Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Beardponderer
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 19:56:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Vanderie How about this, and this will make it extremely simple:
If you are caught via screenshot in a capital or supercap at a non-capital FFA, you are permanently banned from singularity. That would take care of things rather quickly, no? Doesn't matter if you are warping in to help someone who is being attacked by a supercap or not, if you are in a carrier, dreadnaught, supercarrier or titan at a non-capital FFA, you are banned.
This "hands off" approach by CCP is unnecessary. If you permaban from SiSi at the first sight of misconduct, people will more than likely follow the rules very carefully. Don't give slaps on the wrist, throw them out the test server for life and see how many people keep breaking the rules.
♥_♥ Inappropriate signature removed. Zymurgist |
Copine Callmeknau
Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 20:40:00 -
[62]
Originally by: fab24 òWe should strive to make Singularity more like Tranquility, not less. This is because Singularity is primarily a test bed for what eventually is deployed on Tranquility, so conditions on the test server should be as close as possible to the live server.
From CCP Dev Blog on new rules. This is why making a system only for capitals will not be put in place. It also seems that you all forgot about the carriers and dread sitting in ffa2 sniping people. They go here to kill battleships, so stop whining at the SUPER CAPITALS ONLY DOES ****. If CCP ever make a capital only system it will be empty and useless.
Open your stupid eyes, I've cleaned 7 capitals out of ffa2 today, on my own, including a camp of 1 dread and 3 carriers, killing all the small ships warping there.
SiSi combat is nothing like TQ, and that isn't the reason CCP did it anyway, CCP made the change because they cbf taking care of it any more.
You don't understand, we want 2 FFA systems, and the subcap system would have CCP deathstars at every moon with cyno jammers active and no caps on market. gl bringing a sniping dread/triage carrier in there.
This still reflects TQ, I mean combat happens in cyno jammed systems doesn't it?
People would still use the cap ship system, you just make the two FFA system near each other so travel is easy. There are plenty of supercap/cap pilots to shoot, and there would be people taking in BS gangs with carrier support etc.
This would for sure bring more people back to SiSi, more mass tests etc
...oh wait
Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3 |
OverlordY
|
Posted - 2011.05.18 23:54:00 -
[63]
Indeed, bans, should be that, BANS - life time, not suspensions.
The server can do without the rule breakers tbh.
|
Lee Janssen
The Ascended Fleet Intergalactic Exports Group
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 09:55:00 -
[64]
From the looks of it, people miss me in my rag.
I'm guessing i should download SISI again then =) - Damn it, out of duct tape again. |
tobs
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 13:00:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Ssagat Currently sisi is owned by the ones in supercapitals. (DDIFI) There is no reason what so ever to log in, go to an FFA, almost everytime there is 20 supers sitting there instapopping everything. I'm usually not so upset about these things, But I miss the old sisi, where the ffas had a restriction. And was not ruled by a corp rather the. Ccp
No I'm not mad, I'm just slightly crossed
I hereby open/condone this place/event
Tobs Trixi Spokesman
|
Ssagat
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 15:46:00 -
[66]
Originally by: tobs
Originally by: Ssagat Currently sisi is owned by the ones in supercapitals. (DDIFI) There is no reason what so ever to log in, go to an FFA, almost everytime there is 20 supers sitting there instapopping everything. I'm usually not so upset about these things, But I miss the old sisi, where the ffas had a restriction. And was not ruled by a corp rather the. Ccp
No I'm not mad, I'm just slightly crossed
I hereby open/condone this place/event
Tobs Trixi Spokesman
you cant even be called Doomsday ifi anymore.. trixi sounds incredibly homo lol
|
tobs
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 17:31:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Ssagat
Originally by: tobs
Originally by: Ssagat Currently sisi is owned by the ones in supercapitals. (DDIFI) There is no reason what so ever to log in, go to an FFA, almost everytime there is 20 supers sitting there instapopping everything. I'm usually not so upset about these things, But I miss the old sisi, where the ffas had a restriction. And was not ruled by a corp rather the. Ccp
No I'm not mad, I'm just slightly crossed
I hereby open/condone this place/event
Tobs Trixi Spokesman
you cant even be called Doomsday ifi anymore.. trixi sounds incredibly homo lol
so much for the well reasoned debate on 'supercapitals on sisi,' I believe the appropriate rebuttal now is 'no you'
Seriously though if you want to make a thread that slags myself or my corp mates off I'd suggest just doing that rather than covering it in the guise of 'fix these supercaps'
Tobs Trixi (possibly homo sounding according to reliable sources) Spokesman
|
Derp Mcgeeee
|
Posted - 2011.05.19 20:17:00 -
[68]
Originally by: tobs
Originally by: Ssagat
Originally by: tobs
Originally by: Ssagat Currently sisi is owned by the ones in supercapitals. (DDIFI) There is no reason what so ever to log in, go to an FFA, almost everytime there is 20 supers sitting there instapopping everything. I'm usually not so upset about these things, But I miss the old sisi, where the ffas had a restriction. And was not ruled by a corp rather the. Ccp
No I'm not mad, I'm just slightly crossed
I hereby open/condone this place/event
Tobs Trixi Spokesman
you cant even be called Doomsday ifi anymore.. trixi sounds incredibly homo lol
so much for the well reasoned debate on 'supercapitals on sisi,' I believe the appropriate rebuttal now is 'no you'
Seriously though if you want to make a thread that slags myself or my corp mates off I'd suggest just doing that rather than covering it in the guise of 'fix these supercaps'
Tobs Trixi (possibly homo sounding according to reliable sources) Spokesman
Haven't you got a TQ carebear corp to manage?
|
Ethixz
|
Posted - 2011.05.20 20:12:00 -
[69]
Awesome pvpers are awesome pvpers.
Proof
|
Dokschrauba
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.05.21 11:46:00 -
[70]
That pic is made out of pure win.
|
|
Miner 1265
Amarr
|
Posted - 2011.05.21 13:04:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Ethixz Awesome pvpers are awesome pvpers.
Proof
win
|
Fara Naava
|
Posted - 2011.05.21 20:13:00 -
[72]
Uhm, I don't want to sound unfriendly, but actually a lot of people just test their new fits on tq, sisi was intended to test new stuff and it evolved to a ccp-time-consuming-carebear-pvp-ground.
If there were new ship balancings on SiSi, then CCP should bother with your C6 FFA, otherwise it's just a waste of time.
|
Avon
Caldari Versatech Co. RED.OverLord
|
Posted - 2011.05.23 21:09:00 -
[73]
Originally by: CCP Konflikt To effectively monitor rule infractions in the former state of the server rules realistically would have meant that a QA tester would pretty much spend every waking moment watching and banning people. This isn't an effective use of test time,
This is because CCP went soft on the rule enforcement and punishment on Sisi, nothing more. FD- became a mess because the same old faces were allowed to continue with their stupid antics time after time because it was felt that warnings or "soft" punishments would be enough.
I remember when people got banned at their first offence and even though they could protest their innocence on the forums those threads were seen as entertainment for the masses, rather than there being any chance of a reversal. Good times.
Going all the way back to "Fight Club" there was a feeling that being on the test server was a privelege, not a right, and that you followed the rules or got out. It was never there for "epic lulz", and if that is what ccp think its role should be now then I agree there is no reason to police it.
Stupid though - not having an effective, structured, test server where players can methodically test together without becoming the victim of someone elses's "epic lulz" will ultimately deprive CCP of a free QA resource - and that can only be bad for Eve as a whole.
The arguement that players who want to test can go to another system defeats the point of having a declared testing system. It is exactly the opposite of the ideal, where you would have one system where, on the spur of the moment, a group of unaffiliated characters could test an issue.
Sure Sisi probably is "epic lulz" for some people now; I wouldn't know - I have stopped testing anything on Sisi since the rules changed.
Retro sig |
Kieron VonDeux
|
Posted - 2011.05.24 00:35:00 -
[74]
I agree that CCP's lax enforcement of the rules caused the overwhelming flood of rule breakers down the road which eventually swamped them. It is funny that they don't see this, but the roots of this seems to go back a year or two. The telling part is when you suggested someone follow the rules, they responded, "why?, it's not like they are enforced or anything", which was a change from several years ago when I fist started testing on Sisi.
Even a weekly perma-ban of the worst offenders would have meant something, since many of the worse offenders live on and for Sisi.
Personally, I no longer test on Sisi, unless for a spectic reason, outside of the main combat system. The main combat system is simply a joke for anything sub-super cap most of the time. More of a joke than the last days of FD- were.
|
Chinwe Rhei
Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2011.05.25 08:52:00 -
[75]
I understand not wanting to waste QA time what i don't understand is why not use existing things to make the server much better by "hard" rule enforcement.
Like you have Faction Warfare plexes that are ship restricted so what's the problem in setting up some of those for people to use ? And if you want to make a free for all without supercapitals then just cyno-jam a system and don't allow your own move tool to move supers into it ?
If you keep your testers happy you'll get more testing and more bugreports and plus they'll show up for mass tests more.
|
Etil DeLaFuente
|
Posted - 2011.05.25 17:21:00 -
[76]
Originally by: CCP Konflikt we dedicate to making sure that 360,000+ eve subscribers get the quality of game play that they deserve, over ensuring that the ~100-200 persistent Sisi users always have epic lulz.
Just for the obvious, those ~100-200 are not at all part of the 360000 players, right ?
Anyway, i've spent a lot of time on sisi and tend to like it cause it reflects pretty acurately what's happening everyday on TQ : Blob and overkills.
If you want to test a specific fit, try asking in local for an arranged fight. You will get your special fitt ready then get wtfpwn on tq with it because you can't allways choose what you'll be fighting.
tl;dr; SISI is like TQ
|
Comodore John
Gallente Shattered Star Exiles SpaceMonkey's Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.05.25 17:25:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Etil DeLaFuente
Originally by: CCP Konflikt tl;dr; SISI is like TQ
CCP's goal has been reached.
|
Aloe Cloveris
The Greater Goon
|
Posted - 2011.05.26 18:11:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Ie. restricted acceleration gates in FFA system, preventing people bringing oversized ships.
This should be pretty easy to implement, so I don't know why this isn't an actual thing yet. |
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2011.05.26 19:25:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Aloe Cloveris
Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Ie. restricted acceleration gates in FFA system, preventing people bringing oversized ships.
This should be pretty easy to implement, so I don't know why this isn't an actual thing yet.
Because then you won't be able use warpdrive in combat. -- Thanks CCP for cu |
Derp Mcgeeee
|
Posted - 2011.05.27 06:22:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Tonto Auri
Originally by: Aloe Cloveris
Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Ie. restricted acceleration gates in FFA system, preventing people bringing oversized ships.
This should be pretty easy to implement, so I don't know why this isn't an actual thing yet.
Because then you won't be able use warpdrive in combat.
Yes you would....
|
|
Mupdadoodidda Bix Nood
|
Posted - 2011.05.27 09:02:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Derp Mcgeeee
Originally by: Tonto Auri
Originally by: Aloe Cloveris
Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Ie. restricted acceleration gates in FFA system, preventing people bringing oversized ships.
This should be pretty easy to implement, so I don't know why this isn't an actual thing yet.
Because then you won't be able use warpdrive in combat.
Yes you would....
You wouldn't be able to have a billion tactical safes. Although in my eyes, that's a good thing.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |