Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 157 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 25 post(s) |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8832
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 21:30:00 -
[3301] - Quote
Airto TLA wrote: I am going to pick this one out of the, several. Since the analogy used was the worst.
I'm not going to say anything about the rest of your post, but it is horribly wrong nonetheless.
I will however point out that you suck at sarcasm. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Rabe Raptor
The Conference Elite CODE.
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 06:37:00 -
[3302] - Quote
Honestly I don't understand the will for nerfs to ganking. If people simply followed the Law of Highsec they would be completely safe. Carebears baffle me. |
Verlyn
Sisters of Xambu
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 11:37:00 -
[3303] - Quote
Noragli wrote: I wonder how many cancel their subscription.
shut up
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3801
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 12:04:00 -
[3304] - Quote
Airto TLA wrote:I real dislike care bear PvP tough guys, they really annoy me. that's ok i'm sure you'll do nothing about it |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8841
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 12:07:00 -
[3305] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Airto TLA wrote:I real dislike care bear PvP tough guys, they really annoy me. that's ok i'm sure you'll do nothing about it
They never do.
DMC was threatening me for a while about an offhanded comment I made. Thus far, nothing. My favorite part was when he outright admitted that he abuses the petition system by getting his friends to report people on his behalf.
If they had any spines, or the ability to back up what they said, they wouldn't be who they are in the first place. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
317
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 12:51:00 -
[3306] - Quote
Rabe Raptor wrote:Honestly I don't understand the will for nerfs to ganking. If people simply followed the Law of Highsec they would be completely safe. Carebears baffle me.
While I do enjoy the antics of the CODE, you shouldn't push this notion of 'completely safe', as it is untrue, has never been true, and for so long as EVE is EVE will never be true. There will always be predation, and to try to push your dogma as some kind of magical shield against it is unfair to those who you're trying to convert. Yes, the code is full of ship-saving material, but until you and yours man up to the responsibility of protecting those who fall under your shield from those who don't give 1/15th of a rats hindquarters about it (yes, you may have guessed, but they do exist), the safety that comes from following it is only safety from you and yours. |
Rabe Raptor
The Conference Elite CODE.
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 13:14:00 -
[3307] - Quote
Omar Alharazaad wrote:Rabe Raptor wrote:Honestly I don't understand the will for nerfs to ganking. If people simply followed the Law of Highsec they would be completely safe. Carebears baffle me. While I do enjoy the antics of the CODE, you shouldn't push this notion of 'completely safe', as it is untrue, has never been true, and for so long as EVE is EVE will never be true. There will always be predation, and to try to push your dogma as some kind of magical shield against it is unfair to those who you're trying to convert. Yes, the code is full of ship-saving material, but until you and yours man up to the responsibility of protecting those who fall under your shield from those who don't give 1/15th of a rats hindquarters about it (yes, you may have guessed, but they do exist), the safety that comes from following it is only safety from you and yours.
Since the law outlines warping away if you see gankships on d-scan please give me a reasonable scenario that doesn't save you. An opponent throwing two SBs at a retriever or something? cmon. Together we can make Highsec a better place! The Law of Highsec Read it, share it, learn it, quote it, live it! |
Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
318
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 13:43:00 -
[3308] - Quote
Um. People die in high sec all the time from things that are not ganks. I know. I've killed a handful of them, others I know have killed more. I'm just saying that it's unkind to preach a notion of complete safety when such a thing doesn't truly exist, regardless of how much good advice you follow.
Like I said earlier, I don't disapprove of the CODE.'s methods. I just don't want folks to have misconceptions of absolute safety spoon fed to them. By following the advice given many times over in this thread by the gankers they can minimize their chances of being wtfpwnd, this is true, but we aren't ever supposed to be completely safe. It's part of what makes EVE awesome. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8844
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 14:04:00 -
[3309] - Quote
Omar Alharazaad wrote:Um. People die in high sec all the time from things that are not ganks. I know. I've killed a handful of them, others I know have killed more. I'm just saying that it's unkind to preach a notion of complete safety when such a thing doesn't truly exist, regardless of how much good advice you follow.
Like I said earlier, I don't disapprove of the CODE.'s methods. I just don't want folks to have misconceptions of absolute safety spoon fed to them. By following the advice given many times over in this thread by the gankers they can minimize their chances of being wtfpwnd, this is true, but we aren't ever supposed to be completely safe. It's part of what makes EVE awesome.
I must agree. Safety comes from the measures you take to achieve it. Buying a permit is an excellent step in doing so, but no amount of what you do will ever come to 100% safety, unless you never undock. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20156
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 14:14:00 -
[3310] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:but no amount of what you do will ever come to 100% safety, unless you never undock. If you're terminally greedy or stupid not even a station can offer 100% safety.
Never hold your farts in. They travel up your spine and into the brain, where they ferment. They then migrate to your keyboard via your fingers. That's where shiptoasts come from.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8845
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 14:16:00 -
[3311] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:but no amount of what you do will ever come to 100% safety, unless you never undock. If you're terminally greedy or stupid not even a station can offer 100% safety.
Yeah, but God bless those people. I paid for my account earlier this week with someone else's money. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Hengle Teron
Mew Age Outpaws
28
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 22:53:00 -
[3312] - Quote
Rabe Raptor wrote:Omar Alharazaad wrote:Rabe Raptor wrote:Honestly I don't understand the will for nerfs to ganking. If people simply followed the Law of Highsec they would be completely safe. Carebears baffle me. While I do enjoy the antics of the CODE, you shouldn't push this notion of 'completely safe', as it is untrue, has never been true, and for so long as EVE is EVE will never be true. There will always be predation, and to try to push your dogma as some kind of magical shield against it is unfair to those who you're trying to convert. Yes, the code is full of ship-saving material, but until you and yours man up to the responsibility of protecting those who fall under your shield from those who don't give 1/15th of a rats hindquarters about it (yes, you may have guessed, but they do exist), the safety that comes from following it is only safety from you and yours. Since the law outlines warping away if you see gankships on d-scan please give me a reasonable scenario that doesn't save you. An opponent throwing two SBs at a retriever or something? cmon. uncloacking scram |
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
3937
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 22:59:00 -
[3313] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:ImYourMom wrote:...
so you want easy kills.... sorry but eve isnt just about you....and i dont think adding one more slot and 3 rigs is going to give anywhere near the EHP of carriers, so dont be silly You and your ilk have read THIS and tried to apply brain in gear before wailing on forums for nerfs right, RIIIIIIGHT? (finger hovers over the Kill-It-Forward button...) F *pushes button for fayed*
Quote:Kill it forward From: Ralph King-Griffin Sent: 2014.08.16 22:50 To: [Redacted-see link in sig]
I just wanted to check in and provide an opportunity for you to ask any questions you may have about your recent Proteus and Typhoon losses in Auvergne tonight,
Rest assured you did nothing personally to prompt the loss, but instead you merely found yourself embroiled in eve the eve political meta.
in which both myself,my Benevolent ceo and overlord Feyd Rautha Harkonnen, and our corp have dedicated ourselvs to sploding a carebear for each and every request for 'nerf's made on the EVE-O forums.
the fact that ye'r Tech 3 cruiser and (rather dashing ill add)Battleship were killed by a mear frigate may have generate some bleeding from the posterior, If this is the case please fillout form
However...should this experience instead fire your imagination, or you wish to make this a learning experience, I stand ready to answer any questions you may have, up to and including enrolling you in our asshat training program(which is super fun) so you can aid me in my quest (pending confirmation of you not being a total bellend).
Yours Ralph King-Griffin =][= |
Paranoid Loyd
1463
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 23:08:00 -
[3314] - Quote
Nicely done sir, you no longer qualify as inept. "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8848
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 23:13:00 -
[3315] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Nicely done sir, you no longer qualify as inept.
Cloaked Proteus... in an NPC corp... in highsec. What the actual ****.
On behalf of everyone, thank you for killing that guy.
[edit: AAAAAHHHHH! Mixed guns on the Typhoon! *cries into napkin* "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
3939
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 23:19:00 -
[3316] - Quote
same poket =][= |
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
1034
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 03:25:00 -
[3317] - Quote
Christopher Mabata wrote:Nexus Day wrote:120+ pages and people still want to stick their heads in the sand.
I would like to see EvE grow. EvE has been lucky due to a lack of competition. It is a niche game. At some point someone will invent a user friendly space game and then truly the bitter vets will have EvE to themselves. And then when they realize that there are no newbies to exploit they will slowly leave blaming most likely someone else.
IMHO a problem with EvE is that it follows EvE logic. People say EvE is hard. I disagree. I say Eve is not intuitive because it follows it own logic. This is by choice and IMHO self limiting.
Take for instance miner bumping. Two objects collide and the net result is....nothing? Here would be a simple solution that is both logical and support both sides. Bumping causes damage based upon the force of the collision. Wow, what a concept.
A second minor change would benefit miners, miner bumpers, gankers and gankees. There are no criminal effects until shields are depleted. In other words until you can show the officer damage he will not show up to write a ticket (or blow you up).
This would allow people to bump, within reason. It would also allow people to shoot anyone anywhere as long as they didn't go past shields.
But the second you cross the easily recognizable, well defined line the consequences should be sudden and without escape in hi sec. This concept is easy to understand and dos not require a whole lot of "if this then" thinking.
People should not have to read a tutorial or watch a YouTube video to understand how to do the simplest things in a GAME.
This is just a taste of logic that EvE could use. Now bring on the bitter vets who say EvE is about adapting, as long as it means everybody but them.
1. Collision mechanics would make the jita undock scrap free for all warfare or CONCORD Splam fest as people triggered illegal aggression undocking their freighters. This could also be exploited very easily if it triggered CONCORD aggro. 2. No the gank begins when the first shot is fired, if i can sit there and peck a way a skiff's shields and then volley out its armor in a 0.5 before CONCORD responds it defeats the purpose of the buff to their tank. and makes shield tanks useless if you fly anything someone would want to gank. 3. This isn't adapting this is just bad
And Jita has to be Jita? You mean people wouldn't adapt to the change (gasps in horror).
And then you go on to explain how things are even though they still make no sense to a new player and finish with the beloved "bad".
Your honor I have no case to make because the defendant keeps making it for me.
This thread has so much content it may be 'Thread of the Year' and it is only January.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8860
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 03:29:00 -
[3318] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote: And then you go on to explain how things are even though they still make no sense to a new player and finish with the beloved "bad".
Your honor I have no case to make because the defendant keeps making it for me.
Are you on drugs, son?
(in all seriousness, what in the hell are you talking about? Are you still trying to defend your inane ideas to get rid of bumping?) "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
1034
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 03:32:00 -
[3319] - Quote
So in the above a person points out that Jita would be a mess if collision caused damage, an artifact of bad coding. This is one reason EvE is not intuitive, the laws of physics are secondary to CCPs ability to code.
So what would happen in real space? First they would have some sort of traffic control to prevent collisions. Pretty sure CCP could implement that. Also seeing the success other markets would open up nearby, success breeds competition. We players could do that. But no CCP and we sit on hands because Jita must be Jita. Instead we have a bogus collision mechanic which (surprise, surprise) can be exploited.
Adapt or die does not apply just to new pilots. This thread has so much content it may be 'Thread of the Year' and it is only January.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8860
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 03:36:00 -
[3320] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:So in the above a person points out that Jita would be a mess if collision caused damage, an artifact of bad coding. This is one reason EvE is not intuitive, the laws of physics are secondary to CCPs ability to code.
Completely untrue.
Quote: So what would happen in real space?
Completely irrelevant.
Quote: Instead we have a bogus collision mechanic which (surprise, surprise) can be exploited.
*Any* collision mechanism can be used to the benefit of smart players. And any collision mechanism will be used to the detriment of stupid players.
Nothing about that requires CCP to recode the entire base game as you are suggesting.
Quote: Adapt or die does not apply just to new pilots.
It particularly applies to people who want to see the game changed to benefit them, however.
In this case it applies to you. It's a longer way of saying "deal with it". "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
|
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
1034
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 03:36:00 -
[3321] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Nexus Day wrote: And then you go on to explain how things are even though they still make no sense to a new player and finish with the beloved "bad".
Your honor I have no case to make because the defendant keeps making it for me.
Are you on drugs, son? (in all seriousness, what in the hell are you talking about? Are you still trying to defend your inane ideas to get rid of bumping?)
When bumping became in vogue CCPs stance was bumping was not griefing, while in their definition of griefing they used bumping as an example of griefing. This is the logic of EvE.
Read my post again and you might have a chance of realizing that I in no way want to get rid of bumping. What I propose would still allow bumping bot miners which we all endorse. This thread has so much content it may be 'Thread of the Year' and it is only January.
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
4110
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 03:43:00 -
[3322] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:When bumping became in vogue CCPs stance was bumping was not griefing, while in their definition of griefing they used bumping as an example of griefing. This is the logic of EvE. No, they use following someone around after they make a real attempt to move on as grief play.
Bumping alone, nor killing someone is griefing. Following them over several systems and continuing to do it to them after they have attempted to distance themselves from the situation. That is griefing.
Quote:Read my post again and you might have a chance of realizing that I in no way want to get rid of bumping. What I propose would still allow bumping bot miners which we all endorse. Your proposal is not new and neither is it good.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
. -á<- Argue this, not this ->-á( -í-¦ -£-û -í-¦) |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8860
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 03:43:00 -
[3323] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote: When bumping became in vogue CCPs stance was bumping was not griefing, while in their definition of griefing they used bumping as an example of griefing. This is the logic of EvE.
Are you actually that obtuse? Please tell me you're trolling, and you actually aren't this ignorant. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Riyria Twinpeaks
Reasonable People Of Sound Mind
2109
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 03:49:00 -
[3324] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:So in the above a person points out that Jita would be a mess if collision caused damage, an artifact of bad coding. This is one reason EvE is not intuitive, the laws of physics are secondary to CCPs ability to code.
So what would happen in real space? First they would have some sort of traffic control to prevent collisions. Pretty sure CCP could implement that. Also seeing the success other markets would open up nearby, success breeds competition. We players could do that. But no CCP and we sit on hands because Jita must be Jita. Instead we have a bogus collision mechanic which (surprise, surprise) can be exploited.
Adapt or die does not apply just to new pilots.
I'd like to see you address the issues Scipio raised in this response to your original suggestion. He's not the first one to raise them when faced with the "bumping causing damage" suggestion, I think, and I was about to write something similar before noticing it had already been said, but sadly not responded to. |
|
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3320
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 05:33:00 -
[3325] - Quote
Removed an off topic post or some. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20165
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 07:37:00 -
[3326] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote: ...This is one reason EvE is not intuitive, the laws of physics are secondary to CCPs ability to code. The laws of physics are secondary to most forms of entertainment. Films, comics, games, books etc. all make use of a phenomenon known as willing suspension of disbelief, which is where the viewer, reader, player etc puts aside what they know to be true about the world and embraces the reality presented to them.
Quote:So what would happen in real space? In Newtonian space, I would say stuff would go either go boom or end up with a dirty gurt hole in it, or both, depending on who bumped what.
Ask a astronautical engineer/ physicist what would happen if a 104,000+ ton object travelling at nearly 1.5km/s (Machariel, 100mn mwd) impacts a 940,000 ton item that is travelling at 65m/s (Obelisk), it doesn't matter how big the object being hit is, it's going to make a bit of a mess.
Quote:First they would have some sort of traffic control to prevent collisions. Pretty sure CCP could implement that. Also seeing the success other markets would open up nearby, success breeds competition. We players could do that. By traffic control are you suggesting a hardcoded "you can't undock until the undock is clear" or something akin to traffic lights? If the former then it would would considerably affect the amount of docks and undocks a station could handle as well as put unnecessary strain on the node, if the latter you'd see people shooting the red lights, just as they do in the real world.
CCP already rerouted traffic around the former trade hub via changing the stargate destinations, the result was Jita. If CCP did implement traffic control as you suggest the probable result would be the systems surrounding Jita would become, for all intents and purposes, part of Jita.
Convenience is everything, and Jita is extremely convenient due to its position and accessibility from all four empires. If CCP changed the gate network to make Jita not so convenient, we'd find somewhere that was and Jita 2.0 would be born.
Quote:Instead we have a bogus collision mechanic which (surprise, surprise) can be exploited. There are counters to the bumping mechanic. A mechanic which CCP, who are the only people that count in this regard, do not see as an exploit.
[/quote]Adapt or die does not apply just to new pilots.[/quote]This is about the only thing you posted that makes any sense. Never hold your farts in. They travel up your spine and into the brain, where they ferment. They then migrate to your keyboard via your fingers. That's where shiptoasts come from.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |
admiral root
Red Galaxy
1530
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 14:05:00 -
[3327] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:So what would happen in real space?
You must have really hated star wars. OMG, those x-wings have no control surfaces - how the hell are they flying through atmosphere?!?!?! No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff |
DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
780
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 14:46:00 -
[3328] - Quote
admiral root wrote:Nexus Day wrote:So what would happen in real space? You must have really hated star wars. OMG, those x-wings have no control surfaces - how the hell are they flying through atmosphere?!?!?!
Confirming that video games and science fiction should always follow every law of physics and that the dev team needs to get on top of this before EVE is dying and grrrr goons :)
It's called "game mechanics" and "adapt or die". Learn the rules, learn how to work with them - win all the time, all day, every day! |
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
1034
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 18:31:00 -
[3329] - Quote
Riyria Twinpeaks wrote:Nexus Day wrote:So in the above a person points out that Jita would be a mess if collision caused damage, an artifact of bad coding. This is one reason EvE is not intuitive, the laws of physics are secondary to CCPs ability to code.
So what would happen in real space? First they would have some sort of traffic control to prevent collisions. Pretty sure CCP could implement that. Also seeing the success other markets would open up nearby, success breeds competition. We players could do that. But no CCP and we sit on hands because Jita must be Jita. Instead we have a bogus collision mechanic which (surprise, surprise) can be exploited.
Adapt or die does not apply just to new pilots. I'd like to see you address the issues Scipio raised in this response to your original suggestion. He's not the first one to raise them when faced with the "bumping causing damage" suggestion, I think, and I was about to write something similar before noticing it had already been said, but sadly not responded to. So I did. Do try and keep up.
Again people are imagining things as they are as it seems to be their only frame of reference. Could there be another way of doing things? The answer is usually yes unless the problem has been broken down to its fundamental elements.
He also points out that bumping damage could be exploited without addressing the suggestion that shields regenerate, etc. etc. Some amount of bumping should be allowed. He also fails to address that the current system is exploited. Maybe because it benefits him in some way.
Is this the best we can do? Somehow modern day airports takeoff and land 1000's of planes a day without collisions and CCP can't figure it out in a game? And you defend this as good? This thread has so much content it may be 'Thread of the Year' and it is only January.
|
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
1034
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 18:34:00 -
[3330] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Nexus Day wrote:So in the above a person points out that Jita would be a mess if collision caused damage, an artifact of bad coding. This is one reason EvE is not intuitive, the laws of physics are secondary to CCPs ability to code. Completely untrue. Quote: So what would happen in real space?
Completely irrelevant. Quote: Instead we have a bogus collision mechanic which (surprise, surprise) can be exploited. *Any* collision mechanism can be used to the benefit of smart players. And any collision mechanism will be used to the detriment of stupid players. Nothing about that requires CCP to recode the entire base game as you are suggesting. Quote: Adapt or die does not apply just to new pilots.
It particularly applies to people who want to see the game changed to benefit them, however. In this case it applies to you. It's a longer way of saying "deal with it".
Why is it completely untrue? You need to support your responses or they are just....meh.
Recode the entire base game!? I will let the software gurus explain why the entire base game does not have to be recoded to add damage (something that exists in game) to collisions (something that exists in game). And causing that damage to eventually result in a response (something that exists in game).
This thread has so much content it may be 'Thread of the Year' and it is only January.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 157 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |