Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2518
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 07:41:00 -
[271] - Quote
Quote:And we are not suggesting you can't. I just want the ability to shove 3000dps and a full rack of webs, and jams up your sanctimonious MWD as soon you enter a site you have every intention of taking from me. Rather than waiting till you have your optimal plan in place, rendering me incapable of retaliating. You already have that ability. The only thing preventing you from using it is yourself.
Oh god. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2518
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 07:42:00 -
[272] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:Goldiiee wrote:
The key here is intention, if you scanned down a site with the intention of committing a 'Suspect' worthy act, then you deserve a 'Suspect' flag, your intentions deserve the appropriate flag.
This is exactly the point. How do you prove their intentions before they commit the crime? Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
136
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 07:44:00 -
[273] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:Goldiiee wrote:
The key here is intention, if you scanned down a site with the intention of committing a 'Suspect' worthy act, then you deserve a 'Suspect' flag, your intentions deserve the appropriate flag.
This is exactly the point. How do you prove their intentions before they commit the crime?
Read what you quoted... maybe a few times. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 07:47:00 -
[274] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:Goldiiee wrote:
The key here is intention, if you scanned down a site with the intention of committing a 'Suspect' worthy act, then you deserve a 'Suspect' flag, your intentions deserve the appropriate flag.
This is exactly the point. How do you prove their intentions before they commit the crime? Read what you quoted... maybe a few times. No. Answer the question. Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
136
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 07:48:00 -
[275] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:
This is so simple that anyone could easily grasp it, I don't understand the continued defiance to the idea, it protects the mission runner only if he is willing to fight for what is his. It adds a suspect flag to the invader, as is deserved due to his intentions in failing to ask for an invite, but if you're a piratey type this is nothing new, since you were going to get a suspect tag anyways as soon as you got there and found something to do to earn it (shoot MTU, loot wreck, yada, yada).
Salvagers would be safe, all they need to do is ask if they can salvage and get a fleet invite, or trust the Mission Runner will not engage a salvager (A Noctis is not a real imposing threat). Of the two I would trust a Mission Runner before the aforementioned Piratey type.
Riot Girl needs to re-read this for clarity. Thanks for summarizing it so eloquently. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 07:52:00 -
[276] - Quote
Stop trying to make me read garbage I've already read to avoid answering questions. You've avoided pretty much every argument I've presented to you and you've resorted to immature tactics to stubbornly defend your horrible idea. Why don't you just drop it already? Oh god. |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
876
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 07:57:00 -
[277] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Goldiiee wrote:This is not impeding a capsuleers ability or right to fly anywhere they want So not being able to warp to a site in high sec unless you change your security lock to yellow isn't impeding people's ability to travel? Quote:it is setting the mission space up as if it was a exploration site People fight over those sites all the time. You don't see people crying for suspect timers. Quote:it protects the mission runner only if he is willing to fight for what is his. It doesn't and he isn't. Nope. He gets the suspect flag AFTER he commits the crime. That's how it works. To point #1 EVE is not a safe place (Seen this posted a few times before) having to change your safety to yellow merely confirms this rather than denies it. So no it's not impeding, and I am not sure why you would worry from he sounds of your arguments you have it set to yellow or red permanently. To point #2 As a public spawn site you should know these (DED complexes)are supposed to be contested. To point #3 Now you're just being obstinate, with no real argument you're tilting at windmills. To point #4 Committing a crime is about Intent as well as the Act, Intent to kill is just as easy to prosecute as murder, you buy a gun, ammo, and black ski mask, show up at the guys house but are foiled by his yappy Chihuahua. Your still going to go to jail.
Things that keep me up at night;-á Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state,-áOnce you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another. |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
877
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:01:00 -
[278] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Stop trying to make me read garbage I've already read to avoid answering questions. You've avoided pretty much every argument I've presented to you and you've resorted to immature tactics to stubbornly defend your horrible idea. Why don't you just drop it already? This is because you haven't presented any argument other than, 'This screws my game play and I don't like it!'
Things that keep me up at night;-á Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state,-áOnce you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another. |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
877
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:06:00 -
[279] - Quote
Riot Girl. What I am getting is you don't like the idea because it flags suspects before they commit a crime; In your opinion.
But it is the opinion of everyone else that entering a site with the intent of 'taking it' (BTW; implies ownership other than your own) is in itself a criminal or 'Suspect' worthy act, we are only asking that the appropriate flag be applied to the appropriate action, nothing more.
Things that keep me up at night;-á Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state,-áOnce you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
136
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:09:00 -
[280] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:Riot Girl. What I am getting is you don't like the idea because it flags suspects before they commit a crime; In your opinion.
But it is the opinion of everyone else that entering a site with the intent of 'taking it' (BTW; implies ownership other than your own) is in itself a criminal or 'Suspect' worthy act, we are only asking that the appropriate flag be applied to the appropriate action, nothing more.
For clarity:
"crime" is the RL term describing the act.
"Suspicious" is the suggested in-game label for mission invasion/trespassing. |
|
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
877
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:11:00 -
[281] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:Goldiiee wrote:Riot Girl. What I am getting is you don't like the idea because it flags suspects before they commit a crime; In your opinion.
But it is the opinion of everyone else that entering a site with the intent of 'taking it' (BTW; implies ownership other than your own) is in itself a criminal or 'Suspect' worthy act, we are only asking that the appropriate flag be applied to the appropriate action, nothing more.
I believe "criminal" is the RL term for clarity. "Suspicious" is the suggested in-game label for mission invasion/trespassing. Yeah trying to relate in game terms as appropriate. But in reality all players,especially missioners, are genocidal maniacs -10 with just about every pirate faction is the proof.
Things that keep me up at night;-á Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state,-áOnce you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:13:00 -
[282] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote: I am not sure why you would worry from he sounds of your arguments you have it set to yellow or red permanently. Not worried, just pointing it out.
Quote:As a public spawn site you should know these (DED complexes)are supposed to be contested Yeah, so why compare your idea, which is designed to avoid as much player interaction as possible.
Quote:Now you're just being obstinate, with no real argument you're tilting at windmills. I'm not. Explain to me how your idea protects mission runners. It does nothing like that.
Quote:Committing a crime is about Intent as well as the Act, Intent to kill is just as easy to prosecute as murder, you buy a gun, ammo, and black ski mask, show up at the guys house but are foiled by his yappy Chihuahua. Your still going to go to jail. Yeah, except this is a video game... set in a galaxy with very different rules and legal requirements than our own. While showing up to someone's house with a gun does imply an intent to commit a crime, in Eve, it's pretty standard fare to show up to someone's house carrying a gun. Or 8. Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
136
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:14:00 -
[283] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:Riot Girl wrote:Stop trying to make me read garbage I've already read to avoid answering questions. You've avoided pretty much every argument I've presented to you and you've resorted to immature tactics to stubbornly defend your horrible idea. Why don't you just drop it already? This is because you haven't presented any argument other than, 'This screws my game play and I don't like it!'
This is quite an accurate assessment. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
136
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:17:00 -
[284] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:Riot Girl. What I am getting is you don't like the idea because it flags suspects before they commit a crime; In your opinion.
But it is the opinion of everyone else that entering a site with the intent of 'taking it' (BTW; implies ownership other than your own) is in itself a criminal or 'Suspect' worthy act, we are only asking that the appropriate flag be applied to the appropriate action, nothing more.
You do understand all of what's written here, Princess Achaja... I mean "Riot Girl"... right? |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:17:00 -
[285] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:Riot Girl. What I am getting is you don't like the idea because it flags suspects before they commit a crime; In your opinion.
But it is the opinion of everyone else that entering a site with the intent of 'taking it' (BTW; implies ownership other than your own) is in itself a criminal or 'Suspect' worthy act, we are only asking that the appropriate flag be applied to the appropriate action, nothing more. What if I don't want the site? What if I claim ownership of the whole system and everything in it. I'm allowed to do that and what you're proposing is an idea to limit my ability to do that. To me, you are the suspect, and you should be flagged for combat because you are trespassing on my property. I don't care about that though because if I wanted you gone, I'd suicide gank you anyway instead of crying to CCP about mission runners stealing all my NPC rats. Oh god. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:21:00 -
[286] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:Goldiiee wrote:Riot Girl wrote:Stop trying to make me read garbage I've already read to avoid answering questions. You've avoided pretty much every argument I've presented to you and you've resorted to immature tactics to stubbornly defend your horrible idea. Why don't you just drop it already? This is because you haven't presented any argument other than, 'This screws my game play and I don't like it!' This is quite an accurate assessment. It's not. I've made a number of arguments you haven't been able to contest. The main one being that the game already provides you with every tool you need to succeed in this situation. There are a number of things you can do and you refuse to do the work or the planning to get the reward you want, so you don't deserve it.
Oh god. |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
877
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:23:00 -
[287] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Goldiiee wrote:Riot Girl. What I am getting is you don't like the idea because it flags suspects before they commit a crime; In your opinion.
But it is the opinion of everyone else that entering a site with the intent of 'taking it' (BTW; implies ownership other than your own) is in itself a criminal or 'Suspect' worthy act, we are only asking that the appropriate flag be applied to the appropriate action, nothing more. What if I don't want the site? What if I claim ownership of the whole system and everything in it. I'm allowed to do that and what you're proposing is an idea to limit my ability to do that. To me, you are the suspect, and you should be flagged for combat because you are trespassing on my property. I don't care about that though because if I wanted you gone, I'd suicide gank you anyway instead of crying to CCP about mission runners stealing all my NPC rats. That is already available to you, go to Nul find a system and claim SOV.
Things that keep me up at night;-á Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state,-áOnce you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
136
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:27:00 -
[288] - Quote
Ultimately, there is no reason that Concord should offer protection to a mission invader.
When a mission invader chooses to warp into another player's mission pocket, they are performing a "suspicious" act.
They should be suspect flagged at warp in and be a valid target immediately. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:28:00 -
[289] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:That is already available to you, go to Nul find a system and claim SOV. Don't need to claim sov. As you said, the option is already available to me wherever I go.
Oh god. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:31:00 -
[290] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:When a mission invader chooses to warp into another player's mission pocket, they are performing a "suspicious" act. Suspect flags aren't given for looking suspicious...
Oh god. |
|
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
877
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:32:00 -
[291] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Goldiiee wrote:That is already available to you, go to Nul find a system and claim SOV. Don't need to claim sov. As you said, the option is already available to me wherever I go. And that style of game play is your right. So the appropriate Flag and response should be the right of everyone else not interested in your particular form of enjoyment. Conversely everyone else should have the right and ability to stop you.
Things that keep me up at night;-á Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state,-áOnce you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another. |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
877
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:33:00 -
[292] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:When a mission invader chooses to warp into another player's mission pocket, they are performing a "suspicious" act. Suspect flags aren't given for looking suspicious... Funny I thought there were, therefore the whole 'Suspected' part of 'Suspect'
Things that keep me up at night;-á Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state,-áOnce you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:33:00 -
[293] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:Conversely everyone else should have the right and ability to stop you. They do. So what's the problem? Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
136
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:41:00 -
[294] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:Hunter Arngrahm wrote:Riot Girl wrote: For clarification, my point is that I resent having to explain things you should be able to figure out on your own. And my point was you're just wasting people's time. Which you've proven. If you had any real argument or contribution you'd be providing it, and you aren't. Yes this was true several pages ago for most objections. From the start for some.
Re-posted because it is still very accurate. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:46:00 -
[295] - Quote
My argument is that CCP shouldn't pander to the selfish desires of carebears who want everything handed to them on a platter. It's bad for the overall quality of the game and the experience it offers, which is unique in the world of MMOs. Oh god. |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
878
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:50:00 -
[296] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Goldiiee wrote:Conversely everyone else should have the right and ability to stop you. They do. So what's the problem? Goldiiee wrote:Funny I thought there were, therefore the whole 'Suspected' part of 'Suspect' That would partially explain why your arguments are flawed. That's rich coming from you. Your argument? As of yet Whaaa is not applicable. You offer nothing but quip replies and vague Ad Hominem retorts, with no substance or direction just a desire to derail a solid rebalancing request of Rules of engagement for contested private mission loot.
You have yet to give a reason why an intruder to a mission site not owned by you (Your admission; ''take it'') should not earn a Suspect flag.
Things that keep me up at night;-á Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state,-áOnce you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another. |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
878
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:53:00 -
[297] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:My argument is that CCP shouldn't pander to the selfish desires of carebears who want everything handed to them on a platter. It's bad for the overall quality of the game and the experience it offers, which is unique in the world of MMOs. So by that standard CCP should redefine the ROE for mission sites rather than pander to the lowest form of criminal, 'extortionist' that regardless of you prolific post make up considerably less total revenue than the 'Carebear' quotient of the EVE online populous.
Things that keep me up at night;-á Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state,-áOnce you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:58:00 -
[298] - Quote
Quote:That would partially explain why your arguments are flawed.
Quote:That's rich coming from you. Your argument? As of yet Whaaa is not applicable. You offer nothing but quip replies and vague Ad Hominem retorts, with no substance or direction just a desire to derail a solid rebalancing request of Rules of engagement for contested private mission loot.
You have yet to give a reason why an intruder to a mission site not owned by you (Your admission; ''take it'') should not earn a Suspect flag. I've provided plenty of strong arguments. You still haven't explained what is preventing you from being able to complete the mission successfully, other than your own inability to do so (despite having every tool needed). Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
136
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 08:59:00 -
[299] - Quote
You are obviously on tilt, Princess. Edit your post so the quotes are set straight. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 09:00:00 -
[300] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:Riot Girl wrote:My argument is that CCP shouldn't pander to the selfish desires of carebears who want everything handed to them on a platter. It's bad for the overall quality of the game and the experience it offers, which is unique in the world of MMOs. So by that standard CCP should redefine the ROE for mission sites rather than pander to the lowest form of criminal, 'extortionist' that regardless of you prolific post make up considerably less total revenue than the 'Carebear' quotient of the EVE online populous. Nope. You should just HTFU tbh.
Oh god. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |