Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1695
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 07:41:00 -
[61] - Quote
There are many players in EVE that might qualify to be called Hard Bears, meaning players that can do industrial activities and not become an easy victim.
They are hard to spot though, as they never make threads like this nor participate in them.
They don't need to. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Lapine Davion
Outer Ring Applied Logistics
286
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 07:42:00 -
[62] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:There are many players in EVE that might qualify to be called Hard Bears, meaning players that can do industrial activities and not become an easy victim. They are hard to spot though, as they never make threads like this nor participate in them. They don't need to.
They might participate in them in order to mock the whiners. I know I do. Don't worry about posting with your main! -áPost with your brain! "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." |
Amanda Holland
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 07:43:00 -
[63] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:Kestrix wrote:All these examples revolve around the current methods of non-consensual PvP. CCP has altered the workings of these after players found ways to obtaine results which CCP had not intended. The fact that 'carbears' as you like to label them brought these 'bugs' to CCP's attention does not mean CCP is trying to wrap them in cotton wool and make Hi-sec a safe and fun place to be, only to bring it into line with what thier (CCP) vision of what hi-sec should be.
As for responce times, insurance payouts ect these have been added/buffed becasue you proved to CCP that thier consequences were not adequate enough.
swapping out ships from an Orca effects the miners as much as it effects the PvP'ers. Now I can't store my Hulk in my Orca if I've been attacked by rats/players.
Ships have been introduced to make travel in low sec and 0.0 a little safer. unfortunately (for you) these ships can opperate in Hi-sec as well.
So you're no longer claiming that no changes have been made, now you're just claiming that CCP changed it because they/care bears wanted high sec/low sec/null sec to be safer? That was kind of my original point, thank you for making it for me.
fixing exploits is bad to you? ah, youre trolling.. kk |
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
865
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 07:55:00 -
[64] - Quote
Amanda Holland wrote:fixing exploits is bad to you? ah, youre trolling.. kk Only two of those changes I mentioned were declared exploits, one of which was in favour of care bears and the decision to declare it an exploit was reversed.
As for being able to warp under GCC, this was known about and used widely prior to miners crying about it on the forums. In fact it used to be possible to continuously warp about to evade GCC for the full 15 minutes timers, CCP chose to keep warping and declare that only evading ship destruction was an exploit, until miners cried about it.
Amanda Holland wrote:the insurance nerf and the CONCORD response time changes are regarded like INSANELY HUGE NERFS yet gankers gor a whole class of ships for them (tier 3 BCs lol) Tier 3 BC without insurance = considerably more expensive than a maelstrom with insurance.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"-á-á-MXZF |
Sigurd Sig Hansen
Hedion University Amarr Empire
79
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 08:08:00 -
[65] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote: As for being able to warp under GCC, this was known about and used widely prior to miners crying about it on the forums. In fact it used to be possible to continuously warp about to evade GCC for the full 15 minutes timers, CCP chose to keep warping and declare that only evading ship destruction was an exploit, until miners cried about it. .
I take it the boomerang exploit is what youre talking about? Funny thing that... they ignored the miners for years UNTIL
A.) a dumbass got on eve-o general, explained in detail HOW to do it and gave all the details for it (he wasnt banned) B.) Goons started planning the Burn Jita idea withe CCP and CCP realized this may keep them from getting killed by CONCORD
hey look links... http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-27-ccp-players-attempt-to-destroy-eve-online-economy-is-f-ing-brilliant
Quote:There was one bug in the game that meant that if they do the things they're going to do, they could have escaped the in-game consequences. So we fixed that bug about three weeks ago. And they went, okay.
Simi Kusoni wrote: Tier 3 BC without insurance = considerably more expensive than a maelstrom with insurance.
Firstly, its really funny how the gankers took the news of the insurance nerf by saying "we never need that insurance anyways" and yeah they should totally change the game cause you cant afford the ship
Mining is the "Deadliest Catch" in this game |
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
867
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 08:23:00 -
[66] - Quote
Lol, rather amusing quote from CCP in that article:
Quote:"There's not a lot of turnaround on ships and goods in Empire. I think it might be healthy if we lose a lot of this industrial power, if they have to go back and save up for their ships again and be a part of the cycle of life everyone else is a part of.
"I don't like complete security, and I do like when a large group of players who live in complete security have that pulled away temporarily. It's going to be healthy." As for the "bookmark escaping agro bug", that doesn't sound like the boomerang CCP, and players, have always referred to the boomerang as... well... the boomerang. Which doesn't involve bookmarks, or evade the consequences, this sounds like something else?
Quote:There was one bug [the 'bookmark escaping agro bug'] in the game that meant that if they do the things they're going to do, they could have escaped the in-game consequences. *The unedited CCP quote. Wonder what it was? ^^ Google search for it just shows this article, and some post on a gaming site where someone else is asking the same question.
Simi Kusoni wrote:Firstly, its really funny how the gankers took the news of the insurance nerf by saying "we never need that insurance anyways" and yeah they should totally change the game cause you cant afford the ship Having to lose every single ship when you engage something, because it's the only way to engage anything effectively in high sec, makes suicide ganking an expensive hobby. Not to mention the fact that it requires enough ships of sufficient size and cost to kill your targets in an alpha strike.
How would you like it if your hulk exploded every time you mined an asteroid? Oh, you got far less ISK from that one cycle than your ship cost? Welcome to suicide ganking.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"-á-á-MXZF |
Tallian Saotome
Fractured Core Fatal Ascension
644
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 08:41:00 -
[67] - Quote
/popcorn
I was gonna post, but I see a couple people are doing a great job of covering it Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom. |
Sigurd Sig Hansen
Hedion University Amarr Empire
79
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 08:50:00 -
[68] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:Lol, rather amusing quote from CCP in that article: Quote:"There's not a lot of turnaround on ships and goods in Empire. I think it might be healthy if we lose a lot of this industrial power, if they have to go back and save up for their ships again and be a part of the cycle of life everyone else is a part of.
"I don't like complete security, and I do like when a large group of players who live in complete security have that pulled away temporarily. It's going to be healthy." As for the "bookmark escaping agro bug", that doesn't sound like the boomerang CCP, and players, have always referred to the boomerang as... well... the boomerang. Which doesn't involve bookmarks, or evade the consequences, this sounds like something else? Quote:There was one bug [the 'bookmark escaping agro bug'] in the game that meant that if they do the things they're going to do, they could have escaped the in-game consequences. *The unedited CCP quote. Wonder what it was? ^^ Google search for it just shows this article, and some post on a gaming site where someone else is asking the same question. Simi Kusoni wrote:Firstly, its really funny how the gankers took the news of the insurance nerf by saying "we never need that insurance anyways" and yeah they should totally change the game cause you cant afford the ship Having to lose every single ship when you engage something, because it's the only way to engage anything effectively in high sec, makes suicide ganking an expensive hobby. Not to mention the fact that it requires enough ships of sufficient size and cost to kill your targets in an alpha strike. How would you like it if your hulk exploded every time you mined an asteroid? Oh, you got far less ISK from that one cycle than your ship cost? Welcome to suicide ganking.
the boomerang wasnt the one that let you kill multiple ships at a time thereby "evading" CONCORD until they caught up to you? Technically as I understand the reason it WAS called a exploit in the first place was cause you evade getting killed the first time. REGARDLESS of if you eventually get killed you were supposed to be killed the first time, not kill, warp, kill, warp, kill warp, kill then get killed by CONCORD. As far as CCP is concerned if you kill 4 ppl you should be getting killed 4 times so by their logic youre "evading" e punishments with the boomerang thing. What OTHER exploit was fixed about 3 weeks ago? I dont remember hearing about one that involved bookmarks do you? Im thinking the guy doing the article was either wrong or the CCP got confused (that are supposedly human and all).
and yes I editted the quote BECAUSE te bookmarks part doesnt make sense, BECAUSE there was no bookmark exploit unless someone can provide me a link to correct me?
Mining is the "Deadliest Catch" in this game |
Sigurd Sig Hansen
Hedion University Amarr Empire
79
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 08:57:00 -
[69] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:Simi Kusoni wrote:Firstly, its really funny how the gankers took the news of the insurance nerf by saying "we never need that insurance anyways" and yeah they should totally change the game cause you cant afford the ship Having to lose every single ship when you engage something, because it's the only way to engage anything effectively in high sec, makes suicide ganking an expensive hobby. Not to mention the fact that it requires enough ships of sufficient size and cost to kill your targets in an alpha strike. How would you like it if your hulk exploded every time you mined an asteroid? Oh, you got far less ISK from that one cycle than your ship cost? Welcome to suicide ganking.
its supposed to be. HTFU as you gankers are do fond of saying
Its called "SUICIDE ganking" for a reason...
please find me the insurance policy that pays out when the insured commits suicide. That was kinda the reason it got removed btw, now cause miners QQed, because it was stupid. IMO they should remove insurance entirely cause I cant believe a insurance company wold back up a policy on a vehicle driven into a war zone. (yes asteroid belts are war zones too, even in high sec). ESPECIALLY war ships.
Mining is the "Deadliest Catch" in this game |
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
869
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 09:44:00 -
[70] - Quote
Sigurd Sig Hansen wrote:the boomerang wasnt the one that let you kill multiple ships at a time thereby "evading" CONCORD until they caught up to you? Technically as I understand the reason it WAS called a exploit in the first place was cause you evade getting killed the first time. (...) What OTHER exploit was fixed about 3 weeks ago? I dont remember hearing about one that involved bookmarks do you? Im thinking the guy doing the article was either wrong or the CCP got confused (that are supposedly human and all).
and yes I editted the quote BECAUSE te bookmarks part doesnt make sense, BECAUSE there was no bookmark exploit unless someone can provide me a link to correct me? Hmm, well the thing is that the boomerang exploit didn't so much evade consequences, which has always been an exploit, as it did delay them.
And what intrigues me is just the specific mention of bookmarks and aggression? Could just be that he messed up on the wording, but it did remind me of this, which was also in the patch three weeks ago:
"New Eden has become a better place by fixing an exploit."
From the patch notes, this was rather cryptically posted along side the boomerang and the pax amarria fixes. I know we're not supposed to discuss exploits unless they're commonly known, and CCP never releases details, but hey, I like knowing how stuff works. And I'm a sucker for curiosity :D
Sigurd Sig Hansen wrote:its supposed to be. HTFU as you gankers are do fond of saying
Its called "SUICIDE ganking" for a reason...
please find me the insurance policy that pays out when the insured commits suicide. That was kinda the reason it got removed btw, now cause miners QQed, because it was stupid. IMO they should remove insurance entirely cause I cant believe a insurance company wold back up a policy on a vehicle driven into a war zone. (yes asteroid belts are war zones too, even in high sec). ESPECIALLY war ships. I'll be honest I always despise the idea of encouraging or discouraging an in game mechanic based on realism, or based on real life logic.
I would agree to insurance payout on more expensive T1 ships receiving a bit of a nerf, but to be honest on the smaller ships it needs to be there to give the newbies a security blanket. While we can afford to lose hundreds of battle cruisers a month if necessary, new players can't replace their ships so easily.
And whilst I am aware that it is called "suicide ganking" there was a time, not long ago, when suicide ganking the majority of ships was (almost) profitable. This is no longer so. Until they fix war dec mechanics that has pretty effectively killed off meaningful high sec PvP.
(Not that suicide ganking is particularly satisfying or "meaningful" PvP anyway.)
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"-á-á-MXZF |
|
Jacob Staffuer
State War Academy Caldari State
87
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 10:48:00 -
[71] - Quote
People disagree with me, but without founded reasons, and thus try to insult me instead. This lends veracity to my idea, and thus pleases me greatly.
Thank you. I will now refer to carebears as "hardbears" and nullbears as "nullsec carebears". |
fgft Athonille
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 10:52:00 -
[72] - Quote
carebears come in many vartieties
dumbbears are the miners. there are way more profitable things for them to be doing but they mine nullbear. nullsec resident fwbear. farms fw lp all day robobear. bots
|
Tallian Saotome
Fractured Core Fatal Ascension
645
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 11:25:00 -
[73] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:People disagree with me, but without founded reasons, and thus try to insult me instead. This lends veracity to my idea, and thus pleases me greatly.
Thank you. I will now refer to carebears as "hardbears" and nullbears as "nullsec carebears".
You do that, Mr Hard Bear. Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom. |
Kestrix
UV Heavy Industries
30
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 11:52:00 -
[74] - Quote
fgft Athonille wrote:carebears come in many vartieties
dumbbears are the miners. there are way more profitable things for them to be doing but they mine nullbear. nullsec resident fwbear. farms fw lp all day robobear. bots
Mining is not an un-profitable enterprise when done correctly. Infact I know quite a few players who's main ISK source is mining and they make alot of ISK (alot by my standards is in the billions)
Simi Kusoni I'll make this as easy as possible for you. Their are four methods of non-consensual combat in hi-sec.
1) War decs 2) Suicide attacks 3) trickery ( making the other peson unwittingly aggress you so you can retaliate) 4) Join thier corp (attacking corp mates does not flag you)
All four of these methods are governed by mechanics set by CCP. It is these mechanics that CCP alters to make things harder/easier more profitbale/less profitable. By changing the mechanics CCP are not reducing the number of methods of non-consensual combat in hi-sec. The Boomerang exploit was closed but suicide attacks can still occure.
If I've missed some please enlighten me. |
Sigurd Sig Hansen
Hedion University Amarr Empire
79
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 11:57:00 -
[75] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:Sigurd Sig Hansen wrote:the boomerang wasnt the one that let you kill multiple ships at a time thereby "evading" CONCORD until they caught up to you? Technically as I understand the reason it WAS called a exploit in the first place was cause you evade getting killed the first time. (...) What OTHER exploit was fixed about 3 weeks ago? I dont remember hearing about one that involved bookmarks do you? Im thinking the guy doing the article was either wrong or the CCP got confused (that are supposedly human and all).
and yes I editted the quote BECAUSE te bookmarks part doesnt make sense, BECAUSE there was no bookmark exploit unless someone can provide me a link to correct me? Hmm, well the thing is that the boomerang exploit didn't so much evade consequences, which has always been an exploit, as it did delay them.
as CCP has since put it, that delay WAS evading. As I said, if you gank someone and then boomerang to three more ganks then get CONCORDED, apparently CCP feels you should have been CONCORDED four times not once.
Sigurd Sig Hansen wrote:its supposed to be. HTFU as you gankers are do fond of saying
Its called "SUICIDE ganking" for a reason...
please find me the insurance policy that pays out when the insured commits suicide. That was kinda the reason it got removed btw, now cause miners QQed, because it was stupid. IMO they should remove insurance entirely cause I cant believe a insurance company wold back up a policy on a vehicle driven into a war zone. (yes asteroid belts are war zones too, even in high sec). ESPECIALLY war ships.
Simi Kusoni wrote: I'll be honest I always despise the idea of encouraging or discouraging an in game mechanic based on realism, or based on real life logic.
Funny I tend to feel the same way about nonsensical things in games Noob and lower ships I dont see a problem with having insurance but cap ships? BSes? BCs? Destroyers? ACTUAL WAR ships? Shouldnt
Quote: I would agree to insurance payout on more expensive T1 ships receiving a bit of a nerf, but to be honest on the smaller ships it needs to be there to give the newbies a security blanket. While we can afford to lose hundreds of battle cruisers a month if necessary, new players can't replace their ships so easily.
And whilst I am aware that it is called "suicide ganking" there was a time, not long ago, when suicide ganking the majority of ships was (almost) profitable.
Yes, they fixed that issue, which is why you dont get money
Mining is the "Deadliest Catch" in this game |
St Sinner
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 12:03:00 -
[76] - Quote
Garnoo wrote:why would they be a "hardbears"? all they do is dying..... its not so hard :)
Haven't you seen Die Hard?
|
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
878
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 12:04:00 -
[77] - Quote
Kestrix wrote:fgft Athonille wrote:carebears come in many vartieties
dumbbears are the miners. there are way more profitable things for them to be doing but they mine nullbear. nullsec resident fwbear. farms fw lp all day robobear. bots
Mining is not an un-profitable enterprise when done correctly. Infact I know quite a few players who's main ISK source is mining and they make alot of ISK (alot by my standards is in the billions) Simi Kusoni I'll make this as easy as possible for you. Their are four methods of non-consensual combat in hi-sec. 1) War decs 2) Suicide attacks 3) trickery ( making the other peson unwittingly aggress you so you can retaliate) 4) Join thier corp (attacking corp mates does not flag you) All four of these methods are governed by mechanics set by CCP. It is these mechanics that CCP alters to make things harder/easier more profitbale/less profitable. By changing the mechanics CCP are not reducing the number of methods of non-consensual combat in hi-sec. The Boomerang exploit was closed but suicide attacks can still occure. I don't think you understand what is meant by forms of PvP, my earlier comment was also not limited to high sec. Hence the nullified t3s and JFs comments.
Some of the common forms of PvP:
Gate camping. Jump Bridge camping. Complex camping. Hunting mission runners, either via war decs or ninja looting/baiting. Suicide ganking miners. Awoxing, and specifically setting up bait corps to kill new recruits. War decs on null sec power blocks. War dec griefing small indie/miner corps. Etc.
There are more, but you get the point. All of these forms of PvP are governed and effected by different mechanics changes, some changes will effect one whilst not effecting others and some changes negatively effect them all.
To be honest, I am guessing from your combat record that you have never really engaged in much PvP, which is fair enough. I don't really kill much myself nowadays either, but please don't be so short sighted as to believe the only styles of PvP are war decs, awoxing and suicide ganking.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"-á-á-MXZF |
Tallian Saotome
Fractured Core Fatal Ascension
645
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 12:11:00 -
[78] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:Kestrix wrote:fgft Athonille wrote:carebears come in many vartieties
dumbbears are the miners. there are way more profitable things for them to be doing but they mine nullbear. nullsec resident fwbear. farms fw lp all day robobear. bots
Mining is not an un-profitable enterprise when done correctly. Infact I know quite a few players who's main ISK source is mining and they make alot of ISK (alot by my standards is in the billions) Simi Kusoni I'll make this as easy as possible for you. Their are four methods of non-consensual combat in hi-sec. 1) War decs 2) Suicide attacks 3) trickery ( making the other peson unwittingly aggress you so you can retaliate) 4) Join thier corp (attacking corp mates does not flag you) All four of these methods are governed by mechanics set by CCP. It is these mechanics that CCP alters to make things harder/easier more profitbale/less profitable. By changing the mechanics CCP are not reducing the number of methods of non-consensual combat in hi-sec. The Boomerang exploit was closed but suicide attacks can still occure. I don't think you understand what is meant by forms of PvP, my earlier comment was also not limited to high sec. Hence the nullified t3s and JFs comments. Some of the common forms of PvP: Gate camping. Jump Bridge camping. Complex camping. Hunting mission runners, either via war decs or ninja looting/baiting. Suicide ganking miners. War decs on null sec power blocks. War dec griefing small indie/miner corps. Etc. There are more, but you get the point. All of these forms of PvP are governed and effected by different mechanics changes, some changes will effect one whilst not effecting others and some changes negatively effect them all. To be honest, I am guessing from your combat record that you have never really engaged in much PvP, which is fair enough. I don't really kill much myself nowadays either, but please don't be so short sighted as to believe the only styles of PvP are war decs, awoxing and suicide ganking. You are both missing quite a few. Short off the top of my head list:
Relisting Market manipulation Ninja mining Flame wars(forum pvp ftw) Taking up all the industry slow you can simply to prevent others from being able to effective do manufacturing/research Stealing people mission loot Stealing peoples drop in deadspace complexes
Thats just from about 10 seconds of thinking.
EVERYTHING you do in EVE is PVP, most of it non-consensual, except for the fact that you consent to it by simply logging in. Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom. |
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
878
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 12:14:00 -
[79] - Quote
How you know when someone has lost an argument: they try to resort to semantics and forget what their original point was.
I'm sure that in the context of my original statement I definitely meant that care bears are killing off market PvP. I mean they just keep nerfing my ability to .01 all your orders into the ground.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"-á-á-MXZF |
FlameGlow
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
57
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 12:15:00 -
[80] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:Sigurd Sig Hansen wrote:its supposed to be. HTFU as you gankers are do fond of saying
Its called "SUICIDE ganking" for a reason...
please find me the insurance policy that pays out when the insured commits suicide. That was kinda the reason it got removed btw, now cause miners QQed, because it was stupid. IMO they should remove insurance entirely cause I cant believe a insurance company wold back up a policy on a vehicle driven into a war zone. (yes asteroid belts are war zones too, even in high sec). ESPECIALLY war ships. I'll be honest I always despise the idea of encouraging or discouraging an in game mechanic based on realism, or based on real life logic. I would agree to insurance payout on more expensive T1 ships receiving a bit of a nerf, but to be honest on the smaller ships it needs to be there to give the newbies a security blanket. While we can afford to lose hundreds of battle cruisers a month if necessary, new players can't replace their ships so easily. And whilst I am aware that it is called "suicide ganking" there was a time, not long ago, when suicide ganking the majority of ships was (almost) profitable. This is no longer so. Until they fix war dec mechanics that has pretty effectively killed off meaningful high sec PvP. (Not that suicide ganking is particularly satisfying or "meaningful" PvP anyway.)
There is no insurance for ganking, but luckily we get 120mil reimbursement per lost tornado from alliance. But don't worry about state of goon finances, after all, all of you sponsored this event by buying T2 ships built with our technetium
|
|
TheBlueMonkey
Natural Progression Dragoons.
146
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 12:18:00 -
[81] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:you have almost no way to defend yourself.
Confirming you totally know how to play eve and are in no way pointless. |
Tallian Saotome
Fractured Core Fatal Ascension
646
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 12:19:00 -
[82] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:How you know when someone has lost an argument: they try to resort to semantics and forget what their original point was.
I'm sure that in the context of my original statement I definitely meant that care bears are killing off market PvP. I mean they just keep nerfing my ability to .01 all your orders into the ground. If that is pointed at me, I'd like to point out that I mostly support your points. The post was simply a demonstration of the fact that they can never escape PVP, be it ships blowing up, or people stealing their stuff, or destroying their profits. Anyone playing EVE is a PVPer, and as such they need to man up and PVP. Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom. |
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
880
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 12:24:00 -
[83] - Quote
Tallian Saotome wrote:Simi Kusoni wrote:How you know when someone has lost an argument: they try to resort to semantics and forget what their original point was.
I'm sure that in the context of my original statement I definitely meant that care bears are killing off market PvP. I mean they just keep nerfing my ability to .01 all your orders into the ground. If that is pointed at me, I'd like to point out that I mostly support your points. The post was simply a demonstration of the fact that they can never escape PVP, be it ships blowing up, or people stealing their stuff, or destroying their profits. Anyone playing EVE is a PVPer, and as such they need to man up and PVP. Hehe, sorry my bad, I was just trying to troll kestrix a little. Didn't realise it was a different person that replied
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"-á-á-MXZF |
Pinstar Colton
New Lunar Republic Special Tactics Squadron
8
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 12:47:00 -
[84] - Quote
I prefer the term "Pony" :D
Still bright and colorful Still prefer friendship and cooperation to fighting.
But made of slightly stronger stuff should you force the issue. I don't make minerals. I just make ore 20% cooler. |
DonHel
Aliastra Gallente Federation
32
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 12:51:00 -
[85] - Quote
Krios Ahzek wrote:Hang out in the ''safe'' space where you are not allowed to shoot first in order to defend yourself. Somehow convince yourself that this makes you hardcore.
oh, like how blowing up[ defenseless ships that cant even fire back is totally hardcore. I want to have your babies |
Krixtal Icefluxor
Bison - Ammatar Thunder Thundering Herd
638
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 12:52:00 -
[86] - Quote
"You think high-sec-carebear cares? High-sec-carebear is craaaaaazy, he don't give a ****. "
"In the end the carebear persists and continues on with their lives and game. You mistake their lack of interest in combat as an inability to know how to defend themselves.
And you far far superior and much braver players scuttle around game mechanics for some kind of weakness. I'm not sure how anyone can arrive at the conclusion that this level of stubborness and resilience is weakness I won't burden you with logic you can't grasp."
- Mass Attack
Just spreadin' the truth. There isn't anything left for you to do to Carebears. -áGo, kill them some more. They're like fungus or bacteria, they won't die and they won't stop. All you have to show for years of organized harassment campaigns against them is ... nothing. |
knobber Jobbler
163
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 13:00:00 -
[87] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:Ganking hi-sec players (miners, mission runners, etc) has become a sport, complete with prizes and private, alliance sponsored insurance payouts for ships lost in the process. The fact is if you're in a Hulk or any type of hauler, you are automatically a target and you have almost no way to defend yourself. There are more ships destroyed in hi-sec on any given day than null-sec and low-sec combined.
For this reason, I am moving to rename "carebears" to "hardbears" and renaming "nullbears" to "carebears".
You have plenty of tools to defend yourself. You just chose not to.
Maybe become a null bear and mine in space you've conquered and protect? Thats to obvious isn't it. |
Diesel47
Warlord General
12
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 13:12:00 -
[88] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:I am a care bear. I live in syndicate.
You high sec scrubs should come up and visit some time if you think you're hard core.
Yeah, shoot em with your ratting drakes. |
The D1ngo
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
21
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 13:43:00 -
[89] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:Simi Kusoni wrote:I am a care bear. I live in syndicate.
You high sec scrubs should come up and visit some time if you think you're hard core. Yeah, shoot em with your ratting drakes.
If you think YOU are hardcore playing any portion of any computer game then may I respectfully suggest you get a life.
You,Syndicate scrub, should try taking a subway, crossing the street, running a 5k or going 1 round in the ring if you think you are hard core.
I know "Eve is Real" for some of you but writing stuff like, "I 'live' (somewhere) in fake space therefore I am a tough guy" is just pathetic.
It's a game...whether you derive enjoyment from mining rocks or mining tears...it's just a game.
P.S. I just watched my girlfriend paint her nails. She used bright red instead of doing a French Manicure! It was sooooo hardcore! I think I may be getting an understanding of where some of you are coming from. Carry on.
|
Tallian Saotome
Fractured Core Fatal Ascension
647
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 13:45:00 -
[90] - Quote
The D1ngo wrote:Diesel47 wrote:Simi Kusoni wrote:I am a care bear. I live in syndicate.
You high sec scrubs should come up and visit some time if you think you're hard core. Yeah, shoot em with your ratting drakes. If you think YOU are hardcore playing any portion of any computer game then may I respectfully suggest you get a life. You,Syndicate scrub, should try taking a subway, crossing the street, running a 5k or going 1 round in the ring if you think you are hard core. I know "Eve is Real" for some of you but writing stuff like, "I 'live' (somewhere) in fake space therefore I am a tough guy" is just pathetic. It's a game...whether you derive enjoyment from mining rocks or mining tears...it's just a game. P.S. I just watched my girlfriend paint her nails. She used bright red instead of doing a French Manicure! It was sooooo hardcore! I think I may be getting an understanding of where some of you are coming from. Carry on. Can someone explain to me how calling someone out for claiming to be hardcore when they are not is claiming to be hardcore yourself? I saw no claims of hardcore, simple pointing out that highseccers who complain about how horrible highsec is on the forums most certainly are not hardcore. Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |