Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 61 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
270
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 19:42:00 -
[1531] - Quote
Fix Sov wrote:Or in the case of carrier fleets, a bit more than 25 people instead of just 1 pressing F.
Still not 100% of people playing. The fix doesn't fix the problem. Either people not pushing buttons is an issue, or it isn't. Either fix it, or leave it as is. |
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
334
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 19:42:00 -
[1532] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Promiscuous Female wrote:you're still literally saying that the change shouldn't be made because ccp has an obligation to preserve afk gameplay behaviors because fighting in tidi sucks if afk gameplay was bad, mining would have been overhauled long ago. naw, that's not even roughly analogous
an analogous situation would have been ccp doing something like requiring you to continually reaim your mining laser at the rock while you are mining it and having the game constantly veer you off the rock and people saying "but I was able to afk mine before the change you are obligated to maintain MY GAMEPLAY IT IS A SANDBOX" |
Fix Sov
117
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 19:42:00 -
[1533] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:Just like Drones causing server load. CCP tried to fix drones like 7 years ago, they reduced the number of drones ships could launch...they didn't fix the problem, they just kicked the can down the road to 2014 and HEDGP. It wasn't a problem until players suddenly decided that they were worth using as the fleet's sole damage output avenue.
Mario Putzo wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:"Commands sent to a server are not quantifiable" - Mario Putzo Is it mandatory for GSF membership to misquote people? The word you're looking for is paraphrase. The current sov system is too heavily reliant on the defender saving systems by stuffing as many people as possible into the system for the final timer, instead of incentivizing attacking (and defending) multiple systems at the same time by splitting their forces into multiple fleets and using actual intelligence/strategy. This must change. |
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
334
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 19:44:00 -
[1534] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:Fix Sov wrote:Or in the case of carrier fleets, a bit more than 25 people instead of just 1 pressing F. Still not 100% of people playing. The fix doesn't fix the problem. Either people not pushing buttons is an issue, or it isn't. Either fix it, or leave it as is. all changes must be BLACK AND WHITE there is no room for a middle ground
incidentally the full solution has this litany of roadblocks between us and the full solution so why don't you just get started on those before you even think of knocking an easy change out of the park |
Dave Stark
4349
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 19:48:00 -
[1535] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Promiscuous Female wrote:you're still literally saying that the change shouldn't be made because ccp has an obligation to preserve afk gameplay behaviors because fighting in tidi sucks if afk gameplay was bad, mining would have been overhauled long ago. naw, that's not even roughly analogous an analogous situation would have been ccp doing something like requiring you to continually reaim your mining laser at the rock while you are mining it and having the game constantly veer you off the rock and people saying "but I was able to afk mine before the change you are obligated to maintain MY GAMEPLAY IT IS A SANDBOX"
warp in, drop drones, start lasers/anchoring. go afk.
sounds very analogous to me. |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
270
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 19:49:00 -
[1536] - Quote
Fix Sov wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:Just like Drones causing server load. CCP tried to fix drones like 7 years ago, they reduced the number of drones ships could launch...they didn't fix the problem, they just kicked the can down the road to 2014 and HEDGP. It wasn't a problem until players suddenly decided that they were worth using as the fleet's sole damage output avenue. Mario Putzo wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:"Commands sent to a server are not quantifiable" - Mario Putzo Is it mandatory for GSF membership to misquote people? The word you're looking for is paraphrase.
And why did Drones become the primary damage choice for fleets?
It wasn't because of Drone Assist obviously. So why are we fixing drone assist? Clearly it is not an issue on its own.
Perhaps CCP should have listened to the player base when they were planning drone/drone boat changes. Or perhaps it is because CCP didn't listen to the player base when retooling damps, when the player base told CCP that this was bad and it was going to cause issues with fleets down the road.
Seems that the common theme here is CCP not listening to the people actually playing the game. Hell they didn't listen 7 years ago when Players told CCP that reducing amount of drones each ship brought wouldn't fix server load issues, because people would just bring more ships with drones anyway.
And here we are, 3 rounds of kick the can later....getting ready to kick it one more time. But ya lets not actually work on fixing the problem. Lets just assume everyone is playing null politics and spewing narratives at each other. |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
270
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 19:50:00 -
[1537] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:Fix Sov wrote:Or in the case of carrier fleets, a bit more than 25 people instead of just 1 pressing F. Still not 100% of people playing. The fix doesn't fix the problem. Either people not pushing buttons is an issue, or it isn't. Either fix it, or leave it as is. all changes must be BLACK AND WHITE there is no room for a middle ground incidentally the full solution has this litany of roadblocks between us and the full solution so why don't you just get started on those before you even think of knocking an easy change out of the park
Not when the issue is being presented as black and white.
People aren't pushing buttons, and are not having fun.
So we are going to get 24 more people to push buttons and 225 people still won't have any fun.
Fix Sov wrote: So you're actually going to try to go with the "leave it as-is", given the evidence of how it affects player behavior and server performance?
Interesting.
No I would remove it from the game in its entirety if the goal is to have people push buttons. If CCP is unwilling to do that then they should not change it at all because it obviously isn't actually an issue. I think all passive **** should eventually be taken out of the game. Including passive income sources. |
Fix Sov
117
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 20:01:00 -
[1538] - Quote
So CCP doesn't want to completely remove drone assist for various reasons, so therefore CCP should do nothing about it and we should wait 5 years for CCP to fix the way the processing in a solar system is handled (to fix the lag issue) and another 5 years for CCP to fix the sov system. Meanwhile every fight is going to be an average of 10 player commands (apart from the FC)? The current sov system is too heavily reliant on the defender saving systems by stuffing as many people as possible into the system for the final timer, instead of incentivizing attacking (and defending) multiple systems at the same time by splitting their forces into multiple fleets and using actual intelligence/strategy. This must change. |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
270
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 20:11:00 -
[1539] - Quote
Fix Sov wrote:So CCP doesn't want to completely remove drone assist for various reasons, so therefore CCP should do nothing about it and we should wait 5 years for CCP to fix the way the processing in a solar system is handled (to fix the lag issue) and another 5 years for CCP to fix the sov system. Meanwhile every fight is going to be an average of 10 player commands (apart from the FC)?
Hey man ask Rise not me. I didn't announce that people not playing the game was an problem he did. I didn't announce a "fix" that doesn't address that issue he did. Perhaps you should be questioning CCP Rise as to his reasoning behind not actually addressing either issue he claims valid enough to warrant mechanics changes.
If it were up to me Drone assist would be gone in a patch tomorrow morning. Along with drone bays from any ship without a drone bonus. I would then focus all my efforts on figuring out a way to make sov battles unfold more like B-R did, and less like HED. Instead of doing half ass fixes that don't actually solve issues I deem relevant enough to warrant fixing.
Once I was able to not only reduce total drone use, and have people playing the game in a more enjoyable atmosphere, I would begin removing other passive fleet systems, such as anchoring, and I would begin to work on tweaking passive income systems to make them require more active player input to attain moongoo and PI ****.
I wouldn't start by kicking a can a few more years down the road. Again. |
Fix Sov
117
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 20:23:00 -
[1540] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:Fix Sov wrote:So CCP doesn't want to completely remove drone assist for various reasons, so therefore CCP should do nothing about it and we should wait 5 years for CCP to fix the way the processing in a solar system is handled (to fix the lag issue) and another 5 years for CCP to fix the sov system. Meanwhile every fight is going to be an average of 10 player commands (apart from the FC)? Hey man ask Rise not me. I didn't announce that people not playing the game was an problem he did. I didn't announce a "fix" that doesn't address that issue he did. Perhaps you should be questioning CCP Rise as to his reasoning behind not actually addressing either issue he claims valid enough to warrant mechanics changes. If it were up to me Drone assist would be gone in a patch tomorrow morning. Along with drone bays from any ship without a drone bonus. I would then focus all my efforts on figuring out a way to make sov battles unfold more like B-R did, and less like HED. Instead of doing half ass fixes that don't actually solve issues I deem relevant enough to warrant fixing. Once I was able to not only reduce total drone use, and have people playing the game in a more enjoyable atmosphere, I would begin removing other passive fleet systems, such as anchoring, and I would begin to work on tweaking passive income systems to make them require more active player input to attain roids, moongoo and PI ****. I wouldn't start by kicking a can a few more years down the road. Again. When you want to make an omelet you have to break a few eggs. (your sig sums up the number 1 issue with the game today.) Realtalk: I have no issue with any part of this post. In fact I'm actually a bit surprised they went with a hard cap of 50. Personally I would've thought they would either get rid of it altogether, or go for a fighter-style assignment system, so a player can only wield x drones, where x is determined by either his ship, his skills or both.
Then I would've demanded they spend as long as it takes to fix the sov system, because in my view it is the biggest problem this game is facing, and one I wouldn't be surprised ends up killing it if it isn't fixed soon, but I digress. The current sov system is too heavily reliant on the defender saving systems by stuffing as many people as possible into the system for the final timer, instead of incentivizing attacking (and defending) multiple systems at the same time by splitting their forces into multiple fleets and using actual intelligence/strategy. This must change. |
|
Ragnen Delent
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 20:25:00 -
[1541] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote: And why did Drones become the primary damage choice for fleets?
It wasn't because of Drone Assist obviously. So why are we fixing drone assist? Clearly it is not an issue on its own.
Perhaps it had to do with the drone modules added in 2012, as well as several buffs to which brought drones more in line with other weapons systems, allowing people to seriously consider them for fleet doctrines, and the stunning realization that now that drones were "good" that drone assist was now incredibly powerful due to its ability to mitigate the effects of ewar, poor ieet member attention to primaries, and almost instant damage application. Maybe it was that sequence of things that turned a mechanix which had previous not been all that useful due to how poor drones were.
Now, CCP could just nerf drones and likely reduce the usage of drones, but as mentioned that was not the principal intent of this change. |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
270
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 20:31:00 -
[1542] - Quote
Ragnen Delent wrote:Mario Putzo wrote: And why did Drones become the primary damage choice for fleets?
It wasn't because of Drone Assist obviously. So why are we fixing drone assist? Clearly it is not an issue on its own.
Perhaps it had to do with the drone modules added in 2012, as well as several buffs to which brought drones more in line with other weapons systems, allowing people to seriously consider them for fleet doctrines, and the stunning realization that now that drones were "good" that drone assist was now incredibly powerful due to its ability to mitigate the effects of ewar, poor ieet member attention to primaries, and almost instant damage application. Maybe it was that sequence of things that turned a mechanix which had previous not been all that useful due to how poor drones were. Now, CCP could just nerf drones and likely reduce the usage of drones, but as mentioned that was not the principal intent of this change.
Ya that is what I was getting at. It wasn't drone assist that created the current problem, and changing drone assist isn't going to fix the current problem. The current problem is a symptom of other balance changes, and most notably the lack of any fucks being given to the sov system which is ultimately the cancer that is causing the symptoms.
If Sov war was more enjoyable do you think people would be alt tabbed playing WoT or PoE?
It just seems like CCP would rather play nursemaid, instead of stepping up and being the Doctor. |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
270
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 20:34:00 -
[1543] - Quote
Fix Sov wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:Fix Sov wrote:So CCP doesn't want to completely remove drone assist for various reasons, so therefore CCP should do nothing about it and we should wait 5 years for CCP to fix the way the processing in a solar system is handled (to fix the lag issue) and another 5 years for CCP to fix the sov system. Meanwhile every fight is going to be an average of 10 player commands (apart from the FC)? Hey man ask Rise not me. I didn't announce that people not playing the game was an problem he did. I didn't announce a "fix" that doesn't address that issue he did. Perhaps you should be questioning CCP Rise as to his reasoning behind not actually addressing either issue he claims valid enough to warrant mechanics changes. If it were up to me Drone assist would be gone in a patch tomorrow morning. Along with drone bays from any ship without a drone bonus. I would then focus all my efforts on figuring out a way to make sov battles unfold more like B-R did, and less like HED. Instead of doing half ass fixes that don't actually solve issues I deem relevant enough to warrant fixing. Once I was able to not only reduce total drone use, and have people playing the game in a more enjoyable atmosphere, I would begin removing other passive fleet systems, such as anchoring, and I would begin to work on tweaking passive income systems to make them require more active player input to attain roids, moongoo and PI ****. I wouldn't start by kicking a can a few more years down the road. Again. When you want to make an omelet you have to break a few eggs. (your sig sums up the number 1 issue with the game today.) Realtalk: I have no issue with any part of this post. In fact I'm actually a bit surprised they went with a hard cap of 50. Personally I would've thought they would either get rid of it altogether, or go for a fighter-style assignment system, so a player can only wield x drones, where x is determined by either his ship, his skills or both. Then I would've demanded they spend as long as it takes to fix the sov system, because in my view it is the biggest problem this game is facing, and one I wouldn't be surprised ends up killing it if it isn't fixed soon, but I digress.
Heck I wouldn't even mind seeing Drone Assist becoming a leadership skill, if their intent is to keep it. You start with the ability to control 0 drones (from others) and get +10 per level up to the 50 cap. This way not anyone can be a drone assist and it actually becomes a skill position and not just a "ill do it" thing.
|
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA
475
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 20:37:00 -
[1544] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:Hey man ask Rise not me. I didn't announce that people not playing the game was an problem he did. I didn't announce a "fix" that doesn't address that issue he did. Perhaps you should be questioning CCP Rise as to his reasoning behind not actually addressing either issue he claims valid enough to warrant mechanics changes.
If it were up to me Drone assist would be gone in a patch tomorrow morning. Along with drone bays from any ship without a drone bonus. I would then focus all my efforts on figuring out a way to make sov battles unfold more like B-R did, and less like HED. Instead of doing half ass fixes that don't actually solve issues I deem relevant enough to warrant fixing.
Once I was able to not only reduce total drone use, and have people playing the game in a more enjoyable atmosphere, I would begin removing other passive fleet systems, such as anchoring, and I would begin to work on tweaking passive income systems to make them require more active player input to attain roids, moongoo and PI ****.
I wouldn't start by kicking a can a few more years down the road. Again.
When you want to make an omelet you have to break a few eggs.
(your sig sums up the number 1 issue with the game today.)
This is a pretty good post and mirrors a lot of my own thoughts on the matter.
I also wondered why they even left drone assist at a cap of 50 instead of just getting rid of it altogether.
Probably because they didn't want to induce rage from the incursion community....Not that people have much sympathy for them, anyways.
Exception: the part about "fixing anchoring" - if you have any ideas on how to do that, please let everybody know. That's a difficult nut to crack.
|
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
270
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 20:46:00 -
[1545] - Quote
Anchoring isn't that tough to tweak really. Simply just disallow you from using navigable command on a fleet member.
Flash a lame message like
"Due to the fleet systems synchronization your navigation computer is unable to perform that action at this time."
You would still be able to do the approach/keep range/orbit on people outside fleet however due to the needed utility against opponents.
If you want to anchor you would do so on someone outside your fleet, thus they would not have bonuses nor would they be able to show up in the fleet watchlist etc. It would still be doable, but it would require more set up and application above just point and click.
Similar to how Drone Assist being removed doesn't nix Drone Alpha...it just become a bit more complex, and actually requires people to pay attention to goings on.
that is how I would address anchoring anyway. |
Fix Sov
117
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 20:50:00 -
[1546] - Quote
Or just fetch whomever you're anchoring/orbiting/whatever's coordinates at the time of selection, instead of continually updating the coordinates of your target, thus requiring slightly more work on behalf of the fleet members.
But the proper fix would be xwing style flying and fighting. The current sov system is too heavily reliant on the defender saving systems by stuffing as many people as possible into the system for the final timer, instead of incentivizing attacking (and defending) multiple systems at the same time by splitting their forces into multiple fleets and using actual intelligence/strategy. This must change. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA
475
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 20:52:00 -
[1547] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:Anchoring isn't that tough to tweak really. Simply just disallow you from using navigable command on a fleet member.
This is getting off-topic but that's not really a good solution.
It would invalidate many perfectly valid use cases...For instance, what if you just want to approach a fleet member? Not to "anchor" off of them, but just to get closer?
You'd essentially force everybody into the double-click game which is really bad. Or just approaching celestials instead. |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
270
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 20:54:00 -
[1548] - Quote
Fix Sov wrote:Or just fetch whomever you're anchoring/orbiting/whatever's coordinates at the time of selection, instead of continually updating the coordinates of your target, thus requiring slightly more work on behalf of the fleet members.
But the proper fix would be xwing style flying and fighting.
God if CCP ever let us actually fly our ships id probably be to busy wanking it to be able to fly.
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2019
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 21:51:00 -
[1549] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote: I also wondered why they even left drone assist at a cap of 50 instead of just getting rid of it altogether.
Drone assist is one way to counter ECM/Damps in small gangs.
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2289
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:18:00 -
[1550] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:Anchoring isn't that tough to tweak really. Simply just disallow you from using navigable command on a fleet member. This is getting off-topic but that's not really a good solution. It would invalidate many perfectly valid use cases...For instance, what if you just want to approach a fleet member? Not to "anchor" off of them, but just to get closer? You'd essentially force everybody into the double-click game which is really bad. Or just approaching celestials instead.
This is a co out, because when you anchor on in a fleet the driver is already forced to do the double clicking, and your argument is that its ok for one person to have to do that but its not ok for everybody to have to do that.
Drive your own ship. Know your position, if one person already does it theres literally zero reason the rest of the fleet shouldn't be able to
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
|
Cecil Arongo
Zebra Corp Gentlemen's Agreement
38
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:23:00 -
[1551] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:Anchoring isn't that tough to tweak really. Simply just disallow you from using navigable command on a fleet member. This is getting off-topic but that's not really a good solution. It would invalidate many perfectly valid use cases...For instance, what if you just want to approach a fleet member? Not to "anchor" off of them, but just to get closer? You'd essentially force everybody into the double-click game which is really bad. Or just approaching celestials instead. This is a co out, because when you anchor on in a fleet the driver is already forced to do the double clicking, and your argument is that its ok for one person to have to do that but its not ok for everybody to have to do that. Drive your own ship. Know your position, if one person already does it theres literally zero reason the rest of the fleet shouldn't be able to All this while you're still whining about drone assist? This is for all you new people: I have one rule. Everyone fights, no one quits. If you dont do your job I will shoot you myself. DO YOU GET ME? |
captain foivos
State War Academy Caldari State
221
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:31:00 -
[1552] - Quote
Grath is all for manual piloting because supers don't have to fly anywhere; they just jump to a cyno. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2289
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:33:00 -
[1553] - Quote
Cecil Arongo wrote: All this while you're still whining about drone assist?
Hey remember when you and 3 other alliances decided to attack EMP and like, got beat down, then lost all your own money moons in your own space to GSOL because you couldn't be counted on to take care of it all yourself? Then had to call in Vee and BL to help bail you out before you actually cost the CFC serious money?
You got beat up by Baki and Aerallol.
Man weren't those good times?
Also to be slightly on topic that post had nothing to do with drone assign it had to do with another 'afk mechanic" and peoples justification for keeping it.
Its almost like the CFC as a whole has concerns about the implications of its members having to fly their own ships.
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
captain foivos
State War Academy Caldari State
221
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:36:00 -
[1554] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Sov wars should be determined by who has the most supercapitals
hey remember when you had titan superiority
I just wanted to remind you of that before waving the fact that you don't anymore in your face |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
271
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:36:00 -
[1555] - Quote
Cecil Arongo wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:Anchoring isn't that tough to tweak really. Simply just disallow you from using navigable command on a fleet member. This is getting off-topic but that's not really a good solution. It would invalidate many perfectly valid use cases...For instance, what if you just want to approach a fleet member? Not to "anchor" off of them, but just to get closer? You'd essentially force everybody into the double-click game which is really bad. Or just approaching celestials instead. This is a co out, because when you anchor on in a fleet the driver is already forced to do the double clicking, and your argument is that its ok for one person to have to do that but its not ok for everybody to have to do that. Drive your own ship. Know your position, if one person already does it theres literally zero reason the rest of the fleet shouldn't be able to All this while you're still whining about drone assist?
Look its cute that you and most of your friends have come to this thread because Martini to you to. Its neat that you choose to troll it and what not. But you could at least give people the courtesy of reading their post. I haven't seen Grath complain once about drone assist actually being adjusted. I have seen him make some completely relevant arguments on the justification and the implementation of CCP Rise's proposed fix, as well as make some concrete arguments in continuation of issues CCP Rise himself deems important enough to require attention.
But hey lets pretend that you are here for actual discussion and not simply to troll Grath because he happens to be the head of one of a group that your entity currently doesn't like.
What do you think of Rise's proposed changes and do you think it adequately addresses the issue of people pushing enough buttons as well as reduce the server load caused by drones? |
Fix Sov
117
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:36:00 -
[1556] - Quote
We can start manually piloting our ships when you have to start manually track and fire the titan guns/DD. If you miss, sucks to be you. The current sov system is too heavily reliant on the defender saving systems by stuffing as many people as possible into the system for the final timer, instead of incentivizing attacking (and defending) multiple systems at the same time by splitting their forces into multiple fleets and using actual intelligence/strategy. This must change. |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
271
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:37:00 -
[1557] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Cecil Arongo wrote: All this while you're still whining about drone assist?
Hey remember when you and 3 other alliances decided to attack EMP and like, got beat down, then lost all your own money moons in your own space to GSOL because you couldn't be counted on to take care of it all yourself? Then had to call in Vee and BL to help bail you out before you actually cost the CFC serious money? You got beat up by Baki and Aerallol. Man weren't those good times? Also to be slightly on topic that post had nothing to do with drone assign it had to do with another 'afk mechanic" and peoples justification for keeping it. Its almost like the CFC as a whole has concerns about the implications of its members having to fly their own ships.
If you want people to take your criticism seriously you should check the politics at the door. Argue with your friends on Kugu about whose friends are bigger knuckle draggers. |
Cecil Arongo
Zebra Corp Gentlemen's Agreement
38
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:44:00 -
[1558] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Cecil Arongo wrote: All this while you're still whining about drone assist?
Hey remember when you and 3 other alliances decided to attack EMP and like, got beat down, then lost all your own money moons in your own space to GSOL because you couldn't be counted on to take care of it all yourself? Then had to call in Vee and BL to help bail you out before you actually cost the CFC serious money? You got beat up by Baki and Aerallol. Man weren't those good times? Also to be slightly on topic that post had nothing to do with drone assign it had to do with another 'afk mechanic" and peoples justification for keeping it. Its almost like the CFC as a whole has concerns about the implications of its members having to fly their own ships. Yeah, because playing politics and yelling at a line member is classy. WTG Grath.
I'm just happy shooting things.
Without drone assist. This is for all you new people: I have one rule. Everyone fights, no one quits. If you dont do your job I will shoot you myself. DO YOU GET ME? |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2290
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:47:00 -
[1559] - Quote
Fix Sov wrote:We can start manually piloting our ships when you have to start manually track and fire the titan guns/DD. If you miss, sucks to be you.
So what you're saying is that you're ok with AFK mechanics as long as they benefit you
Cecil Arongo wrote: Yeah, because playing politics and yelling at a line member is classy. WTG Grath..
I'm sorry, can you show me the rule that says i have to be nice to a guy who comes up to me acting like an idiot? If you could point that out I'll gladly stay classy, other wise I'm pretty sure theres a bag of something you can choke on around here somewhere.. Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
271
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:47:00 -
[1560] - Quote
Cecil Arongo wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Cecil Arongo wrote: All this while you're still whining about drone assist?
Hey remember when you and 3 other alliances decided to attack EMP and like, got beat down, then lost all your own money moons in your own space to GSOL because you couldn't be counted on to take care of it all yourself? Then had to call in Vee and BL to help bail you out before you actually cost the CFC serious money? You got beat up by Baki and Aerallol. Man weren't those good times? Also to be slightly on topic that post had nothing to do with drone assign it had to do with another 'afk mechanic" and peoples justification for keeping it. Its almost like the CFC as a whole has concerns about the implications of its members having to fly their own ships. Yeah, because playing politics and yelling at a line member is classy. WTG Grath. I'm just happy shooting things. Without drone assist.
To be fair Grath didn't have to send out a jabber ping to tell his groupies what to think or say this week on EVEO. But seriously m8. Your alliance is ****, and your trolling in this thread is pathetic. Martini must be proud 77 pages of on again off again discussion. Thanks CFC for legitimately caring about the forward progress of EVE. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 61 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |