|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
489
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 09:49:00 -
[1] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:"Hostile bombers in system" "probes out" ~15 minutes later~ "Entire bomber fleet destroyed while setting up." Yeah. Fair and balanced.
What they want (and this is said almost explicitally) is just that; to remove any chance of non consensual interaction and risk in what they think are "their" systems. If they had the option they would make their systems isntanced areas or a separate PVE server.
In their mind "sovreignity" means a system become a private playground, like buyng an host service for their personal web sites.
Thry're a bunch of arrogant noobs: no matter how much effort one puts trying to explaining mechanics and implications, no matter if this means ruining the general game balance only to please them as minorance. No matter how much you try to argument and explain reasons, the answer will be always a never ending forum spam "yes ok but I don't care, I want it removed, is my interest".
|
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
493
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 09:03:00 -
[2] - Quote
StRaWbErRy MuFfInGiRl wrote: As I see it the only way to prevent cloak ships is simple by sovereignty boosts.
Everyone in EVE deal with cloack ships, and they're perfectly fine with it. Insisting on the argument "yes, but in sov 0.0 we're r etarded so we need special mechanics" isn't that great. |
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
493
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 12:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote: You want to force cloaked, active players to remain uncloaked for fifteen minutes for every hour? How on earth is that balanced? That is purely designed to give you an advantage, and to punish those who represent a threat to you.
Still better than that one wanting to force people to mine isotope from the sun to keep their cloacking device running :)
|
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
496
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 09:58:00 -
[4] - Quote
Allanon Bremen wrote: Both of those tell me they spent at least a large part of their time AFK. Therefore I know they were AFK. To deny that knowledge is to deny awareness as the above quote defines.
Guess what? If I'm behind my monitor, or I'm at the bathroom, or eating a sandwitch, or taking a nap... whatever I do in the real world... IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. You can take all the sovreignity you want in a videogame you're not entiteled to know.
As well I don't have any right and any tool to know if you are AFK; an honest mind would say: "this is mutual, even, is balanced".
|
|
|
|