Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
415
|
Posted - 2015.10.09 06:39:29 -
[31] - Quote
less trollpost then trollbait.
OP said was he was thinking and not so much whining. Symptomatic are the kind of answers he got.
Some correct answers with "flipp the switch" and lots of insults and other foulmouthing. Eve might be dark and harsh, but this are forums. No wonder devs prefer to discuss on reddit. Some ppl have no decency in RL And EVE.
Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
3362
|
Posted - 2015.10.09 10:54:41 -
[32] - Quote
Markus Reese wrote:It was required... at least according to the dev team when the new system changes occured. According to CCP at the time, they said the old flagging system was so convoluted, complex and intertwined with everything, that it made development work just a big haze. Changing one thing would break something else completely unrelated. They actually fixed that problem before they introduced crimewatch. If you remember how it was introduced they did the "back end" changed where they modernized the code considerably before the new flagging mechanics were introduced.
They also managed to sell the lie that the old system was confusing. Which it wasn't, there was only one type of flag and the entire system was basically "If someone assists someone you can shoot, you can now shoot them". This was replaced with a system that has multiple types of flag with timers of different length that cause you to become attackable to everyone in the game in circumstances when logically you shouldn't be. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2137
|
Posted - 2015.10.09 11:11:31 -
[33] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:Markus Reese wrote:It was required... at least according to the dev team when the new system changes occured. According to CCP at the time, they said the old flagging system was so convoluted, complex and intertwined with everything, that it made development work just a big haze. Changing one thing would break something else completely unrelated. They actually fixed that problem before they introduced crimewatch. If you remember how it was introduced they did the "back end" changed where they modernized the code considerably before the new flagging mechanics were introduced. They also managed to sell the lie that the old system was confusing. Which it wasn't, there was only one type of flag and the entire system was basically "If someone assists someone you can shoot, you can now shoot them". This was replaced with a system that has multiple types of flag with timers of different length that cause you to become attackable to everyone in the game in circumstances when logically you shouldn't be.
The current system has its merits. The flaws come by protecting the special snowflakes like incursion runners.
If they'd left them out of it, we'd have had a mostly intuitive system AND nerfed incursions. Win/win |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
3362
|
Posted - 2015.10.09 11:44:32 -
[34] - Quote
It absolutely does have its merits but I can't call it an improvement.
I personally think the biggest logical oversight is how you become suspect flagged for remotely assisting someone you're allied with in a war. It makes no sense whatsoever from a gameplay standpoint, but it's a logical consequence of a system specifically designed to not account for special circumstances.
The pitchfork waving mass of carebears and nullsec pilots who didn't understand the previous system or consider the implications of the new one were easily sold crimewatch because they were incorrectly informed that it would somehow result in and end to neutral logistics (which they had been using to justify why they always lose or refuse to fight in wars).
We even told them ahead of time that it wouldn't do anything to curtail neutral logistics and that if anything people would just field even more of it, but rather than listen to the opinions of people who actually understand the mechanics they just blew it off.
Unfortunately for them "neutral" means a lot of things. |
Hiasa Kite
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
237
|
Posted - 2015.10.09 13:30:29 -
[35] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:Just get your CEO to set Friendly Fire = Illegal. Problem solved. Or find a corp with a competent CEO.
Both are good.
People to vote for CSM X(in order): Sabriz Adoudel, Cagali Cagali, Steve Ronuken, Manfred Sideous, Mike Azariah, Gorski Car
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
816
|
Posted - 2015.10.09 13:46:56 -
[36] - Quote
Hengle Teron wrote:I had no idea NPC corps can have the friendly fire on.
Friendly Fire is set to "Illegal" in NPC corps by default, and cannot be changed. I wish it could be changed by a vote option.
Getting a more competent CEO would be reasonable, but then his current CEO doesn't learn anything; or maybe his current CEO is a reverse Safari type of guy. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
40473
|
Posted - 2015.10.09 14:56:50 -
[37] - Quote
Hiasa Kite wrote:Estella Osoka wrote:Just get your CEO to set Friendly Fire = Illegal. Problem solved. Or find a corp with a competent CEO. Both are good. The CEO may well be competent.
Perhaps friendly fire is allowed for a reason.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
3368
|
Posted - 2015.10.09 15:11:47 -
[38] - Quote
Gotta shoot greens.
Heck the fact I can't shoot alliance members is legitimately a problem sometimes. There needs to be an alliance friendly fire toggle. |
Ralph King-Griffin
Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance
12360
|
Posted - 2015.10.09 15:53:15 -
[39] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote: Gotta shoot greens.
Heck the fact I can't shoot alliance members is legitimately a problem sometimes. There needs to be an alliance friendly fire toggle. It is indeed.
Better the Devil you know.
=]|[=
|
Hal Morsh
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
422
|
Posted - 2015.10.09 22:22:54 -
[40] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote: See Hal, he's not interest in learning and adapting, he just wants to whine.
Okay okay I get it. Maybe one day he won't be miserable about it.
I would suggest too OP to lose some ships.
Dun'Gal > Hal is simply an imperfect ai, though if drunkeness ever gets programmed into ai's I foresee both a hilarious and tragic end to humanity.
|
|
ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1238
|
Posted - 2015.10.09 22:36:21 -
[41] - Quote
The OP received the answer to his inquiry. I'm closing this because I spent too much time deleting troll/flame/disrespectful replies and I cannot foresee how it will improve going forward.
Quote:2. Be respectful toward others at all times.
The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated.
5. Trolling is prohibited.
Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.
ISD Decoy
Captain
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |