EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2006-09-13 21:03
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-04-07 17:52
  • Number of Posts: 882
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 593

Max Kolonko

Security Status -0.8
  • Caldari Provisions Member since
  • Caldari State Faction

Last 20 Posts

  • Monthly Economic Report - February 2016 in EVE Information Center

    As a R trainee I would love to get my hands on Your R scripts that generated the graphs.

  • Dev blog: Overlays, ISK Buyer Amnesty and Account Security in EVE Information Center

    Praal wrote:
    Thank you for your answers! A few follow-ups


    1. One part of multiboxing window management is often removing the window border of a client (borderless window). Is this allowed as window management or banned as a modification of the client?

    2. Can you confirm if the non-gameplay uses of broadcasting specifically allowed In this dev post (https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=387571) are still allowed now?

    3. Is your detection system able to differentiate between the availability / use of forbidden practices on the system (for other apps / games) and their use with the EVE client. For example:

      • I have ISBoxer. I use it for window management only with EVE. I use it for window management and broadcasting with EverQuest (not at the same time). Are you able to recognize that my broadcasting config applies to a different game and the EVE client is not receiving / sending broadcasts?
      • I have AutoHotkey and use it so speed-up certain work-related taks. If I have EVE running (but not being the focus window) and I use a hotkey which sends multiple keystrokes to a non-EVE app (say a telnet client), are you able to recognize that the 1-press-many-actions that happened did not involve the EVE client?




    CCP does not minitor app You run, they just see keystrokes send to client faster than humanly possible, over and over and ban :)

  • Dev blog: Overlays, ISK Buyer Amnesty and Account Security in EVE Information Center

    Annexe wrote:
    Do these new policies include key macros? ie: using 1 key to trigger multiple keys.

    And how does CCP intend on enforcing these policies without being able to monitor the users actions first hand?








    there are no new policies, only clarification.

    key macro (multiple action via single key) is a no-no since like forever

    As for the second question CCP will never tell You how they detection software works, but do read on anomalies detection a little.

  • Dev blog: The EVE Online API Challenge in EVE Information Center

    Lucas Kell wrote:
    CCP Tellus wrote:
    Lucas Kell wrote:
    While I was originally planning on entering into this, I'm afraid I've decided against developing a third party application. A CCP dev blog posted today has explained that third party applications that can be used to provide an unfair advantage over players not using the application can result in bans.

    That dev blog was explicitly referring to programs that manipulate the EVE client itself into allowing you to see and do things that you wouldn't otherwise be able to do, in the client.

    You are always free to use data gathered from CREST, XML API, SDE, and other services we offer, in a way you see fit. We are offering these services because we want you to use them and take advantage of the possibilities they offer.

    We are continuously improving and adding new functionality to CREST, the XML API, and the SDE all the time. We love seeing new and exciting third-party applications! And we want to encourage you all to make more of them. We are holding the API challenge to help foster these desires.

    You may be wondering, how we would we react should you discover a way to take advantage of information provided by our third-party services to achieve what we would consider "unfair". We have in the past changed game mechanics to cater around new usages of our APIs in order to level the playing field. We have simply removed endpoints from our APIs in the past as well. These are examples of peaceful resolutions to "unfair" use of our APIs.

    We stand nothing to gain by excommunicating players.

    Hope these resolve some of your concerns.

    Thanks!
    Thanks. I appreciate the reply, however it doesn't really reosolve the concerns. Up until now, there's been clear guidance on the use of EVE-O preview, a program writing with input from a CCP dev that's always been allowed, and now seems to fall under the unfair part. Many applications grant an obvious unfair advantage even if they don't directly interact with the client UI, and the bit that worries me about using CREST and the API to build an application is this:
    Quote:
    Please be aware of the fact that we do a lot of data analysis which grants us insight into behavior patterns and allows us to detect anomalies. In a lot of cases we do not need to know what you do on the client side because looking at the behavior in our very detailed event logs on the server side allows us to see if you have/had an unfair advantage over anybody else including the game environment. We don’t know all the tools out there and what they do exactly - and frankly we don’t care. If you get banned, then this is because the results of what you did and how you potentially gained from it manifested in our server-side logs.
    This is so broad that I 'd be concerned about getting caught up in it, and in all honesty I'd rather play it safe and simply not be involved in anything that might one day be considered an unfair advantage.


    This is really simple for me: does your program modify client? If no then you have nothing to worry about. If yes then: does your program does anything other than displaying simple, non-client stuff like ts/mumble/ventrilo overlay? If no you are safe. If yes then you enter gray area.

    Yes, eve preview became gray area right now, and would be great if ccp gave clear response but it was in the same grayish area before along with ts overlay. And now is innocent victim of otherwise great change for all players.

    Dont try to spin it into more than it is, cause its not working.

  • Hi Resolution Texture Pack - Show Your Support!!! in EVE Communication Center

    Keris Bilah wrote:
    CCP Darwin wrote:


    Delivering higher-resolution textures isn't off the table, it's just something we prioritized below other projects we could take on that we felt would bring more visual value (including a more procedural approach.)


    I am very intrigued by any mention of procedural graphics generation, could you elaborate on possible applications. Are we talking about creating textures or more than just this, cos I can think of a great deal of PvE content that might benefit from a wave of some kind of procedural magic wand?

    Anyway CCP Darwin it's good of you to keep in touch with the players the way you do, cheers!


    You do realize we are talking about procedural graphics and not procedural content in PVE? Just asking that we are on the same page - dont take it as any form off offense, I just had experience with people mixing stuff like that.

    If we are on the same page - can You elaborate? apart from obviously having preatier looking stuff when zooming in what would you see as improvement in this area?

  • Hi Resolution Texture Pack - Show Your Support!!! in EVE Communication Center

    Freelancer117 wrote:
    CCP Games famous soon™, after 3 years still no iteration what their customers expressed what they really want Roll


    Players: We want hi-res textures!!!!

    CCP: We tested it with graphics team and there was very little gain in visual. We are looking at different approaches to have better looking ships

    Players: ... but...but... hi res textures :(

  • CSM X - Summit II in Council of Stellar Management

    Steve Ronuken wrote:
    Max Kolonko wrote:
    Minutes... when?



    They'll be a while. But not a Dolan while.


    Got to spoiled with last two summits I guess, with minutes going live almost right after summit day was over :)

  • CSM X - Summit II in Council of Stellar Management

    Minutes... when?

  • Proposed Changes to the Static Data Export (SDE) in EVE Technology and Research Center

    As long as some wizard like steve will provide his service of converting them to something old dog like me can understand I'm fine :)

  • My Response to Force Auxiliary and Fighter Skillbooks - Now rant-Free! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I fully agree with op. I have all four races carriers trained ony two chars. Most too 4. Sone to 5. Both chars triage 5 fighters 5. I have tons of skilling ahead of me to be back in place i was before the change will hit.

    as a paying customer (i mean, someone paid for my plexes) this only means that ccp is going for a cash grab on me. When citadel expansion hit i will have my lawyer (i dont have a lawyer) write me some nice petition.

  • [March] Heavy Stasis Grapplers in EVE Technology and Research Center

    EvilweaselFinance wrote:
    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    Hey folks. After hearing your feedback we've decided to keep officer webs in the standard stasis webifier category rather than converting them into grapplers. We'll leave the officer slots for these new modules open for now, with the option of adding new officer grapplers down the line if the interest is high enough.

    Thanks for the feedback so far and keep it coming!

    Why can't you just introduce the proposed officer grapplers, but without converting existing ones? What's the rationale behind only one of them having officer mods?


    Effort. Easier to change item than to add new, add it to relevant market groups, add it to loot tables of relevant oficers. Etc...

  • [March] Heavy Stasis Grapplers in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Grath Telkin wrote:
    Max Kolonko wrote:
    Grath Telkin wrote:
    Max Kolonko wrote:
    So overheated t2 version at 10km have (assuming linear change in power) around 60% web power.

    So basically You want to stay at >10km and its weaker web and only when he is overheating. After few cycles he will have to turn off overheating and web power falls to little over 40%


    Incorrect, heat doesn't add strength it adds range which will kind of do what you describe, just not with as much shift in power as you seem to think, however at 10km its strength should be just under 50% but with a two second cycle time and the ability to get stronger as you get closer.

    So say you get an overheated scram on a guy and throw your deep in fall off grappler on him you can now begin to approach him and as you get closer he'll get webbed harder and harder. In the mean time its got a 2 second cycle time so if you're good at mod management you can probably cycle between targets slowing frigates in scram range for your drones to get on and cycling back onto the primary without him really ever noticing he was unwebbed.



    at 4km (overheated) You have full 85% streanght. At +10 falloff you get 42,5%

    So at 10km while overheated you have around 60% (maybe little less - at 9 you have 63,75%)) but once OH ends You get much farther into falloff teritory so it drops to 45%-ish


    That is exactly what i said, thanks for putting it in shorter words


    You started Your sentence claiming I was incorrect, so thanks for confirming I was right from the start.

  • [March] Heavy Stasis Grapplers in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Grath Telkin wrote:
    Max Kolonko wrote:
    So overheated t2 version at 10km have (assuming linear change in power) around 60% web power.

    So basically You want to stay at >10km and its weaker web and only when he is overheating. After few cycles he will have to turn off overheating and web power falls to little over 40%


    Incorrect, heat doesn't add strength it adds range which will kind of do what you describe, just not with as much shift in power as you seem to think, however at 10km its strength should be just under 50% but with a two second cycle time and the ability to get stronger as you get closer.

    So say you get an overheated scram on a guy and throw your deep in fall off grappler on him you can now begin to approach him and as you get closer he'll get webbed harder and harder. In the mean time its got a 2 second cycle time so if you're good at mod management you can probably cycle between targets slowing frigates in scram range for your drones to get on and cycling back onto the primary without him really ever noticing he was unwebbed.



    at 4km (overheated) You have full 85% streanght. At +10 falloff you get 42,5%

    So at 10km while overheated you have around 60% (maybe little less - at 9 you have 63,75%) but once OH ends You get much farther into falloff teritory so it drops to 45%-ish territory.

  • [March] Heavy Stasis Grapplers in EVE Technology and Research Center

    So overheated t2 version at 10km have (assuming linear change in power) around 60% web power.

    So basically You want to stay at >10km and its weaker web and only when he is overheating. After few cycles he will have to turn off overheating and web power falls to little over 40%

  • [Quality of Life change] Allow adjusting price of already set contract in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Title says it all.

    Once You set up a contract (usually item exchange contract) if You want to change how much You want to get or pay for something You have to scrap the contract and put up a new one.

    As someone who creates some amount of the on regular basis it would really help to be able to do that.

    Ofc this opens up "0,01 isk" games with contracts but compared to market this is relatively benign with contracts.

    Am mount of work that have to be done to fix a contract after price moved far enough that You no longer can hope to sell something is considerable (especially if that something is group of items and You deal in huge inventories).


    CCP please consider making such change.

  • Skill Trading on Singularity (28.1.2016) in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Please allow removal of planetary skills at some point. I understand why they are not removable but please tell me you will work to make it happen

  • Dev blog: Skill trading in New Eden in EVE Information Center

    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
    Nana Skalski wrote:
    CCP, when do you plan to ban character selling?

    I presume character name change service is not talked about anywhere, because we all know why?


    Never character selling costs plex and so gives them money


    They will now get money from extractors, sooo....

  • CREST changes coming to Sisi in EVE Technology and Research Center

    As for location endpoint, are You planning to fill it with remaining information current headers provide? Like shipname / ship type / ship id for example?

    HTTP_EVE_SHIPID - This header will contain the users ship id
    HTTP_EVE_SHIPNAME - This header will contain the users ship name
    HTTP_EVE_SHIPTYPEID - This header will contain the users ship type id
    HTTP_EVE_SHIPTYPENAME - This header will contain the users ship type nam
    HTTP_EVE_STATIONID - This header will contain the unique identifier number assigned to the station at which the user’s character is presently located. If the character is in space, or otherwise not in a station, this header will not be present. *Note* This header does not appear to be used.
    HTTP_EVE_STATIONNAME - This header will contain the name of the station in which the end user’s character is presently located. If the character is in space, or otherwise not at a station, this header will be set to "None".

    the rest of headers is not important or obtainable differently with info already provided (like corp, system name, constelation name, alliance, etc)

  • January Features now live on Singularity in EVE Technology and Research Center

    http://community.eveonline.com/news/patch-notes/patch-notes-for-january-2016-release?_ga=1.251852491.379354255.1452002709

    its here, and almost nothing is there. Come to think about it - its release after Christmas so nothing major could be worked with most of crew on holidays :)

    We have to wait for february to get something more concreete I guess :/

  • Feedback for the update to the "buff bar" in your Ship HUD. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    ok, first issue: Remote Armor Repair icon is not working

    guardian repping and capping - http://c2n.me/3syKmBY

    only cap icon showing on repped ship - http://c2n.me/3syKpPP

    screen shows on e module activated but i had full rack of hi slot active at the same time with the same effect.

    Also tested only repping without capping and no icon was showed.


    As for the icons itself, the contrast is to weak imho. If you look at that icon closely You can see what it is, but with multiple things happening at the screan at the same time it might be not to easly distinguishable between diffrent for of ewar/buff


    Off to test diffrent effects and more effects at the same time :)

Forum Signature