Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:00:00 -
[151]
Only when logging in :P
Besides I think we are getting a new login. logout system.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:00:00 -
[152]
Only when logging in :P
Besides I think we are getting a new login. logout system.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:03:00 -
[153]
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 -
[154]
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.
|
Mr nStuff
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:07:00 -
[155]
Originally by: Sinist Only when logging in :P
Besides I think we are getting a new login. logout system.
No.. you WISH we were getting a new login/logout system. Kind of like how you WISH they would remove safespots.
Since this game has memory issues and you need to log in/out all the time to sort them. I doubt they will nerf logging out/in anytime in the near future.. Originally by: Sinist Not whining making feedback. Your a hypocrite becuase your whining too about how you think your precious safespots are justified.
I wouldn't really put it like that.. More, i'm just showing how baseless your arguments are. But I guess that could still be considered a form of whining since the word pretty much has no meaning anymore on these forums.
5 R&D Agents, 10months, Zero BPO Offers.. Onboard navigational [Planetary Avoidance] computer.
My account will be suspended at the end of the current play period. Expires on 19. September 2004 |
Mr nStuff
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:07:00 -
[156]
Originally by: Sinist Only when logging in :P
Besides I think we are getting a new login. logout system.
No.. you WISH we were getting a new login/logout system. Kind of like how you WISH they would remove safespots.
Since this game has memory issues and you need to log in/out all the time to sort them. I doubt they will nerf logging out/in anytime in the near future.. Originally by: Sinist Not whining making feedback. Your a hypocrite becuase your whining too about how you think your precious safespots are justified.
I wouldn't really put it like that.. More, i'm just showing how baseless your arguments are. But I guess that could still be considered a form of whining since the word pretty much has no meaning anymore on these forums.
5 R&D Agents, 10months, Zero BPO Offers.. Onboard navigational [Planetary Avoidance] computer.
My account will be suspended at the end of the current play period. Expires on 19. September 2004 |
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:21:00 -
[157]
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 -
[158]
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.
|
Mr nStuff
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:34:00 -
[159]
Uh.. Hello.. There will never be a new login/logout system to prevent people from logging out like you WISH.. lol. That's impossible. They are talking about preventing login traps. What ever nonsense that is. login traps, heh.. That's like preventing jumpin traps. Can't argue with CCP though...
CMS meeting? What is that.. heh..
OWNED BIYOCH!! Oh.. lol.. this is fun acting 8 years old nStuff. |
Mr nStuff
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:34:00 -
[160]
Uh.. Hello.. There will never be a new login/logout system to prevent people from logging out like you WISH.. lol. That's impossible. They are talking about preventing login traps. What ever nonsense that is. login traps, heh.. That's like preventing jumpin traps. Can't argue with CCP though...
CMS meeting? What is that.. heh..
OWNED BIYOCH!! Oh.. lol.. this is fun acting 8 years old nStuff. |
|
Hematic
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:35:00 -
[161]
Quote: 1) Log out then if you need to go away from the keyboard and are not able to dock in a station.
2,4,5 & 7) Generally people who are arguing against safespots aren't suggesting that you should remove the ability to bookmark places in dead space. What most people do want is a relatively simple and effective method of tracking down objects that are at dead space spots. Therefore you should still be able to do the things you mention in those points.
3) Properly made safe spots are not trackable through any method.
6) If you want to mine in 0.0 space then you need to have sufficient forces to ensure the security of the operation and not rely on weaknesses and oversights in the game mechanics. Eve is a non-consensual P v.P combat game in 0.0 space. If people aren't willing to adapt to the challenges and problems that poses then go back to empire or find another game.
8) There are going to be sentry guns introduced along with other equipment to help corps protect their POSs. I just don't see fun or challenge in being able to deploy POSs at unreachable dead space areas.
1) Logout? That's dumb. Many people including myself take quite a few breaks from the game while playing. Some of these are as short as 1-2 minutes. Re-logging every time would be a total drag. This game needs less drags to be sure.
2,4,5,7) Yes and most people are suggesting a special piece of equipment that can warp from long range scan or simply spending 10 minutes to find a safe spot. That's ridiculous. Space is a big place and it being hard to find people sometimes reflects that. Suggesting the removal of utilizing these spaces or making it brutally simple to locate makes the universe a smaller place.
3) Not true. While although properly made BMs could take a long time to find. One rule holds true, if someone else got there so can you.
6) What you're suggesting is that only the largest of corporations should be able to mine in 0.0. Defending oneself from all possible threats would bring down the isk per hour of mining / per ship to a point where you may as well stay in empire or just hunt NPCs. And NO eve is NOT a non-consentual PvP game although there are many who would wish it that way. You seem to think you have a right to attack anyone you want and most "pirate" types constantly argue for being able to drag anyone they want into a PvP battle at any time. Very selfish outlook tbh. Adapt to the challenges? Sounds like it you who cannot adapt to the way the game has been designed from day one so you post and start threads of this nature based soley on yous and others inability to met with the challenges that the game provides.
8) Others don't see the fun or challenge in being insta-ganked at gates by 5 BS's but most of the anti-gatecamping threads have died down because haulers and such have simply dealt with it. Since POS's aren't in game yet we will see how they are deployed. More than likely out of reach of the smaller corporations but one can hope that they could deploy something to make the game less tedius like a refitting mobile dock. Of course if a 10 man corp had to spend all their time defending it they wouldn't spend anytime actually using it.
|
Hematic
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:35:00 -
[162]
Quote: 1) Log out then if you need to go away from the keyboard and are not able to dock in a station.
2,4,5 & 7) Generally people who are arguing against safespots aren't suggesting that you should remove the ability to bookmark places in dead space. What most people do want is a relatively simple and effective method of tracking down objects that are at dead space spots. Therefore you should still be able to do the things you mention in those points.
3) Properly made safe spots are not trackable through any method.
6) If you want to mine in 0.0 space then you need to have sufficient forces to ensure the security of the operation and not rely on weaknesses and oversights in the game mechanics. Eve is a non-consensual P v.P combat game in 0.0 space. If people aren't willing to adapt to the challenges and problems that poses then go back to empire or find another game.
8) There are going to be sentry guns introduced along with other equipment to help corps protect their POSs. I just don't see fun or challenge in being able to deploy POSs at unreachable dead space areas.
1) Logout? That's dumb. Many people including myself take quite a few breaks from the game while playing. Some of these are as short as 1-2 minutes. Re-logging every time would be a total drag. This game needs less drags to be sure.
2,4,5,7) Yes and most people are suggesting a special piece of equipment that can warp from long range scan or simply spending 10 minutes to find a safe spot. That's ridiculous. Space is a big place and it being hard to find people sometimes reflects that. Suggesting the removal of utilizing these spaces or making it brutally simple to locate makes the universe a smaller place.
3) Not true. While although properly made BMs could take a long time to find. One rule holds true, if someone else got there so can you.
6) What you're suggesting is that only the largest of corporations should be able to mine in 0.0. Defending oneself from all possible threats would bring down the isk per hour of mining / per ship to a point where you may as well stay in empire or just hunt NPCs. And NO eve is NOT a non-consentual PvP game although there are many who would wish it that way. You seem to think you have a right to attack anyone you want and most "pirate" types constantly argue for being able to drag anyone they want into a PvP battle at any time. Very selfish outlook tbh. Adapt to the challenges? Sounds like it you who cannot adapt to the way the game has been designed from day one so you post and start threads of this nature based soley on yous and others inability to met with the challenges that the game provides.
8) Others don't see the fun or challenge in being insta-ganked at gates by 5 BS's but most of the anti-gatecamping threads have died down because haulers and such have simply dealt with it. Since POS's aren't in game yet we will see how they are deployed. More than likely out of reach of the smaller corporations but one can hope that they could deploy something to make the game less tedius like a refitting mobile dock. Of course if a 10 man corp had to spend all their time defending it they wouldn't spend anytime actually using it.
|
coldheat
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:38:00 -
[163]
Well get some campers in the system to wait for them to log would suggest Earth and Beyond players for that they are pretty good at that.
Safe spots no probs with them life safers :
|
coldheat
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:38:00 -
[164]
Well get some campers in the system to wait for them to log would suggest Earth and Beyond players for that they are pretty good at that.
Safe spots no probs with them life safers :
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 18:40:00 -
[165]
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 -
[166]
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.
|
Mr nStuff
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 19:15:00 -
[167]
If you actually R.E.A.D. a few posts back. You will noticed that I was talking about logging out, not login/logout exploits... So the Dev Blog is irrelevant.
And i'm pretty sure CCP doesn't plan to nerf logging out.
Ok gotta go, bye bye..
5 R&D Agents, 10months, Zero BPO Offers.. Onboard navigational [Planetary Avoidance] computer.
My account will be suspended at the end of the current play period. Expires on 19. September 2004 |
Mr nStuff
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 19:15:00 -
[168]
If you actually R.E.A.D. a few posts back. You will noticed that I was talking about logging out, not login/logout exploits... So the Dev Blog is irrelevant.
And i'm pretty sure CCP doesn't plan to nerf logging out.
Ok gotta go, bye bye..
5 R&D Agents, 10months, Zero BPO Offers.. Onboard navigational [Planetary Avoidance] computer.
My account will be suspended at the end of the current play period. Expires on 19. September 2004 |
illuminati
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 19:24:00 -
[169]
Murd0ck, we podkilled enough of you guys already, one Claw by myself too. I didnt open this thread to smacktalk with Russians, hehe, keep it civilized in the forums.
Safespots are unbalanced, thats a fact. They should be nerfed, that's an opinion. I'm hoping this will show the devs more people share that opinion, which they obviously do.
|
illuminati
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 19:24:00 -
[170]
Murd0ck, we podkilled enough of you guys already, one Claw by myself too. I didnt open this thread to smacktalk with Russians, hehe, keep it civilized in the forums.
Safespots are unbalanced, thats a fact. They should be nerfed, that's an opinion. I'm hoping this will show the devs more people share that opinion, which they obviously do.
|
|
Bobby Wilson
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 20:20:00 -
[171]
Originally by: Joshua Calvert
Originally by: Earthan I really really dont see how the below solution could hurt anyone beside making the game more fun:
1-keep safespots.
2- Bring ways that can track any safespot within 5 minutes max.
What we get is: 1- You still can escape from a combat and not be followed immediately.
2-You still can log off before the enemy gets you.
3- You still can survey a system with enemy forces by warping from safespot to safespot, moving all time.But you got to move and there is risk.
3- No more lame siting at safesopt in system with 50 enemy ships with no risk.
Imho these are good solutions, maybe not solving all issues but making the game better.
People will just take option 2, every single time.
That's okay. At least then they're offline which (hopefully combined with fixing the log-on tactic)makes it clear they are out of the fight.
It's disgustingly irritating to have people sit at a good safe spot for an hour with maybe 3 or 4 of 20 pilots actually watching their accounts (and keeping the others notified via TS), while the rest stay logged in, at the safe spot, running a 2nd account doing something else (or turn up their PC speaker and play X-box/read a book, etc). One fairly famous player spend a chunk of last week logged on in 0.0 for hours and hours on end at a safe spot(s) in one system, usually alone (although who knows with the log-in thing still legal and possible). Was really irritating, and I sincerly doubt he/she was at the keys, alertly watching local alone for 6 hours straight with nothing else running. The only reason no one went looking was of course once you're within their scanner range, people will either move safe spots or log off. That's fine if it takes 10 minutes to find them (reasonable time investment by eve standards), but painful when it takes an hour or more even with good scanner practice and an interceptor.
Just give us the ability to find people within 10 minutes even if they are sitting at safe. Safes will then still allow temporary shelter for both IC and RL issues (ie. toilet, ciggie) but you won't be able to go play a round of golf and come back unless you log off (which seems to me to be fair play).
BW
Originally by: Selim
Cool, congrats.
Oh, stupid idea by the way.
|
Bobby Wilson
|
Posted - 2004.07.13 20:20:00 -
[172]
Originally by: Joshua Calvert
Originally by: Earthan I really really dont see how the below solution could hurt anyone beside making the game more fun:
1-keep safespots.
2- Bring ways that can track any safespot within 5 minutes max.
What we get is: 1- You still can escape from a combat and not be followed immediately.
2-You still can log off before the enemy gets you.
3- You still can survey a system with enemy forces by warping from safespot to safespot, moving all time.But you got to move and there is risk.
3- No more lame siting at safesopt in system with 50 enemy ships with no risk.
Imho these are good solutions, maybe not solving all issues but making the game better.
People will just take option 2, every single time.
That's okay. At least then they're offline which (hopefully combined with fixing the log-on tactic)makes it clear they are out of the fight.
It's disgustingly irritating to have people sit at a good safe spot for an hour with maybe 3 or 4 of 20 pilots actually watching their accounts (and keeping the others notified via TS), while the rest stay logged in, at the safe spot, running a 2nd account doing something else (or turn up their PC speaker and play X-box/read a book, etc). One fairly famous player spend a chunk of last week logged on in 0.0 for hours and hours on end at a safe spot(s) in one system, usually alone (although who knows with the log-in thing still legal and possible). Was really irritating, and I sincerly doubt he/she was at the keys, alertly watching local alone for 6 hours straight with nothing else running. The only reason no one went looking was of course once you're within their scanner range, people will either move safe spots or log off. That's fine if it takes 10 minutes to find them (reasonable time investment by eve standards), but painful when it takes an hour or more even with good scanner practice and an interceptor.
Just give us the ability to find people within 10 minutes even if they are sitting at safe. Safes will then still allow temporary shelter for both IC and RL issues (ie. toilet, ciggie) but you won't be able to go play a round of golf and come back unless you log off (which seems to me to be fair play).
BW
Originally by: Selim
Cool, congrats.
Oh, stupid idea by the way.
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2004.07.14 09:46:00 -
[173]
I still can't see why being at a safespot is any worse than logging off?
What, functionally, is the difference?
Why is someone logging off ok, but using a safespot isn't?
Either ships have to stay ingame when you log off, and safespots removed; or everything stays how it is. Changing one without the other will have no real impact on game dynamics, and is thus pointless. ______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots. They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
Avon
|
Posted - 2004.07.14 09:46:00 -
[174]
I still can't see why being at a safespot is any worse than logging off?
What, functionally, is the difference?
Why is someone logging off ok, but using a safespot isn't?
Either ships have to stay ingame when you log off, and safespots removed; or everything stays how it is. Changing one without the other will have no real impact on game dynamics, and is thus pointless. ______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots. They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
illuminati
|
Posted - 2004.07.14 10:02:00 -
[175]
Originally by: Avon I still can't see why being at a safespot is any worse than logging off?
What, functionally, is the difference?
Why is someone logging off ok, but using a safespot isn't?
Either ships have to stay ingame when you log off, and safespots removed; or everything stays how it is. Changing one without the other will have no real impact on game dynamics, and is thus pointless.
If we assume it will be possible to lock onto ship signatures in deepspace, and you are forced to log off, space is then under control. If I take 2 BS and 1 inty into hell's kitchen I better run after I hit or I know I'll stay logged for the rest of the day. Thus attacks being turned into proper guerilla warfare.
Deepspace combat is essentially about tricking someone into believing he can beat you or gateganking. Air superiority and first strike are what I am after, proper warfare. It's correct though that the tuning needs to be done closely together with these new "anti-logout" things CCP are looking at.
The combination is to allow the solo guy to have a chance to survive and not get WTFPWND in seconds after hostile enters system. Please remember though that being deepspace is supposed to be dangerous and presently I feel too safe. The word being "percentage" of chance of capture to quote our high game mechanic gods.
An alternative I've suggested in another thread is having total ship resolution radius in a grid matter for speed of warpdrive signature location. That would of course lead to people safespotting solo, hehe, so not sure about that one. But it's the idea of balance I'm after, tracking takes hours and new random BM's take seconds.
|
illuminati
|
Posted - 2004.07.14 10:02:00 -
[176]
Originally by: Avon I still can't see why being at a safespot is any worse than logging off?
What, functionally, is the difference?
Why is someone logging off ok, but using a safespot isn't?
Either ships have to stay ingame when you log off, and safespots removed; or everything stays how it is. Changing one without the other will have no real impact on game dynamics, and is thus pointless.
If we assume it will be possible to lock onto ship signatures in deepspace, and you are forced to log off, space is then under control. If I take 2 BS and 1 inty into hell's kitchen I better run after I hit or I know I'll stay logged for the rest of the day. Thus attacks being turned into proper guerilla warfare.
Deepspace combat is essentially about tricking someone into believing he can beat you or gateganking. Air superiority and first strike are what I am after, proper warfare. It's correct though that the tuning needs to be done closely together with these new "anti-logout" things CCP are looking at.
The combination is to allow the solo guy to have a chance to survive and not get WTFPWND in seconds after hostile enters system. Please remember though that being deepspace is supposed to be dangerous and presently I feel too safe. The word being "percentage" of chance of capture to quote our high game mechanic gods.
An alternative I've suggested in another thread is having total ship resolution radius in a grid matter for speed of warpdrive signature location. That would of course lead to people safespotting solo, hehe, so not sure about that one. But it's the idea of balance I'm after, tracking takes hours and new random BM's take seconds.
|
Illion
|
Posted - 2004.07.14 11:20:00 -
[177]
Edited by: Illion on 14/07/2004 11:22:41 Maybe I'm missing something here, but surely it is possible to find safe spots by using the directional scanner... in the same way as explorers find hidden items in systems. It can take a while, but its not impossible, you just need perseverence and a bit of nounce...
Illion.
|
Illion
|
Posted - 2004.07.14 11:20:00 -
[178]
Edited by: Illion on 14/07/2004 11:22:41 Maybe I'm missing something here, but surely it is possible to find safe spots by using the directional scanner... in the same way as explorers find hidden items in systems. It can take a while, but its not impossible, you just need perseverence and a bit of nounce...
Illion.
|
Sinist
|
Posted - 2004.07.14 11:24:00 -
[179]
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 -
[180]
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |