Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
4975
|
Posted - 2013.12.18 23:02:00 -
[31] - Quote
I would suggest you strengthen your case by posting statistics of how many ships have been lost due to this horrific behavior. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Pirate Nation.
212
|
Posted - 2013.12.18 23:14:00 -
[32] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:I would suggest you strengthen your case by posting statistics of how many subs have been lost due to this horrific behavior.
Does that sound better, but I could be saying submarines? If you do not want LOCAL go to WH space,-áand those people who think that WH space is like 0.0 but without local,-álight a cyno and try jumping to it.-á-á There is a structural issue with Eve, based on accounts with no link, vast reserves of ISK-áand plex, which makes it too easy to metagame the destruction of small alliances. |
Xavier Higdon
Wolfbane Hauler Inc
233
|
Posted - 2013.12.18 23:23:00 -
[33] - Quote
Wait, the New Order bumps miners? I thought they only collected pics of dudes wearing mayo. Wolfbane Hauler Inc Looking For Combat And Industrial Pilots |
Praxis Ginimic
Vessels of the Line Bask of Fail
596
|
Posted - 2013.12.18 23:35:00 -
[34] - Quote
If you really want to take a stand then start ganking miner bumpers.
It takes about a month to train a competent ganknado pilot from scratch. Convince a group of miners to train alts for this then put the bumpers on your watch list and run locates on them. Send out a scout for a good warp in point then destroy the bumpers.
These guys use expensive ships for maximum effect and because they aren't in danger of Concordokken. You might even be able to make some isk by charging for your protection. The really ironic thing is that all the information that you need in order to be good at this can be found on minerbumping.com
Now go have fun instead of paying ridiculous whine threads that will never get you anywhere.
Edited for reasons you will never truly understand |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5317
|
Posted - 2013.12.18 23:35:00 -
[35] - Quote
Praxis Ginimic wrote:If you really want to take a stand then start ganking miner bumpers.
It takes about a month to train a competent ganknado pilot from scratch. Convince a group of miners to train alts for this then put the bumpers pin your watch list and run locates on them. Send out a scout for a good warp in point then destroy the bumpers.
These guys use expensive ships for maximum effect and because they aren't in danger of Concordokken. You might even be able to make some isk by charging for your protection. The really ironic thing is that all the information that you need in order to be good at this can be found on minerbumping.com
Nite go have fun instead of paying ridiculous whine threads that will never get you anywhere. So you say, but soon CCP will give them the mining barge anchoring module they asked for... soon (tm) There are no goons. The goons; 0.0 dream is over.
Progodlegend said the goal of N3 is to destroy Goonswarm Federation, but in reality NCdot is in Fountain due to the fact it is virtually the last place there is action. ~NC., Fountain 2013 |
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
NEW ORDER DEATH DEALERS CODE.
81
|
Posted - 2013.12.18 23:51:00 -
[36] - Quote
Olivia shy wrote: 1. High sec mining is a non combative or a non- aggressive roll in the game thus leaving the miner vulnerable to aggressive behavior by others looking to make isk from the weaker disadvantaged mining barge . Um, yes.
Olivia shy wrote:2. Low sec and Null Sec is a place for more experienced players to play in a more aggressive environment. Thus bumping should be allowed in such areas because the stakes and pay are higher for the better ores . Why are low and null for "more experienced players". I haven't seen evidence of this anywhere. Some of my friends jumped into low sec within their first week of play.
Olivia shy wrote: 3. Any one that is new to the game and decides that mining is what they want to do as a career path in the game could become overwhelmed and frustrated due to High Sec Bumping, this could lead to them not wanting to continue down this path. If this is the case, one of two things can happen from that point. a: The new miner would shift from that path and decide to train a new path and not go back to mining because they think mining is dumb and not return to the profession thus creating a shortage of miners to produce the minerals needed to keep the market moving in a positive direction. b: Second if the new miner experiences this kind of action after coming out of the tutorial gate he/she may become frustrated with the game and decide that this game is not for them and decide not to play anymore, with that said. The financial impact on CCP for the loss of potential subscribers could be a described as form of Extortion. What about my ability to choose my own career path? Bumping and ganking will never be lucrative, but it can pay for itself and its a choice I have made to be involved in it. Should I complain and quit when I fail a gank and lose my ship for nothing? Obviously not. I should learn from it and improve in the future. I expect the same from any miner also. Mining is not for everyone, but eve is a game with harsh punishments for failure. Pick up and move on (and maybe buy a permit if your really cool. *hint hint wink wink*) The NO very rarely ganks ventures because its not cost effective, so the majority of people we gank have been playing for at least a few weeks.
Olivia shy wrote: With this being said all this can be avoided by simple change of rules preventing any person, corporation or Alliance in the game that decide to put forth any code that has been created by anyone other than CCP should not be permitted in the High sec systems for a positive future of progression and development of the game with such a rule would uphold the Values, Principles, and Integrity of CCP. How would banning player driven content changes at all benefit eve? Eve has made its name by actively encouraging non-consentual pvp, extortion, scamming, corp theft, awoxing, and other activities (not that the new order is involved in any of these except for pvp). You also completely fail to define what a code is in this run-on sentence, and fail to acknowledge that the new order is the most positive force in high sec ever. (Admittedly Eve Uni is a close second) If players don't define how eve is played, then who does? I hate to disagree with you,-ábut there is nothing subjective about "boring" in connection to "mining". -á-á-á-á -- Solstice Project's Alt |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5318
|
Posted - 2013.12.18 23:54:00 -
[37] - Quote
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:Olivia shy wrote: 1. High sec mining is a non combative or a non- aggressive roll in the game thus leaving the miner vulnerable to aggressive behavior by others looking to make isk from the weaker disadvantaged mining barge . Um, yes. Yep.
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:Olivia shy wrote:2. Low sec and Null Sec is a place for more experienced players to play in a more aggressive environment. Thus bumping should be allowed in such areas because the stakes and pay are higher for the better ores . Why are low and null for "more experienced players". I haven't seen evidence of this anywhere. Some of my friends jumped into low sec within their first week of play. You gotta have 30 million SP MINIMUM to join the forces of Vince Draken
There are no goons. The goons; 0.0 dream is over.
Progodlegend said the goal of N3 is to destroy Goonswarm Federation, but in reality NCdot is in Fountain due to the fact it is virtually the last place there is action. ~NC., Fountain 2013 |
Eryn Velasquez
53
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 14:56:00 -
[38] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Eryn Velasquez wrote:This is neither a penalty, nor it's a risc - just a simple calculation.
Please enlighten me. A simple calculation of what, since no risk is involved apparently. If it's a calculation of what you stand to lose versus what will be gained (tears, loot, a post on minerbumping, etc.) then that's a risk v reward calculation and in terms of ISK values is a simple calculation, but definitely involving risk. Otherwise, if you are suggesting no risk involved, then what penalty does your carebearing ways want to see. The penalty is already there. 100% chance of loss of ship and, since you are also criminal at the time, anyone else could also pod you too (also another risk).
My given answer to this sentence was perfect:
Quote:100% chance of being visited by Concord is a pretty extreme penalty.
If you have no chance to avoid your shiploss, there is no risc. And a penalty it would be, if you, in general, lose more than you gain. The minimal risc to get podded or to lose the loot is so small, that many people are ganking. If there were real riscs the majority of gankers would quit this "profession". GÇ£A man's freedom consists in his being able to do whatever he wills, but that he should not, by any human power, be forced to do what is against his will.GÇ¥-áGÇò Jean-Jacques Rousseau-á |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18046
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 15:11:00 -
[39] - Quote
Eryn Velasquez wrote:If you have no chance to avoid your shiploss, there is no risc. And a penalty it would be, if you, in general, lose more than you gain. If you have no chance to avoid a loss, the risk is total. Unless you're suggesting that they should GÇ£introduceGÇ¥ some risk by making CONCORD only appear 10% of the time rather than 100%.
And it's a penalty regardless of the net result. A loss is a loss is a loss.
Quote:The minimal risc to get podded or to lose the loot is so small, that many people are ganking. Really? How many? It seems an exceedingly rare occurrence and even rarer profession these days due to the inordinate penalties, risks, and costs involved.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Hevymetal
POT Corp Semper Ardens Alliance
169
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 15:11:00 -
[40] - Quote
I can't wait till CCP recodes collision mechanics and people's Rifters start going SPLAT on the side of Mackinaws and Freighters. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18046
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 15:24:00 -
[41] - Quote
Hevymetal wrote:I can't wait till CCP recodes collision mechanics and people's Rifters start going SPLAT on the side of Mackinaws and Freighters. GǪor, more accurately, mackinaws and freighters go splat against battleships and gates. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Ioci
Bad Girl Posse Somethin Awfull Forums
471
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 15:36:00 -
[42] - Quote
CCP, A cerberus is humping my leg :( R.I.P. Vile Rat |
Eryn Velasquez
53
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 15:40:00 -
[43] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Eryn Velasquez wrote:If you have no chance to avoid your shiploss, there is no risc. And a penalty it would be, if you, in general, lose more than you gain. If you have no chance to avoid a loss, the risk is total. Unless you're suggesting that they should GÇ£introduceGÇ¥ some risk by making CONCORD only appear 10% of the time rather than 100%. And it's a penalty regardless of the net result. A loss is a loss is a loss.
You have a perfect chance to avoid the loss - don't gank. In case you do, you accepted the loss, so there is no risc.
I really would like to have a mechanic, which would a ganker allow to escape. But in case he get's caught, the penalty should be high - i.e. the loss of the victim plus the same amount as fine.
Tippia wrote:Quote:The minimal risc to get podded or to lose the loot is so small, that many people are ganking. Really? How many? It seems an exceedingly rare occurrence and even rarer profession these days due to the inordinate penalties, risks, and costs involved.
I have no problem with gankers/ganking - as you see, i would like to give them a chance to survive. The momentary solution for this "profession" is imho boring. GÇ£A man's freedom consists in his being able to do whatever he wills, but that he should not, by any human power, be forced to do what is against his will.GÇ¥-áGÇò Jean-Jacques Rousseau-á |
|
ISD LackOfFaith
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
766
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 15:45:00 -
[44] - Quote
Thread has been moved to Features & Ideas Discussion.
In addition, please note the GM Response on Bumping, arrived to on the 29th of January, 2013. Most notably:
GM Karidor wrote: CCP considers the act of bumping a normal game mechanic, and does not class the bumping of another playerGÇÖs ship as an exploit. However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis.
If you believe you are dealing with a case of harassment, please file a support ticket. ISD LackOfFaith Lieutenant Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department @ISD_LackOfFaith on Twitter |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18046
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 15:45:00 -
[45] - Quote
Eryn Velasquez wrote:You have a perfect chance to avoid the loss - don't gank. In case you do, you accepted the loss, so there is no risc. The risk doesn't go away just because you accept it, nor does it get any lower. It is still a total risk.
Quote:I really would like to have a mechanic, which would a ganker allow to escape. But in case he get's caught, the penalty should be high - i.e. the loss of the victim plus the same amount as fine. That's called ISK tanking and it is an in every way completely and utterly idiotic idea. So no. The solution where the ganker risks losing everything for some gain that may or may not be higher than what he lost achieves the same thing without being stupid.
Quote:I have no problem with gankers/ganking - as you see, i would like to give them a chance to survive. The momentary solution for this "profession" is imho boring. Solution to what? Also, you didn't answer the question: how many? Or did you mean to say GÇ£so very very fewGÇ¥ and miss all the relevant keys? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Mythrandier
Spacelane Salvage
248
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 15:54:00 -
[46] - Quote
Praxis Ginimic wrote:If you really want to take a stand then start ganking miner bumpers.
It takes about a month to train a competent ganknado pilot from scratch. Convince a group of miners to train alts for this then put the bumpers on your watch list and run locates on them. Send out a scout for a good warp in point then destroy the bumpers.
These guys use expensive ships for maximum effect and because they aren't in danger of Concordokken. You might even be able to make some isk by charging for your protection. The really ironic thing is that all the information that you need in order to be good at this can be found on minerbumping.com
Now go have fun instead of paying ridiculous whine threads that will never get you anywhere.
Edited for reasons you will never truly understand
You see, the issue here is that would involve actual ~effort~
The avoidance of effort being the entire premise of the OP somehow I just can't see this happening.
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." --á D. Adams. |
Don Pera Saissore
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 16:35:00 -
[47] - Quote
I got bumped.
It was frustrating for me because i like most other victims was just a month old. I couldn't fly a tech 2 miner and i couldn't fit tech 2 tank.
It's easy to say that i have the same means as them but that is not true. At that point i was still learning the basics, i used the free time while mining to read about the game mechanics. When i was bumped i didn't even see what was happening because i was still struggling with the overview.
This is my main problem with miner bumping, you guys are extorting players who are still learning how this game works.
EDIT: I just realized bumping means colliding with the ship and forcing it to move out of range of the miner. That never happened to me i was simply ganked and then asked for protection money. |
Nerath Naaris
Pink Winged Unicorns for Peace Love and Anarchy
677
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 16:44:00 -
[48] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Praxis Ginimic wrote:If you really want to take a stand then start ganking miner bumpers.
It takes about a month to train a competent ganknado pilot from scratch. Convince a group of miners to train alts for this then put the bumpers pin your watch list and run locates on them. Send out a scout for a good warp in point then destroy the bumpers.
These guys use expensive ships for maximum effect and because they aren't in danger of Concordokken. You might even be able to make some isk by charging for your protection. The really ironic thing is that all the information that you need in order to be good at this can be found on minerbumping.com
Nite go have fun instead of paying ridiculous whine threads that will never get you anywhere. So you say, but soon CCP will give them the mining barge anchoring module they asked for... soon (tm)
Only if that one is a med slot module and thus can-¦t interfere with a maximum yield fitting....
Forum-unbanned since 2011.10.20.
Need to advertise your Corp or service? Look no further, this space is now for rent!
|
Eryn Velasquez
53
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 16:51:00 -
[49] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Eryn Velasquez wrote:You have a perfect chance to avoid the loss - don't gank. In case you do, you accepted the loss, so there is no risc. The risk doesn't go away just because you accept it, nor does it get any lower. It is still a total risk.
That has nothing to do with the term "risc" - a risc is always accompanied by uncertainty.
GÇ£A man's freedom consists in his being able to do whatever he wills, but that he should not, by any human power, be forced to do what is against his will.GÇ¥-áGÇò Jean-Jacques Rousseau-á |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18059
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 17:08:00 -
[50] - Quote
Eryn Velasquez wrote:That has nothing to do with the term "risc" - a risc is always accompanied by uncertainty. No, a RISC is always accompanied by a reduced instruction set.
What I said has everything to do with risk, and especially with risk perception. The fact remains: accepting a risk doesn't remove it. Accepting a risk just means you can start taking it into account in your decisions. Your problem is that you're confusing GÇ£riskGÇ¥ with GÇ£probabilityGÇ¥ when what risk actually is is the effect of probability, not the probability itself. A 100% probability does not remove the risk GÇö it just creates a very high effect. In other words, the risk is total.
Again, if you want to argue the incorrect notion that 100% probability means no risk and that this is somehow a problem, then you must also agree that CONCORD should only have a 10%GǪ hell, let's say 1% chance of appearing after a gank. After all, that has (somehow) created infinitely more risk than when the probability is 100%. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2374
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 17:39:00 -
[51] - Quote
Isn't there a thread in Crime & Punishment where all discussions of miner bumping are to take place? Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2374
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 17:41:00 -
[52] - Quote
ISD LackOfFaith wrote:Thread has been moved to Features & Ideas Discussion. In addition, please note the GM Response on Bumping, arrived to on the 29th of January 2013, after many a discussion and threadnaught about bumping hisec miners. Most notably: GM Karidor wrote: CCP considers the act of bumping a normal game mechanic, and does not class the bumping of another playerGÇÖs ship as an exploit. However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis.
If you believe you are dealing with a case of harassment, please file a support ticket.
Why yes there is a thread on miner bumping in Crime & Punishment with this interesting bit:
Quote:This thread will be left open for now, and all discussion regarding bumping will be diverted here.
ISD can't even follow their own rules. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Eryn Velasquez
53
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 17:51:00 -
[53] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Eryn Velasquez wrote:That has nothing to do with the term "risc" - a risc is always accompanied by uncertainty. No, a RISC is always accompanied by a reduced instruction set. What I said has everything to do with risk, and especially with risk perception. The fact remains: accepting a risk doesn't remove it. Accepting a risk just means you can start taking it into account in your decisions. Your problem is that you're confusing GÇ£riskGÇ¥ with GÇ£probabilityGÇ¥ when what risk actually is is the effect of probability, not the probability itself. A 100% probability does not remove the risk GÇö it just creates a very high effect. In other words, the risk is total. Again, if you want to argue the incorrect notion that 100% probability means no risk and that this is somehow a problem, then you must also agree that CONCORD should only have a 10%GǪ hell, let's say 1% chance of appearing after a gank. After all, that has (somehow) created infinitely more risk than when the probability is 100%.
Sorry, my fault. English is not my native language.
For further information about risk and uncertainty you can read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk#Basic_definitions GÇ£A man's freedom consists in his being able to do whatever he wills, but that he should not, by any human power, be forced to do what is against his will.GÇ¥-áGÇò Jean-Jacques Rousseau-á |
Seranova Farreach
523
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 18:03:00 -
[54] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Olivia shy wrote: 1. High sec mining is a non combative or a non- aggressive roll in the game thus leaving the miner vulnerable to aggressive behavior by others looking to make isk from the weaker disadvantaged mining barge . So? Quote:2. Low sec and Null Sec is a place for more experienced players to play in a more aggressive environment. Not really no. Or at least not in any way that distinguishes them from highsec. Quote:3. Any one that is new to the game and decides that mining is what they want to do as a career path in the game could become overwhelmed and frustrated due to High Sec Bumping, this could lead to them not wanting to continue down this path. If this is the case, one of two things can happen from that point. This goes for all activities since they will all be subject to opposition from other players. If a new player can't handle opposition in a game defined by and built upon opposition from other players, then it is probably not a game for him. If it is for him, he will learn and prosper. Quote:With this being said all this can be avoided by simple change of rules preventing any person, corporation or Alliance in the game that decide to put forth any code that has been created by anyone other than CCP should not be permitted in the High sec systems for a positive future of progression and development of the game with such a rule would uphold the Values, Principles, and Integrity of CCP. You mean the values, principles and integrity of their core statement for EVE: GÇ£it's not meant to look like a cold, harsh place GÇö it's meant to be a cold, harsh placeGÇ¥? And no, preventing or prohibiting bumping in highsec is a spectacularly bad idea since it would rather break large parts of the game and provide new players with a bad environment in which to learn. Preventing players from setting up their own social rules and contracts is an even worse idea since it completely eviscerates the fundamental idea of a sandbox.
it wouldnt break the game it would just mean less people been bumped to death or people being bumped during emergency warpoff just to get killed.. which i dont doubt people still do. _______________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg
|
Seranova Farreach
523
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 18:08:00 -
[55] - Quote
ISD LackOfFaith wrote:Thread has been moved to Features & Ideas Discussion. In addition, please note the GM Response on Bumping, arrived to on the 29th of January 2013, after many a discussion and threadnaught about bumping hisec miners. Most notably: GM Karidor wrote: CCP considers the act of bumping a normal game mechanic, and does not class the bumping of another playerGÇÖs ship as an exploit. However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis.
If you believe you are dealing with a case of harassment, please file a support ticket.
dont forget that its now an exploit to bump people during emergency log-off for the sole purpose of getting them to go POP. _______________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18071
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 18:08:00 -
[56] - Quote
GǪwhich, had you read it, would have told you that risks don't go away just because p=1 and that risk and uncertainty or probability are not the same thing. Nor does acceptance remove the risks.
So, a 100% chance of loss means that the risk is equal to the cost of the ship. It does not make the risk non-existent.
Seranova Farreach wrote:it wouldnt break the game it would just mean less people been bumped to death or people being bumped during emergency warpoff just to get killed GǪi.e. break the game. The mechanics are there and are explicitly allowed and maintained for a reason. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Seranova Farreach
523
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 18:13:00 -
[57] - Quote
Don Pera Saissore wrote:I got bumped.
It was frustrating for me because i like most other victims was just a month old. I couldn't fly a tech 2 miner and i couldn't fit tech 2 tank.
It's easy to say that i have the same means as them but that is not true. At that point i was still learning the basics, i used the free time while mining to read about the game mechanics. When i was bumped i didn't even see what was happening because i was still struggling with the overview.
This is my main problem with miner bumping, you guys are extorting players who are still learning how this game works.
EDIT: I just realized bumping means colliding with the ship and forcing it to move out of range of the miner. That never happened to me i was simply ganked and then asked for protection money.
fly a tanked procurer/skiff those gankers wont bother trying to gank a tanked one of those since they can get battleship EHP _______________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg
|
Seranova Farreach
523
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 18:15:00 -
[58] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪwhich, had you read it, would have told you that risks don't go away just because p=1 and that risk and uncertainty or probability are not the same thing. Nor does acceptance remove the risks. So, a 100% chance of loss means that the risk is equal to the cost of the ship. It does not make the risk non-existent. Seranova Farreach wrote:it wouldnt break the game it would just mean less people been bumped to death or people being bumped during emergency warpoff just to get killed GǪi.e. break the game. The mechanics are there and are explicitly allowed and maintained for a reason.
they arnt it was already announced that its a ban-able exploit if you bump some one who is in an emergency warp out to try or even succeed at makeing them blow up _______________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18071
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 18:21:00 -
[59] - Quote
Seranova Farreach wrote:they arnt it was already announced that its a ban-able exploit if you bump some one who is in an emergency warp out to try or even succeed at makeing them blow up No, it really isn't. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
NEW ORDER DEATH DEALERS CODE.
124
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 19:14:00 -
[60] - Quote
Xavier Higdon wrote:Wait, the New Order bumps miners? I thought they only collected pics of dudes wearing mayo.
I take part in neither of these activities. I may have to try bumping one of these days though. I don't get enough conversation when ganking people though it is usually more educational. I hate to disagree with you,-ábut there is nothing subjective about "boring" in connection to "mining". -á-á-á-á -- Solstice Project's Alt |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |