laugh: It worked as intended as a drill bot, not using it on weapons, that was then using it "Not as intended"
 
As an equus owner , I have never used this , what shall we call it , "stacking effect" to negate the weight restriction.
Never needed to and neither have any of my passengers.

As far as I am concerned it is an unintended thing missed by MA and using this stacking effect is at the very least not playing in the "spirit" of things and at the very worst utilising a bug to earn more ped.
 
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.

Your facts are wrong, I suggest you quote your sources.

What was explained by the rumours is that this bug was exposed as not showing on the HUD, firstly. Then it wasn't giving faster drilling speed.

Faster reload was ommited, and not working as intended as the pet was never to give such a buff. The support tickets about this are recent (from mystique being one example)

3 The issue now is as you stated not as JBK stated


Not like Equus. In fact, Equus have nothing to do with it, which just shows your intents with such threads.

A slip of the tongue over the real issue right there... We don't draw any lines. MindArk does. You keep missing the point.

Write it like you mean it, or don't make it sound like what it isn't.
 
As an equus owner , I have never used this , what shall we call it , "stacking effect" to negate the weight restriction.
Never needed to and neither have any of my passengers.

As far as I am concerned it is an unintended thing missed by MA and using this stacking effect is at the very least not playing in the "spirit" of things and at the very worst utilising a bug to earn more ped.

Thanks SoReal, you have always played by the rules.
I know sometimes it takes courage to not go after the easy penny when opportunity shines in the grey zones of the game :thumbup:
 
umm.. I said "not" as intended :laugh: It worked as intended as a drill bot, not using it on weapons, that was then using it "Not as intended"

oops, my bad, overread the "not" somehow :laugh:

drill bot working on guns when it should only work on excavator, obviously bug.

anti-grav box does what it's supposed to do.
equus does what it's supposed to do.
It's a synergy, not a bug.

oh btw, have fun with all the rage when noone can use the vehicle + box synergy anymore. This goes way beyond equus & firebird afterall. Pitbulls, Sleipnirs etc. will be affected as well.
 
As an equus owner , I have never used this , what shall we call it , "stacking effect" to negate the weight restriction.
Never needed to and neither have any of my passengers.

As far as I am concerned it is an unintended thing missed by MA and using this stacking effect is at the very least not playing in the "spirit" of things and at the very worst utilising a bug to earn more ped.

Couldn't help to read this otherwise: "hello I am SoReal and I endorse this message."

Thanks SoReal, you have always played by the rules.
I know sometimes it takes courage to not go after the easy penny when opportunity shines in the grey zones of the game :thumbup:

To no surprise at all, this is what it was all about all along, its not about "bug fixing" now is it? :cool:

Totaly disregard the forum signatures popcorn eating public! It is all very unbiased bug fixing out here :D

Totally not easy space drama entertainment!
 
As an equus owner , I have never used this , what shall we call it , "stacking effect" to negate the weight restriction.
Never needed to and neither have any of my passengers.

As far as I am concerned it is an unintended thing missed by MA and using this stacking effect is at the very least not playing in the "spirit" of things and at the very worst utilising a bug to earn more ped.

I once made 2000kg of chair frames on rt, i would never spend 12k PED on boxes to get 2000kg of chair frames to caly without MS... MS much cheaper solution :laugh:
 
The intent is as follows - Simplez! :cool:

Simplez then - MA is the game master and decides, we as player follows.

You, me or nobody get to decide what is right or wrong, the game master does. That's how it is and that's how its predicted in the ToU.

When making threads one must be careful with the wording, you make it sound like it's up to you to decide what's deemed a bug or not, like the adjusted harrier armor bug that originated this thread.

I will write it again to make it simpler: Players don't decide what is intended or not. Game developers do.
 
oops, my bad, overread the "not" somehow :laugh:

drill bot working on guns when it should only work on excavator, obviously bug.

anti-grav box does what it's supposed to do.
equus does what it's supposed to do.
It's a synergy, not a bug.

oh btw, have fun with all the rage when noone can use the vehicle + box synergy anymore. This goes way beyond equus & firebird afterall. Pitbulls, Sleipnirs etc. will be affected as well.

Didnt know we already reached the blackmailing level, but i can assure you rage is not our concern we have lived lootable pvp for a decade and are used to it in all its forms ;)

back to basics:
Avatars have a weight limitation, Equus have a carried weight limitation.
Antigrav boxes come in different gravity factors and before rocktropian crafters flooded the marked with lux boxes there used to be quite a price gap between the small and big antigravity factors due to the gain that could be accomplished.
When people realized they could just deepstack antigrav containers any limitations fell away and the only one still designing items with limitations (Mindark) seemed to not notice or not know how to enforce the validity of item stats. Suggestions have been made but so far not acted uppon.
Hope remains that game design and coherence comes before special interests (like the motivation to sell off remaining firebirds before fixing bugs that might reduce their perceived market value).
 
Didnt know we already reached the blackmailing level, but i can assure you rage is not our concern we have lived lootable pvp for a decade and are used to it in all its forms ;)

back to basics:
Avatars have a weight limitation, Equus have a carried weight limitation.
Antigrav boxes come in different gravity factors and before rocktropian crafters flooded the marked with lux boxes there used to be quite a price gap between the small and big antigravity factors due to the gain that could be accomplished.
When people realized they could just deepstack antigrav containers any limitations fell away and the only one still designing items with limitations (Mindark) seemed to not notice or not know how to enforce the validity of item stats. Suggestions have been made but so far not acted uppon.
Hope remains that game design and coherence comes before special interests (like the motivation to sell off remaining firebirds before fixing bugs that might reduce their perceived market value).

So when the anti gravity boxes used to be expensive it wasn't an issue, but now that they are cheaper and more accessible it is? :scratch2:

It's a quick fix: Take out the weight restriction on the only ship with a weight restriction :D Let motherships land in planets. let people log out in space, make warp mines a thing again, we could go on... Although the issue was never about boxes, its about the equus xD

Out of all of these however, only one follows the inbuilt guidelines the fullest. Guess which one it is
 
It's a quick fix: Take out the weight restriction on the only ship with a weight restriction :D Let motherships land in planets. let people log out in space, make warp mines a thing again, we could go on... Although the issue was never about boxes, its about the equus xD

Better idea - Don't allow motherships to land on planet - that is not what they were intended for.
Remove anit-grav factor on boxes when entering a warp capable ship -so those can only be used as they were intended.

The issue is not the equus, its an issue of using/abusing in game mechanics to get around the intended use.

And of course if those in glass houses should be throwing stones...
 
Last edited:
Better idea - Don't allow motherships to land on planet - that is not what they were intended for. Remove anit-grav factor on boxes when entering a warp capable ship -so those ships are able to be used only as they were intended.

who the fuck spends 6k on grav boxes just to warp 1335kg of whatever via equus instead of MS? how many decades does it take to have saved the 6k via cheaper warp costs?

just to put into perspective, 1335kg is not even a single stack of chair frame :laugh:
 
I think since there is no gravity in space the anti-grav part of those boxes shouldn't work. However just because there is no weight doesnt mean they have no mass, which is really what the equus limitation should be.
 
I think since there is no gravity in space the anti-grav part of those boxes shouldn't work. However just because there is no weight doesnt mean they have no mass, which is really what the equus limitation should be.

well, actually if you want it to be rather realistic, the limitation for hardcap should be volume while mass only impacts acceleration and deceleration.
 
For the record:
Alukat - selling lux antigrav boxes
Starkiller - flying Equus which was sold under this announcement with antigrav boxes
John - flying mothership which was sold as large transport vessel - please refer to mindarks space guide

Lets continue with the topic after some 'intentions' / 'biases' have been listed.
 
For the record:
Alukat - selling lux antigrav boxes
Starkiller - flying Equus which was sold under this announcement with antigrav boxes
John - flying mothership which was sold as large transport vessel - please refer to mindarks space guide

Lets continue with the topic after some 'intentions' / 'biases' have been listed.

Yup it's what it's all about :D

Same old same old. But yes, let's continue on topic.

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.

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 ;)
 
For the record:
Alukat - selling lux antigrav boxes
Starkiller - flying Equus which was sold under this announcement with antigrav boxes
John - flying mothership which was sold as large transport vessel - please refer to mindarks space guide

Lets continue with the topic after some 'intentions' / 'biases' have been listed.

For the record, despite Alukat crafting a lot of lux antigrav boxes he still uses MS to get lootables to other planets, simply because the boxes offer way too little bang for the buck.
 
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 :).

Cargo missions have zero to do with this thread and are offtopic, nevertheless i have written to mindark trhroughout the years 3 different versions on how they could do cargo missions in a balanced way even including planetside transport missions and planetside vehicles - you wouldnt even need carried weight limit not avatar weight limit for implementation as it could be carried in a completly separate cargo mission slot with its own restrictions (and yes i even suggested weight limitations for motherships and privateers specifically for cargo missions) - so please stay ontopic.

Deepstacking antigrav containers and being able to transport over 1,000kg in an equus that has by design a carried weight limitation of 100kg and a warp limiation of 150kg is bypassing game mechanics.
Please fix @mindark.
 
Cargo missions have zero to do with this thread and are offtopic, nevertheless i have written to mindark trhroughout the years 3 different versions on how they could do cargo missions in a balanced way even including planetside transport missions and planetside vehicles - you wouldnt even need carried weight limit not avatar weight limit for implementation as it could be carried in a completly separate cargo mission slot with its own restrictions (and yes i even suggested weight limitations for motherships and privateers specifically for cargo missions) - so please stay ontopic.

Deepstacking antigrav containers and being able to transport over 1,000kg in an equus that has by design a carried weight limitation of 100kg and a warp limiation of 150kg is bypassing game mechanics.
Please fix @mindark.

Dissecting posts to make it look like something else but here goes whats on topic: (TLDR)

In the end, 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);

Any other issues with space or Equus (as it's been stated before is the true issue on the matter) is totally moot and off topic and totally unrelated.
 
Your #3 is wrong. The in built system on the equus weight limit is bypassed by using those boxes.
 
Your #3 is wrong. The in built system on the equus weight limit is bypassed by using those boxes.

The weight is all there through the use of the anti gravity boxes, It's not bypassing anything, to bypass it it would have to facilitate infinite weight, which is doesn't.
 
bah, just have Planet Partners and Mindark make everything light so it won't matter... If they could make the maze hammer go from 10 kg to 1.something they can do likewise with other overweight crap in game if they get enough support tickets and requests. ;)
 
Your #3 is wrong. The in built system on the equus weight limit is bypassed by using those boxes.

Actually Starkiller is correct.

Perhaps some do not understand the gravity of what an anti-gravity box is for. It reduces weight. There is a weight restriction on the equus. What is difficult to understand here?

This is a feature that is working as intended. Don't like it? Petition to have the anti-gravity boxes removed.
 
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" effectively 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 effectively 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.

After reading through this thread, I was thinking the same. Is the Log-out/secure-warp system still in play for Motherships and Privateers? Did MA address it? Should definitely be looked at if participants still use it.

:beerchug:
 
Actually Starkiller is correct.

Perhaps some do not understand the gravity of what an anti-gravity box is for. It reduces weight. There is a weight restriction on the equus. What is difficult to understand here?

This is a feature that is working as intended. Don't like it? Petition to have the anti-gravity boxes removed.

I guess the drill speed of the yog horror was a 'feature' too until someone found that it could be stacked to a much greater effect with other means. Players didnt like it. And asked Mindark to fix it and they did.
Same thing here - only that less players feel cheated because they think it is a minority that is cheated as opposed to a majority.
If weight issues had been fixed and logout bypass issues been dealt with we would be looking at dozends of shipowners constantly upgrading their spaceships generating mu on ores and for miners having a major impact on the economy as a whole - it wouldnt be a minority issue but infact a majority issue.

When is a bug a bug, when is it ok to do something wrong ? How many players does one have to affect negatively before something becomes an issue ?
 
After reading through this thread, I was thinking the same. Is the Log-out/secure-warp system still in play for Motherships and Privateers? Did MA address it? Should definitely be looked at if participants still use it.

:beerchug:

It is in use and I agree 100% safe logout should be fixed as well.. Give purpose to skilling up upgrading ship. As it is now any new player can pick up a ship off auction and provide "safe warp" out of the gate! No training or experience or reading the manual to understand how space works is even needed!
 
It is in use and I agree 100% safe logout should be fixed as well.. Give purpose to skilling up upgrading ship. As it is now any new player can pick up a ship off auction and provide "safe warp" out of the gate! No training or experience or reading the manual to understand how space works is even needed!

100% agreed, fix stackable transport through logout, as asked many times before - it still however would be nice to ask for it in a separate thread - i think i still have a few such threads out here on the forum that would be happy about a bump ;)
 
Back
Top