Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Carth Oansi
|
Posted - 2011.01.30 20:44:00 -
[31]
Oh yah and BF's... seems all the gangs are too stupid to see this part of it, but the BF's arent mentioned in the system rules either, just on the beacons, meaning theyre considered "guidlines" as well... We'll see how long it takes the idiots to find that out especially now that I've posted it, and we'll see how CCP responds to unconsensual combat in the BF's... but really its the same with the FFA situation... Never mentioned in the rules...
|
Avon
Caldari Versatech Co. RED.OverLord
|
Posted - 2011.01.30 21:54:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Avon on 30/01/2011 21:54:42
Originally by: Carth Oansi Oh yah and BF's... seems all the gangs are too stupid to see this part of it, but the BF's arent mentioned in the system rules either, just on the beacons, meaning theyre considered "guidlines" as well... We'll see how long it takes the idiots to find that out especially now that I've posted it, and we'll see how CCP responds to unconsensual combat in the BF's... but really its the same with the FFA situation... Never mentioned in the rules...
The rules state that the only place non-consensual combat can take place is at FFA beacons in FD-, so attacking at BFs is against the rules.
Originally by: The Rules 3) Combat by consent only, except at FFA beacons.
Retro sig |
Amberlamps
|
Posted - 2011.01.31 13:04:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Amberlamps on 31/01/2011 13:06:07 Oh did we hit the jackpot with that forum post though :D.
However capitals are still restricted to FFA2.
I'm glad this "guideline" issue has been cleared up as sometimes we need something better than just another cruiser to take out some of these alliance tournament ships. I really don't see why they seeded them but not rattlesnakes.
FFA beacons were never fair anyway and hopefully CCP will change it to two systems for testing rather than the main hub being FD-MLJ, perhaps one system for industry/PI and real testing and the other one for pew pew with clearer rules.
Edit: I got shot on station the other day and then the ganker continued to pop people undocking, I messaged a CCP character asking for justice and he was literally sitting a mere 100km away in his frigate. In response I was told "Why can't we all just play nicely" he then said "Oh he's docked now" and gave him a "warning". To me that says I can go on a rampage until I get reported, I get reported once I get a warning and then I can't station fight but until then it's ok.
So CCP be clear on your rules, if your own developers/employees aren't willing to enforce the rules then why should many people bother "testing" by them.
|
Snowmann
|
Posted - 2011.01.31 19:44:00 -
[34]
CCP enforcing their rules on test in not so different from some 3rd-world countries enforcing their traffic laws.
They should change it from Sisi "rules" to Sisi "guidelines" to clear the confusion.
And I do like the multiple system idea better. Maybe one system for each FFA that exists now.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |