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) |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2880
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 17:59:00 -
[4651] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Some men just want to watch the world burn.
There's space for us all in New Eden.
No, CCP Falcon, there is not.
There is no place for those who want to kill miners in high sec with no CONCORD intervention. There is no place for those who want to mine AFK without worry of being attacked. There is no place for those who want to join a corp with no worry of war decs. There is no place for those who want to attack and destroy war targets who refuse to undock, or even log in. There is no place for those who want to war dec NPC corps, or players in said corps. There is no place for those who want to have avatar game play. There is no place for those who want to haul without worry of being attacked.
I could go on, but you get my point. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24412
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:02:00 -
[4652] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Well, there was a threshold question of if CODE is making a profit (I say no, others say yes). GǪand you have no proof for you stance.
Quote:Once that is dealt with, then you would say ok, so its not a business, its just a tear creation program, is that legitimate? Yes. That's why, even if what you said is true (but again, you can't prove it), it is irrelevant.
Quote:The question then becomes though, has CCP set up the game in optimal fashion Yes. They've said so on multiple occasions. You can stop asking because you have been given the answer so many times now that asking it again is itself wilfully ignorant.
Quote:To the extent that CODE is bleeding isk just to make people cry and humiliate them on minerbumping.com, is that the kind of conduct that CCP sees as socially valuable and wants to incentivize? So to zero extent then. And yes, that is a kind of conduct that is being explicitly allowed and marketed by CCP.
Quote:For example, is it reasonable that people with -10 sec status can continue their spree of ganking in highsec, with no other contributions to the game in between to raise their security status? Very obviously yes. Otherwise, they would not have been allowed to to so and CCP would not have put in the effort to make sure that this can happen.
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 skillplan 2.2. |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
19
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:02:00 -
[4653] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:I support the concept of suicide ganking Just one thing: you're lying. We know this because you have gone on the record saying you don't support it. Since you now go on to make conditions, you still don't support it. So what you meant to say here was GÇ£I don't support suicide ganking, in concept or otherwiseGÇ¥. Quote:I personally do not do it, because I like to help people, not hurt them This is a lie. We know this because of the newbie griefing you have openly engage in on these forums. What you meant to say was GÇ£I like to screw people over and hurt them in the long term.GÇ¥ Quote:I oppose the type of suicide ganking that CODE is doing, which is purely to rile people up This is a lie. There is far more to CODE's ganking that purely to rile people up. What you meant to say is GÇ£I oppose suicide ganking of all types, especially if it is profitable and fun, like CODE'sGÇ¥.
Lolz....you do so prove entertainment here :)
1. I said no such thing. I'm a big fan of +EV suicide ganking, I think it keeps highsec interesting. I don't unconditionally support all suicide ganking true, but I support it at certain times and places. I'm a big fan of ships with cargo value >> hull value + mod value getting xploded and looted. I'm a big fan of 20 bil officer fit L4 ships getting xloded and looted, etc... So your statement is...well....false.
2. I help new players, run missions with them, give anti ganking advice, explain of the game. I'm actually quite confident that I am far better at this game than you are. And certainly I didn't grief new players by being the #4 support of CODE last month during the venture killing contest.
3. Check their website, its all about tears. Check their treasury, its all about losing isk. |
IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1182
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:03:00 -
[4654] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:IIshira wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: No, but people who want to make a profit don't intentionally blow up empty ships in an -EV fashion.
Okay Veers you have avoided my point on this topic. Veers, Veers, Veers, Veers. I don't care if I make a profit! I want to blow stuff up and I love PVP! Eve is a game where I can do that. Is it bad I don't make a profit and just play the game to have fun??? Well, there was a threshold question of if CODE is making a profit (I say no, others say yes). Once that is dealt with, then you would say ok, so its not a business, its just a tear creation program, is that legitimate? And like you, I think the answer is "yes," that's legit. EvE is not sim city, you are allowed to do -EV things for fun. The question then becomes though, has CCP set up the game in optimal fashion, considering what CODE is doing, and are any changes warranted? To the extent that CODE is bleeding isk just to make people cry and humiliate them on minerbumping.com, is that the kind of conduct that CCP sees as socially valuable and wants to incentivize? And if not, are there ways to tweak the mechanics so that gankers focus more on +EV targets, and less on -EV targets to just harvest tears? For example, is it reasonable that people with -10 sec status can continue their spree of ganking in highsec, with no other contributions to the game in between to raise their security status?
I don't care about tears... I want to blow things up. I'm not a Carebear so I don't want to raise my sec status.
The RP tears are cute if you're into that kind of thing. If you're shedding RL tears over pixels PLEASE STEP BACK FROM THE GAME. This is a warning sign that you have a problem. |
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite CODE.
200
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:03:00 -
[4655] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:And, as shown, the revenue is less than the cost, making it a loss, not a profit. You don't have the numbers, you just assume the values that best fit to your arguments and sell them as facts.
As I have explained before, the ganking of empty Freighters has the not so obvious (and maybe originally unintended) purpose of keeping the people in the fleet interested. If you only gank valuable targets and let them wait for hours they will log of and not join the next time, because it is simply boring. Since this is a game and most people play for fun in their rare free time you have to consider this things. the Code ALWAYS wins |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
20
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:04:00 -
[4656] - Quote
entivize?[/quote]So to zero extent then. And yes, that is a kind of conduct that is being explicitly allowed and marketed by CCP.
Quote:For example, is it reasonable that people with -10 sec status can continue their spree of ganking in highsec, with no other contributions to the game in between to raise their security status? Very obviously yes. Otherwise, they would not have been allowed to to so and CCP would not have put in the effort to make sure that this can happen. [/quote]
Thankfully CCP is constantly deciding how to change and improve the game, it isn't static. And that's why we have these forums, so we can provide our opinion on the current happenings, and suggest improvements. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24413
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:08:00 -
[4657] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:[Lolz....you do so prove entertainment here So you agree then, since you can't actually offer any proof to the contrary.
Quote:I said no such thing. Yes you did. Explicitly and on numerous occasions, here and elsewhere. You have already proven this, and you can't take it back.
No you don't. You grief them by actively ruining their chances to learn EVE. You have already proven this and you can't take it back.
Quote:Check their website, its all about tears. Check their treasury, its all about losing isk. GǪexcept that their treasure prove you wrong and you have no other proof to support your lie. Again, you keep claiming that there is no profit. Prove it.
Quote:Thankfully CCP is constantly decided how to change and improve the game, it isn't static. This part of the game is, because they explicitly have said that it is supposed to work that way. Every time you ask them, they give the same answer. And no-one has ever offered even the remotest hint of anything resembling a reason why it should change. 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 skillplan 2.2. |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
20
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:10:00 -
[4658] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Quote:I said no such thing. Yes you did. Explicitly and on numerous occasions, here and elsewhere. No you don't. You grief them by actively ruining their chances to learn EVE. Quote:Check their website, its all about tears. Check their treasury, its all about losing isk. GǪexcept that their treasure prove you wrong and you have no other proof to support your lie. Quote:Thankfully CCP is constantly decided how to change and improve the game, it isn't static. This part of the game is, because they explicitly have said that it is supposed to work that way. Every time you ask them, they give the same answer.
I think I've made my position on suicide ganking pretty darn clear. Feel free to read what I actually wrote instead of addressing what you would like me to write.
The rest of your comments are....odd....and I don't have a response at this time. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20694
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:12:00 -
[4659] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:I'm actually quite confident that I am far better at this game than you are. Oh god make it stop, won't someone please make it stop?
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:13:00 -
[4660] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Tippia wrote:Quote:I said no such thing. Yes you did. Explicitly and on numerous occasions, here and elsewhere. No you don't. You grief them by actively ruining their chances to learn EVE. Quote:Thankfully CCP is constantly decided how to change and improve the game, it isn't static. This part of the game is, because they explicitly have said that it is supposed to work that way. Every time you ask them, they give the same answer. I think I've made my position on suicide ganking pretty darn clear. Feel free to read what I actually wrote instead of addressing what you would like me to write. The rest of your comments are....odd....and I don't have a response at this time.
Tippia needs to be provided with proof that the sky is blue so I would say you are doing a pretty good job since nobody seems capable of continuing to debate you in a meaningful way. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24413
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:15:00 -
[4661] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:I think I've made my position on suicide ganking pretty darn clear. No, because you are a liar. Nothing you say can ever be trusted. Nothing you say seems to ever be true, and most of the time, the exact opposite of what you said turns out to be (or just very obviously is) the case.
This is why you need to prove proof. Because without it, every word that comes out of you is 100% worthless and irrelevant. 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 skillplan 2.2. |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
20
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:17:00 -
[4662] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:Tippia needs to be provided with proof that the sky is blue so I would say you are doing a pretty good job since nobody seems capable of continuing to debate you in a meaningful way.
patience is always the key...obviously someone who was the #4 contributor to CODE last month is probably not of the persuadable variety, but the points should be made, regardless, for the benefit of other players and CCP. |
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4600
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:17:00 -
[4663] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:Tippia needs to be provided with proof that the sky is blue so I would say you are doing a pretty good job since nobody seems capable of continuing to debate you in a meaningful way. the sky isnt actually blue though =][= |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
20
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:17:00 -
[4664] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:I think I've made my position on suicide ganking pretty darn clear. No, because you are a liar. Nothing you say can ever be trusted. Nothing you say seems to ever be true, and most of the time, the exact opposite of what you said turns out to be (or just very obviously is) the case. This is why you need to prove proof. Because without it, every word that comes out of you is 100% worthless and irrelevant. Quote:The rest of your comments are....odd....and I don't have a response at this time. No. The rest of my comment (like the first part) is true. That's why it strikes you as odd: it is not something you are familiar with. That is also why you are incapable of responding to it GÇö because it would just be more, very blatant and obvious lies on your part.
To prove proof? Even I can't do that! |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
20
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:19:00 -
[4665] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:I think I've made my position on suicide ganking pretty darn clear. No, because you are a liar. Nothing you say can ever be trusted. Nothing you say seems to ever be true, and most of the time, the exact opposite of what you said turns out to be (or just very obviously is) the case. This is why you need to prove proof. Because without it, every word that comes out of you is 100% worthless and irrelevant. Quote:The rest of your comments are....odd....and I don't have a response at this time. No. The rest of my comment (like the first part) is true. That's why it strikes you as odd: it is not something you are familiar with. That is also why you are incapable of responding to it GÇö because it would just be more, very blatant and obvious lies on your part.
No, I've explicitly laid out my position. Suicide ganking is an important part of the game, and should be retained. CCP should adjust incentives so that it occurs more when +EV, and less when -EV. That is hardly "lying" or "opposing suicide ganking." Keep it real Tippia. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24415
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:19:00 -
[4666] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:To prove proof? Even I can't do that! Because guessing GÇ£provideGÇ¥ before I corrected it is sooooooo hard.
Liar.
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 skillplan 2.2. |
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5523
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:20:00 -
[4667] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:To prove proof? Even I can't do that!
Glad you're willing to admit that all your various claims are lies. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24415
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:20:00 -
[4668] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:No, I've explicitly laid out my position. GǪand then contradicted it. So you were lying. You can't even prove your own stance.
Quote:CCP should adjust incentives so that it occurs more when +EV, and less when -EV. This is already the case, liar, so why should they adjust the incentives? 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 skillplan 2.2. |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
20
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:23:00 -
[4669] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:No, I've explicitly laid out my position. GǪand then contradicted it. So you were lying. You can't even prove your own stance. Quote:CCP should adjust incentives so that it occurs more when +EV, and less when -EV. This is already the case, liar, so why should they adjust the incentives?
Did not contradict my own stance. Calling me a liar many times in a row just makes you look....sad. I know you are capable of better, Tippia, this isn't even on the Goon level, this is like down to Waffes level. Please re-read what I wrote.
No, CODE is institutionalizing -EV ganks, which was the entire topic of the thread? Did you even bother reading the eloquent post from the OP? |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
20
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:23:00 -
[4670] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:To prove proof? Even I can't do that! Glad you're willing to admit that all your various claims are lies.
Proving proof is by definition impossible. How do you prove that there is such a thing as proof? |
|
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:25:00 -
[4671] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:No, I've explicitly laid out my position. GǪand then contradicted it. So you were lying. You can't even prove your own stance. Quote:CCP should adjust incentives so that it occurs more when +EV, and less when -EV. This is already the case, liar, so why should they adjust the incentives?
When I read this I seriously thought of a little girl screaming "liar" when told santa claus isn't real.
Thanks for the laughs. |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
20
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:26:00 -
[4672] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:No, I've explicitly laid out my position. GǪand then contradicted it. So you were lying. You can't even prove your own stance. Quote:CCP should adjust incentives so that it occurs more when +EV, and less when -EV. This is already the case, liar, so why should they adjust the incentives? When I read this I seriously thought of a little girl screaming "liar" when told santa claus isn't real. Thanks for the laughs.
I know, the entertainment level from Tippia is truly epic :) She is by far my favorite forum poster. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24416
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:27:00 -
[4673] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Did not contradict my own stance. Yes you did, liar. First you were against ganking, then you were for it, then you were for it with condition (which means you're against it).
Quote:No, CODE is institutionalizing -EV ganks GǪexcept that you can't prove that they're not profiting from them, so that's quite a lie as well. And it doesn't change the fact that the incentives are already what you claim you want them to be (but then again, with your track record, this is probably a lieGǪ). So why should they adjust the incentives?
Quote:How do you prove that there is such a thing as proof? Ask Popper. Or al-Haytham. 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 skillplan 2.2. |
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
4428
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:30:00 -
[4674] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:No, I've explicitly laid out my position. GǪand then contradicted it. So you were lying. You can't even prove your own stance. Quote:CCP should adjust incentives so that it occurs more when +EV, and less when -EV. This is already the case, liar, so why should they adjust the incentives? When I read this I seriously thought of a little girl screaming "liar" when told santa claus isn't real. Thanks for the laughs. I know, the entertainment level from Tippia is truly epic :) She is by far my favorite forum poster.
It's like watching a pair of pigeons strut their stuff after shitting all over something no one cares about and pretending they've won something. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
20
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:32:00 -
[4675] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Did not contradict my own stance. Yes you did, liar. First you were against ganking, then you were for it, then you were for it with condition (which means you're against it). Quote:No, CODE is institutionalizing -EV ganks GǪexcept that you can't prove that they're not profiting from them, so that's quite a lie as well. And it doesn't change the fact that the incentives are already what you claim you want them to be. So why should they adjust the incentives?
I was never opposed to all suicide ganking, I think highsec would be boring without out. As a noob i used to delight in this player's epic ganks. https://zkillboard.com/character/94217100/ Now there is a businessman. Personally I don't gank because it hurts people and makes them quit the game, and I prefer to help people than make them cry. And thinking that incentives should be altered to make there more +EV ganking and less -EV ganking does not mean that I am against ganking. Come on Tippia, step up your game - this is the big leagues.
And CODE is bleeding money like a beast, look at their bank account. I provided ways to incentivize high value kills - mainly forcing -10 sec status players to grind up sec status before they can gank again. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24419
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:34:00 -
[4676] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:I was never opposed to all suicide ganking Your earlier claims prove otherwise.
Quote:And thinking that incentives should be altered to make there more +EV ganking and less -EV ganking does not mean that I am against ganking. Why should there be, and why should the incentives be altered?
Quote:And CODE is bleeding money like a beast, look at their bank account. And you have yet to prove that their ganks are not profitable. In fact, everything you hint at (but don't actually cite) suggests the exact opposite of your claim, making those claims look an awful lot like lies. 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 skillplan 2.2. |
Trixie Lawless
Wayland Industrial Holdings
16
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:43:00 -
[4677] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Did not contradict my own stance. Yes you did, liar. First you were against ganking, then you were for it, then you were for it with condition (which means you're against it). Quote:No, CODE is institutionalizing -EV ganks GǪexcept that you can't prove that they're not profiting from them, so that's quite a lie as well. And it doesn't change the fact that the incentives are already what you claim you want them to be (but then again, with your track record, this is probably a lieGǪ). So why should they adjust the incentives? Quote:How do you prove that there is such a thing as proof? Ask Popper. Or al-Haytham.
At this point does it even matter if he's right it wrong? Or if you're right or wrong? Throwing the word liar out there repeatedly makes you sound like your 13 and pissed off at the world. Honestly it's pathetic. Who cares if he has proof or not. State your piece and be done with it like an adult.
|
Devils Embrace
Spidercakes Baked Goods and Industriel Servises
56
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:44:00 -
[4678] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:IIshira wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: No, but people who want to make a profit don't intentionally blow up empty ships in an -EV fashion.
Okay Veers you have avoided my point on this topic. Veers, Veers, Veers, Veers. I don't care if I make a profit! I want to blow stuff up and I love PVP! Eve is a game where I can do that. Is it bad I don't make a profit and just play the game to have fun??? Well, there was a threshold question of if CODE is making a profit (I say no, others say yes). Once that is dealt with, then you would say ok, so its not a business, its just a tear creation program, is that legitimate? And like you, I think the answer is "yes," that's legit. EvE is not sim city, you are allowed to do -EV things for fun. The question then becomes though, has CCP set up the game in optimal fashion, considering what CODE is doing, and are any changes warranted? To the extent that CODE is bleeding isk just to make people cry and humiliate them on minerbumping.com, is that the kind of conduct that CCP sees as socially valuable and wants to incentivize? And if not, are there ways to tweak the mechanics so that gankers focus more on +EV targets, and less on -EV targets to just harvest tears? For example, is it reasonable that people with -10 sec status can continue their spree of ganking in highsec, with no other contributions to the game in between to raise their security status?
"The carebear is only concerned with money. Agents value higher things--namely, the Code. For this reason, a miner and an Agent often seem to talk past each other."
It's like they usually say about fantasy MMO's and men playing female characters: "If I'm going to spend alot of time watching this character, it might as well have a good looking ass". |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24419
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:47:00 -
[4679] - Quote
Trixie Lawless wrote:Who cares if he has proof or not. State your piece and be done with it like an adult. The piece has been stated: everything he says is a lie. He has no proof. If he wants anything he says to be believe, he has to provide proof. He can't, so he tries to disprove his lies with more lies.
I'm just calling a spade a spade. 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 skillplan 2.2. |
Helena Tiberius Mabata
new order logistics CODE.
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 18:54:00 -
[4680] - Quote
#Veer'sTearz
I think the general populace of this forum has seen though your supposed "Support of Ganking" You just veil it and try to push for a safe high sec with "Communal PVE" and "Safety for autopiloting ships" It has hence been beaten to death and I think its time to rack up the next idea |
|
|
|
|
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 |