|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.12 22:50:00 -
[1]
Originally by: Hematic Safe spots are needed.
If only to be able to take a f'ng break to have a cig or go the bathroom.
I hear alot of people moaning about people talking smack from safe spots. I think the problem for those that moan is to learn the term 'sticks and stones' and just tune them out. I've been playing since may of '03 and smack talk hasn't been a problem for me even once. Probably because it's generally a two-way street.
The current bookmarking system is fine the way it is.
Ever heard of docking or logging out?
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.12 22:50:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Hematic Safe spots are needed.
If only to be able to take a f'ng break to have a cig or go the bathroom.
I hear alot of people moaning about people talking smack from safe spots. I think the problem for those that moan is to learn the term 'sticks and stones' and just tune them out. I've been playing since may of '03 and smack talk hasn't been a problem for me even once. Probably because it's generally a two-way street.
The current bookmarking system is fine the way it is.
Ever heard of docking or logging out?
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.12 23:55:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Mr nStuff uh.. logging out shouldn't have to be an option. Neither should fighting a losing battle. You guys have a problem with smack talk. Either keep your mouth shut or use the block feature. If you want something to blow up. Go find someone that isn't hiding or go blow up an NPC pirate or something.
And stop <cough> complaining.. You're giving me a headache.
Mr N Stuff is a NOOB. The point is it negates viable PvP.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.12 23:55:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Mr nStuff uh.. logging out shouldn't have to be an option. Neither should fighting a losing battle. You guys have a problem with smack talk. Either keep your mouth shut or use the block feature. If you want something to blow up. Go find someone that isn't hiding or go blow up an NPC pirate or something.
And stop <cough> complaining.. You're giving me a headache.
Mr N Stuff is a NOOB. The point is it negates viable PvP.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 00:00:00 -
[5]
The point is your probably sick of getting blown up and you know that the only way you survive in PvP is to safespot. That makes you a noob.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 00:00:00 -
[6]
The point is your probably sick of getting blown up and you know that the only way you survive in PvP is to safespot. That makes you a noob.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 00:11:00 -
[7]
why get rid of warp core stabs? I never heard anyone complain about warp core stabs except that they were underpowered. Safespots are a bigger problem then Insta BM's because now we have Mobile Warp disruptors that can stop insta bm's. As for empire wars then yeah maybe you shouldnt be able to make insta bm's in empre bc the empires dont allow it for security reasons ( a roleplay solution)
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 00:11:00 -
[8]
why get rid of warp core stabs? I never heard anyone complain about warp core stabs except that they were underpowered. Safespots are a bigger problem then Insta BM's because now we have Mobile Warp disruptors that can stop insta bm's. As for empire wars then yeah maybe you shouldnt be able to make insta bm's in empre bc the empires dont allow it for security reasons ( a roleplay solution)
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 01:04:00 -
[9]
Until they warp to a new one...
I dont think tracking agents give bookmarks to safespots. I assume thats what your saying because using a tracking agent takes 10 minutes. Im just trying to understand wether your proposing that safespots should be findable in 10 minutes or if they already are.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 01:04:00 -
[10]
Until they warp to a new one...
I dont think tracking agents give bookmarks to safespots. I assume thats what your saying because using a tracking agent takes 10 minutes. Im just trying to understand wether your proposing that safespots should be findable in 10 minutes or if they already are.
|
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 07:17:00 -
[11]
Right but do you think a small fleet should be able to hit and run say a corporation that has every gate camped in a system with mobile warp disruptors? No, but there is o corp in Eve that can camp every gate in every system in a whole region. So there woudl still be oppurtunity to do guerilla tactics and escape. OR they shouldnt be able to camp a system and then one sign of being outnumbered or trapped they safespot and logout etc. That is bad flavor and it ruins PvP. I mean they were trapped and outnumbered, they should of been destroyed for being so stupid as to not escape through the gate or to dock.
Next person who says that there should be safespots in Eve will receive negative standing to me personally. Thank you. End this nonsense. Go play a wimp game like Everquest.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 07:17:00 -
[12]
Right but do you think a small fleet should be able to hit and run say a corporation that has every gate camped in a system with mobile warp disruptors? No, but there is o corp in Eve that can camp every gate in every system in a whole region. So there woudl still be oppurtunity to do guerilla tactics and escape. OR they shouldnt be able to camp a system and then one sign of being outnumbered or trapped they safespot and logout etc. That is bad flavor and it ruins PvP. I mean they were trapped and outnumbered, they should of been destroyed for being so stupid as to not escape through the gate or to dock.
Next person who says that there should be safespots in Eve will receive negative standing to me personally. Thank you. End this nonsense. Go play a wimp game like Everquest.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 07:45:00 -
[13]
I told you Mr N Stuff is not all there.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 07:45:00 -
[14]
I told you Mr N Stuff is not all there.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 09:37:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Crunch Freeman
Originally by: Sinist Next person who says that there should be safespots in Eve will receive negative standing to me personally. Thank you. End this nonsense. Go play a wimp game like Everquest.
Oh no!!! Please not that. I don't think I could live with my self if I had a negative personal standing with you. By the way, who are you and why should I care? Geeze, go back to playing Quake if you can't deal with it.
Safe spots are a viable option to those who are not kitted out to pvp or are not into pvp. There are plenty other targets out there for you to pick on that are willing to fight against you so let those that arn't go to their safe spot and wait out the heat. If you have a bunch of clowns that are sitting in a safe spot just to taunt you then click block and they will go away, I promise. Going to a safe spot is no different than going to a station and docking but if there is no station around then it is the only other alternative. What next, you want to prohibit people from docking in a station?
Then goto a moon. If you arent into PvP or Combat and you go into 0.0 then you deserve to die. Stay in Empire. NPC's will attack you and so will Players. IF you want to be a girl and warp to a deadspot in space where likely noone is going to find you then so be it. You will have bad standing with me. I dont agree with it and it is my right to set you at bad personal standing. You should go play a game like Tale in the desert which doesnt have combat. Why do you go into 0.0? To grief people by safespotting all over being invincible in the most dangerous places in Eve( or close enough). Or you like cmaping a system as a wannabee alliance or corporation/pirates and then safespotting at first sign of trouble? Please.
If you werent in noob starter corp you would of had a war declaration. Nub.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 09:37:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Crunch Freeman
Originally by: Sinist Next person who says that there should be safespots in Eve will receive negative standing to me personally. Thank you. End this nonsense. Go play a wimp game like Everquest.
Oh no!!! Please not that. I don't think I could live with my self if I had a negative personal standing with you. By the way, who are you and why should I care? Geeze, go back to playing Quake if you can't deal with it.
Safe spots are a viable option to those who are not kitted out to pvp or are not into pvp. There are plenty other targets out there for you to pick on that are willing to fight against you so let those that arn't go to their safe spot and wait out the heat. If you have a bunch of clowns that are sitting in a safe spot just to taunt you then click block and they will go away, I promise. Going to a safe spot is no different than going to a station and docking but if there is no station around then it is the only other alternative. What next, you want to prohibit people from docking in a station?
Then goto a moon. If you arent into PvP or Combat and you go into 0.0 then you deserve to die. Stay in Empire. NPC's will attack you and so will Players. IF you want to be a girl and warp to a deadspot in space where likely noone is going to find you then so be it. You will have bad standing with me. I dont agree with it and it is my right to set you at bad personal standing. You should go play a game like Tale in the desert which doesnt have combat. Why do you go into 0.0? To grief people by safespotting all over being invincible in the most dangerous places in Eve( or close enough). Or you like cmaping a system as a wannabee alliance or corporation/pirates and then safespotting at first sign of trouble? Please.
If you werent in noob starter corp you would of had a war declaration. Nub.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 11:13:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Del Narveux I look at this from two perspectives. As a PvP enthusiast, it really sucks that me and my pals can jump into a system, bent on blood, and our target jumps to a safespot, never to be seen again that day. But on the other hand as a smalltimer and miner, I see that theyre essential to mining and getting past gate-ganks that dont care if were a band of mining noobs or an alliance battle fleet.
The problem I see with making safespots easily detectable is griefer gangs will just go from system to system, tracking down safespots and blowing up the secure cans and backup ships we leave there. Very, very bad news for all the smallish mining/industrial corps out there. I think this is a problem that will plague POS's as well, and basically make it so only huge corps/alliances with people online 24/7 could have one without it being ganked to hell by the roving lamers.
A possible solution I see is a very large, very expensive anchorable 'stealth field' that hides everything in a ~30km radius from scanners. Perhaps you could even make it so that a corp or individual can only have 1 of them. Thus, a mining op could establish a mess of cans at a safespot in their favorite system, but fighters couldnt just jump away in any system and escape being shot at.
Um why cant you put your backup ships and ammo in stations like normal people? Else wait for player owned structures.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 11:13:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Del Narveux I look at this from two perspectives. As a PvP enthusiast, it really sucks that me and my pals can jump into a system, bent on blood, and our target jumps to a safespot, never to be seen again that day. But on the other hand as a smalltimer and miner, I see that theyre essential to mining and getting past gate-ganks that dont care if were a band of mining noobs or an alliance battle fleet.
The problem I see with making safespots easily detectable is griefer gangs will just go from system to system, tracking down safespots and blowing up the secure cans and backup ships we leave there. Very, very bad news for all the smallish mining/industrial corps out there. I think this is a problem that will plague POS's as well, and basically make it so only huge corps/alliances with people online 24/7 could have one without it being ganked to hell by the roving lamers.
A possible solution I see is a very large, very expensive anchorable 'stealth field' that hides everything in a ~30km radius from scanners. Perhaps you could even make it so that a corp or individual can only have 1 of them. Thus, a mining op could establish a mess of cans at a safespot in their favorite system, but fighters couldnt just jump away in any system and escape being shot at.
Um why cant you put your backup ships and ammo in stations like normal people? Else wait for player owned structures.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 11:22:00 -
[19]
Some safespots can be found. Not easily though. And impossible if the person even had half a clue how to do it. Your arguments about guerilla tactics and how they need safespots is false. If all gates out of a system are camped and have mobile warp disruptors ont hem your out of luck to begin with. You moonhop and logoff. Same as safespotting. Or you dock if possible. Whats the problem? Whya re deadspace bookmarks even possible to beginw ith? If new scanner technology was coming in next patch I wouldnt be posting here. But it isnt and CCP has said jack about it besides Oveer arguing with the SAfespot huggers and coming up with unnaceptable solutions. Just get rid of deadspace bookmarking. Only allow bookmarks to be placed near stations, assteroid belts, moons and planets in say a 500km range. All problems solved. No more insta jumping. Still bookmars can be used for battles. face it 99% of the fighitng would happen near gates and stations and nea rmoons and planets and asteroid belts if we didnt have deadspace bookmarking. Or at least very close to those entities. The wya it should be.
This is a pretty big sore for me in Eve right now. While I can use deadspace bookmarking ot my advanatge. it is something I would rather not have. And if we did have it then I expect my scanner to provide something useful like the ability to find people in deadspace and warp to them etc. I mean wth is this hide and go seek?
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 11:22:00 -
[20]
Some safespots can be found. Not easily though. And impossible if the person even had half a clue how to do it. Your arguments about guerilla tactics and how they need safespots is false. If all gates out of a system are camped and have mobile warp disruptors ont hem your out of luck to begin with. You moonhop and logoff. Same as safespotting. Or you dock if possible. Whats the problem? Whya re deadspace bookmarks even possible to beginw ith? If new scanner technology was coming in next patch I wouldnt be posting here. But it isnt and CCP has said jack about it besides Oveer arguing with the SAfespot huggers and coming up with unnaceptable solutions. Just get rid of deadspace bookmarking. Only allow bookmarks to be placed near stations, assteroid belts, moons and planets in say a 500km range. All problems solved. No more insta jumping. Still bookmars can be used for battles. face it 99% of the fighitng would happen near gates and stations and nea rmoons and planets and asteroid belts if we didnt have deadspace bookmarking. Or at least very close to those entities. The wya it should be.
This is a pretty big sore for me in Eve right now. While I can use deadspace bookmarking ot my advanatge. it is something I would rather not have. And if we did have it then I expect my scanner to provide something useful like the ability to find people in deadspace and warp to them etc. I mean wth is this hide and go seek?
|
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 13:10:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: illuminati
Quote: End result is the same though - you can't kill them, they can't kill you ... not really sure I know what the problem is
Hehe, go away! That IS the problem!
It's not like the removal of safespots removes the ability to run and hide...
But if there is no difference between logging or warping to a safespot, where is the problem with either?
People can log to avoid combat. People can use safespots to avoid combat.
When logged there is 0 chance of killing them. When at safespot there is a minimal chance of killing them.
Thus using a safespot is better than people logging.
Ergo, if you do ban safespots you must prevent people logging off in order to maintain a balance.
So, if you need to do something in real life you will need to either dock (hard in the systems I frequent), or do it during downtime.
There. Logic wins again.
:D
Your wrong though and forum rules doesnt permit you to say how wrong you are.
If someone logs that means they warp away and dissapear. WHen they log back in they warp back to where they logged off. People are only going to be able to logoff near moons planets stations gates etc. There is going to be a higher risk in logging in. People who have patience will have a chance of catching people logging in. Which will make station and player owned structures more sought after the way it should be in my opinion. Logging in space will have a risk involved. There is no risk in safespotting. And saying there is a minimal chance of finding the safespot is very gracious considering how it is actually less then minimal. Almost nonexistant.
Please dont instul my intelligence here when you argue about safespots. You cant even deduct your own logics about the pro's and con's behind it. Get rid of safespots. Plain and simple. Its been said for the last eon. Get rid of dead space bookmarking if you arent going to make scanner worth anything.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 13:10:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: illuminati
Quote: End result is the same though - you can't kill them, they can't kill you ... not really sure I know what the problem is
Hehe, go away! That IS the problem!
It's not like the removal of safespots removes the ability to run and hide...
But if there is no difference between logging or warping to a safespot, where is the problem with either?
People can log to avoid combat. People can use safespots to avoid combat.
When logged there is 0 chance of killing them. When at safespot there is a minimal chance of killing them.
Thus using a safespot is better than people logging.
Ergo, if you do ban safespots you must prevent people logging off in order to maintain a balance.
So, if you need to do something in real life you will need to either dock (hard in the systems I frequent), or do it during downtime.
There. Logic wins again.
:D
Your wrong though and forum rules doesnt permit you to say how wrong you are.
If someone logs that means they warp away and dissapear. WHen they log back in they warp back to where they logged off. People are only going to be able to logoff near moons planets stations gates etc. There is going to be a higher risk in logging in. People who have patience will have a chance of catching people logging in. Which will make station and player owned structures more sought after the way it should be in my opinion. Logging in space will have a risk involved. There is no risk in safespotting. And saying there is a minimal chance of finding the safespot is very gracious considering how it is actually less then minimal. Almost nonexistant.
Please dont instul my intelligence here when you argue about safespots. You cant even deduct your own logics about the pro's and con's behind it. Get rid of safespots. Plain and simple. Its been said for the last eon. Get rid of dead space bookmarking if you arent going to make scanner worth anything.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 14:00:00 -
[23]
And if CCP are the ones who invented CNTRL + Space function then CCP are the ones who can disable it. In your world programming isnt reversible though huh...
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 14:00:00 -
[24]
And if CCP are the ones who invented CNTRL + Space function then CCP are the ones who can disable it. In your world programming isnt reversible though huh...
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 16:07:00 -
[25]
You mean
Pro's: 1) Allows me to run in the heat of battle never to be found again. 2) Allows my ship to escape death 80% of the time. 3) Allows me and my friends free reign in places normally we would get smacked around like little girls, all becase we warped in with inties and made a whole bunch of safe spots. 4) System camping is never so easy because well all we have to do is safespot whenever we are outnumbered. we lack the skill to dock or jump out of system or to have escape routes. 5) It supports Anti PvPism 6) There is nothing like safespotting and creating a big blob of unfindable ships to make all those cower in fear whent hey look at map, and to make them never travel there again! 7) Oh yeah ban PvP. LETS PLAY HIDE AND GO SEEK INSTEAD!
Case Closed. Already made my point I dont like it.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 16:07:00 -
[26]
You mean
Pro's: 1) Allows me to run in the heat of battle never to be found again. 2) Allows my ship to escape death 80% of the time. 3) Allows me and my friends free reign in places normally we would get smacked around like little girls, all becase we warped in with inties and made a whole bunch of safe spots. 4) System camping is never so easy because well all we have to do is safespot whenever we are outnumbered. we lack the skill to dock or jump out of system or to have escape routes. 5) It supports Anti PvPism 6) There is nothing like safespotting and creating a big blob of unfindable ships to make all those cower in fear whent hey look at map, and to make them never travel there again! 7) Oh yeah ban PvP. LETS PLAY HIDE AND GO SEEK INSTEAD!
Case Closed. Already made my point I dont like it.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 17:14:00 -
[27]
Please try and see the logic. There will be greater chance of killing people without safespots. In the example of a camped system at least if a person is logged on we know to look at moons, belts gates or stations etc. We dont have to cover millions of square misles of space going 500km/s which would take about 500 years.
When you are camping for example and 10 ships warp into system, instead of warping into deadspace to avoid being killed you either have to goto the station if there is one and dock, or goto a moon etc. and either hide or logout. At least now the one's who were suppsoed to win have a better chance of trakcing you or cutting off your route of escape. GASP NOT TACTICS. NO. That would be Bad. Down with PvP right? Cmon please. For the good of the game stop arguiing.
Besides you need to start getting good at defending moons and gates because when Shiva comes, the majority of the combat will be attacking and defending moons. Not playing warp tag with fleets 10 time syour size from safespot to enemy to safespot to enemy. And one day you might be in a situation where your enemy goes into deadspace and camps out in a system you want to take over. You would want them to fight right? Take away their mechanics inw hich they can avoid the fight. Make system conquering viable.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 17:14:00 -
[28]
Please try and see the logic. There will be greater chance of killing people without safespots. In the example of a camped system at least if a person is logged on we know to look at moons, belts gates or stations etc. We dont have to cover millions of square misles of space going 500km/s which would take about 500 years.
When you are camping for example and 10 ships warp into system, instead of warping into deadspace to avoid being killed you either have to goto the station if there is one and dock, or goto a moon etc. and either hide or logout. At least now the one's who were suppsoed to win have a better chance of trakcing you or cutting off your route of escape. GASP NOT TACTICS. NO. That would be Bad. Down with PvP right? Cmon please. For the good of the game stop arguiing.
Besides you need to start getting good at defending moons and gates because when Shiva comes, the majority of the combat will be attacking and defending moons. Not playing warp tag with fleets 10 time syour size from safespot to enemy to safespot to enemy. And one day you might be in a situation where your enemy goes into deadspace and camps out in a system you want to take over. You would want them to fight right? Take away their mechanics inw hich they can avoid the fight. Make system conquering viable.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:00:00 -
[29]
Only when logging in :P
Besides I think we are getting a new login. logout system.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:00:00 -
[30]
Only when logging in :P
Besides I think we are getting a new login. logout system.
|
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:03:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Mr nStuff
Originally by: Sinist And if CCP are the ones who invented CNTRL + Space function then CCP are the ones who can disable it. In your world programming isnt reversible though huh...
Check this out. Now this guy wants to get rid of the ability to stop and cancel warp.
BTW:.. Remove safespots, people will just warp to moons and cloak. Then what will be your new argument? Please tell...
Space is vast.. Losing track of a ship is very viable.. In the end CCP will please everybody.. That means they will most likely ALWAYS have some way of allowing a player in a system w/o a station, some form of protection or place to hide affectively.
Safespots are the equivalent of logging out. Sorta.. Except that you get to stay online, change your skills, evemail people, talk smack in local, ect. áSince there is a block option. I will never ever see your argument about safespots. Since the player could just log off anyways..
Deal... What is it you guys say.. Err.. Stop fricken whining already..
Not whining making feedback. Your a hypocrite becuase your whining too about how you think your precious safespots are justified. Get over yourself.
PS: ALL POSTS MADE BY ANYONE ARE OF THEIR OPINION AND IN NO WAY REFLECT ACTUAL FACT EXCEPT THE FACT THAT SAFESPOTS WITH NO WORKAROUNF ARE LAME AND GIRLY.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:03:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Mr nStuff
Originally by: Sinist And if CCP are the ones who invented CNTRL + Space function then CCP are the ones who can disable it. In your world programming isnt reversible though huh...
Check this out. Now this guy wants to get rid of the ability to stop and cancel warp.
BTW:.. Remove safespots, people will just warp to moons and cloak. Then what will be your new argument? Please tell...
Space is vast.. Losing track of a ship is very viable.. In the end CCP will please everybody.. That means they will most likely ALWAYS have some way of allowing a player in a system w/o a station, some form of protection or place to hide affectively.
Safespots are the equivalent of logging out. Sorta.. Except that you get to stay online, change your skills, evemail people, talk smack in local, ect. áSince there is a block option. I will never ever see your argument about safespots. Since the player could just log off anyways..
Deal... What is it you guys say.. Err.. Stop fricken whining already..
Not whining making feedback. Your a hypocrite becuase your whining too about how you think your precious safespots are justified. Get over yourself.
PS: ALL POSTS MADE BY ANYONE ARE OF THEIR OPINION AND IN NO WAY REFLECT ACTUAL FACT EXCEPT THE FACT THAT SAFESPOTS WITH NO WORKAROUNF ARE LAME AND GIRLY.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:21:00 -
[33]
OK I have had enough of you.
1) Read the sticky at the top of this forum. One is labeled Blogs blogs Blogs where it links you tot he new dev blog.
GASP A NEW LOGIN, LOGOUT SYSTEM IS COMING. Mr N Stuff is always right though and everyone else has baseless arguments.
*owned*
2) Read the CSM also you might learn something about the game you pretend to play.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:21:00 -
[34]
OK I have had enough of you.
1) Read the sticky at the top of this forum. One is labeled Blogs blogs Blogs where it links you tot he new dev blog.
GASP A NEW LOGIN, LOGOUT SYSTEM IS COMING. Mr N Stuff is always right though and everyone else has baseless arguments.
*owned*
2) Read the CSM also you might learn something about the game you pretend to play.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:40:00 -
[35]
CSM CHAT IS CSM CHAT.
Yes they said new login/logout system because the old methods were being epxloited. Learn to R E A D <--. Which will probably get rid of logging out to avoid being podded, strengtheneing logout system to be less epxloitable and widely used. And reworking the login method to avoid login trap situations.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:40:00 -
[36]
CSM CHAT IS CSM CHAT.
Yes they said new login/logout system because the old methods were being epxloited. Learn to R E A D <--. Which will probably get rid of logging out to avoid being podded, strengtheneing logout system to be less epxloitable and widely used. And reworking the login method to avoid login trap situations.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.14 11:24:00 -
[37]
Put your money where your mouth is. Think you have to first get the right directional scan (its horribe doing it even if you know where someone is). Then try and get a distance reading since your scanner only reaches up to like 18au or something. Then warp and make a bookmark where yout hink it is. Rinse and repeat until you find it. Plus if the person had any decent idea how to make a good bookmark he would first make a normal safespot and then warp to another celestial object and create another one. Then it is IMPOSSIBLE to triangulate the safespot because more then liekly you are not oging ot get a directional reading, + find the right combination of doing two deadspace bookmarks of yourself to find it.
That might confuse some of you but it breaks down to good luck finding my safespots. Unless your an exploiting GM.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.14 11:24:00 -
[38]
Put your money where your mouth is. Think you have to first get the right directional scan (its horribe doing it even if you know where someone is). Then try and get a distance reading since your scanner only reaches up to like 18au or something. Then warp and make a bookmark where yout hink it is. Rinse and repeat until you find it. Plus if the person had any decent idea how to make a good bookmark he would first make a normal safespot and then warp to another celestial object and create another one. Then it is IMPOSSIBLE to triangulate the safespot because more then liekly you are not oging ot get a directional reading, + find the right combination of doing two deadspace bookmarks of yourself to find it.
That might confuse some of you but it breaks down to good luck finding my safespots. Unless your an exploiting GM.
|
|
|
|