| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Lord Zim
747
   |
Posted - 2012.06.01 09:03:00 -
[721] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Frying Doom wrote:I'm sorry I missed the patch where the D-scan covers an entire system or is life so easy for you in Null you have never had to use it. I don't think even a quad facepalm would cover this. You actually do not know how sanctums etc are found? Like, seriously? Oh so you mean if you want to do something where you gain extra reward you might have to take extra risk? Like people piloting hulks do. Oh poor you. I couldn't think of a way to make that drip with more sarcasm sorry.
You really, really don't know, do you?
Here, let me help you: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Cosmic_Anomaly
The important paragraph is the one aptly positioned under "Scanning". |
Frying Doom
Tinfoil Hat News Ltd.
269
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 09:12:00 -
[722] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Frying Doom wrote:I'm sorry I missed the patch where the D-scan covers an entire system or is life so easy for you in Null you have never had to use it. I don't think even a quad facepalm would cover this. You actually do not know how sanctums etc are found? Like, seriously? Oh so you mean if you want to do something where you gain extra reward you might have to take extra risk? Like people piloting hulks do. Oh poor you. I couldn't think of a way to make that drip with more sarcasm sorry. You really, really don't know, do you? Here, let me help you: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Cosmic_AnomalyThe important paragraph is the one aptly positioned under "Scanning".
Yes it says
"Scanning
Cosmic anomalies can be found without any extra modules and skills by using the on-board scanner equipped in every ship other than capsules. The on-board scanner scans nearby space within 64 AU for cosmic anomalies and return the result after 10 seconds of scanning. One can also utilize scan probes to find anomalies, only one probe is required for anomalies and it will provide a warp-in point for any anomalies within its scan range, making it easier to find all anomalies within a system. Please consult the Scanning Guide for detailed instructions on using scan probes. "
So if you are using a anom and are gaining more rewards than mining or ratting you are getting a greater reward. Following me so far? I hope so. Therefore your ability to be found easier would constitute a greater risk. Understand that?
So Just like Hulk pilots in Hi-sec who gain a greater reward from the bonuses of a hulk they have a greater risk because there are bounties on the ships.
Or are you saying Hi-sec should have a risk vs reward system and Null sec should be immune from it?
Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Lord Zim
747
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 09:25:00 -
[723] - Quote
"Greater risk"? You mean "greater risk" as in "I'm running a greater risk of losing my ship by being undocked, because if I'm caught in it I'm most likely to die"? I think that's called "being in nullsec".
But then again, you have absolutely no clue about any of this, so I'll repeat myself: the worst case response time you have before someone who aren't complete **** tackles you, if local is removed and replaced with a mechanic which relies on dscan, will be 4 seconds, down from at least 10-15. What effect do you think this will have on the nullsec population?
PS: Nullsec isn't immune to the risk/reward system, and if you actually, uniroincally thinks this, then that's just something in a long, long line of things you're wrong about which we've seen proof of. |
|
CCP Spitfire
C C P
C C P Alliance
1499
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 09:37:00 -
[724] - Quote
Moved from 'EVE General Discussion".
CCP Spitfire | Russian Community Coordinator
@ccp_spitfire |
|
Frying Doom
Tinfoil Hat News Ltd.
269
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 09:42:00 -
[725] - Quote
Well CCP noticed and moved it to the trash heap.
Until next argument Zim and Nicolo da'Vicenza and others as always good to argue a point.
That one even managed to get quite big till it was killed.
Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1090
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 09:42:00 -
[726] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:"Greater risk"? You mean "greater risk" as in "I'm running a greater risk of losing my ship by being undocked, because if I'm caught in it I'm most likely to die"? I think that's called "being in nullsec".
When I started playing there was an alliance called Initiative Alliance, my alts were in a corp inside it. As a newbie I happily navigated and did my stuff with absolutely no interference till we moved out (the CEO quit the game due to RL issues).
There was a chat to read, if some guys managed to slip past bubbled gates they'd post about it there and everybody had 5-10 minutes to finish their business and dock.
Then I went to NPC 0.0 on this character and there I also did not have expecially insormountable problems farming anoms and L4.
About twice a week I had to take my turn and sit at a gate for 4 hours watching for inbound hostiles, which was actually welcome because it was boring to tears 95% of the days.
In fact guess what, boredom is the 0.0 defining keyword and a potent motivator to organize events in other secs. If it was so active, compelling and challenging gameplay out there, then there'd not be the time nor resources to dedicate manpower in other EvE locations.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Shepard Wong Ogeko
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
27
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 09:53:00 -
[727] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:
So if you are using a anom and are gaining more rewards than mining or ratting you are getting a greater reward. Following me so far?
Nothing good comes from following you.
It already has greater risk, because concord isn't there to punish gankers, bubbles and bombs are available, and the rats themselves are battleships and can kill you on there own.
Oh, and supercaps can drop on you at any moment.
And of course, never mind the already plentiful solo bombers and small gangs that prey on players all day long. You know, the sort of activity Frying Doom wishes he could do, but can't, unless he is using a covops cloak and there is no local.
And it's not like empire miners don't have the option to bug out as soon as they see someone in local. Its like some bizzarro world justice, since highsec miners think they should be safe mining while not paying attention to the game, nullsec players must be limited to d-scan.
Further proof that Frying Doom's crusade to "improve" a region he doesn't even live in is nothing more than a vendetta.
Yes CCP, punish the goons. Take our stuff away. Make us live in gimped wormholes and force us to turn the wheel on some "patrol" mechanism to maintain our sov. Frying Doom assures of that it will just work itself out and be awesome somehow. |
Lord Zim
747
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 10:19:00 -
[728] - Quote
So we won't get an answer to whether Frying Doom thinks it'll depopulate null or not. Oh well, as with everything else which has been uncovered of his arguments, if we assume the opposite of what'll actually happen, we'll get his position, which means if he'd actually answered that question, he'd say "no, it'll make all of hisec flock to nullsec".
vOv |
Elena Melkan
Paladin Order
Fidelas Constans
38
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 11:09:00 -
[729] - Quote
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:Further proof that Frying Doom's crusade to "improve" a region he doesn't even live in is nothing more than a vendetta.
Yes CCP, punish the goons. Take our stuff away. Make us live in gimped wormholes and force us to turn the wheel on some "patrol" mechanism to maintain our sov. Frying Doom assures of that it will just work itself out and be awesome somehow.
Perhaps for him Goons are something that magically popped out from wizard's hat and started existing and being successful alliance. It's just impossible idea that there would be people who have worked hard to keep it together and working. 
|
Frying Doom
Tinfoil Hat News Ltd.
269
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 11:14:00 -
[730] - Quote
Elena Melkan wrote:Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:Further proof that Frying Doom's crusade to "improve" a region he doesn't even live in is nothing more than a vendetta.
Yes CCP, punish the goons. Take our stuff away. Make us live in gimped wormholes and force us to turn the wheel on some "patrol" mechanism to maintain our sov. Frying Doom assures of that it will just work itself out and be awesome somehow. Perhaps for him Goons are something that magically popped out from wizard's hat and started existing and being successful alliance. It's just impossible idea that there would be people who have worked hard to keep it together and working.
Actually if you haven't read
http://www.tentonhammer.com/features/mittani
You should they are a great read especially the parts on propaganda and meta gaming there are some really good ideas in there. Also the alliance panels pre-2010 are also packed full of information.
Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
265
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 12:01:00 -
[731] - Quote
EVE is a sandbox and a sandbox is about choice. Let's avoid overcomplicating the process to a better game and leave people with choices. How about allowing those who wish to remain in local to do so and those who wish to opt out to do so. I mean it's not meant to be a free intelligence channel right? Sounds like a compromise. If you wish to display power you could and if you wished to remain hidden from power you could as well. Its win/win.
You wouldn't want to continue forcing a playstyle upon me would you? |
Leto Aramaus
Ixion Defence Systems
Tactical Narcotics Team
62
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 12:08:00 -
[732] - Quote
Ditra Vorthran wrote:Caliph Muhammed wrote:You would have to work to locate a target. That might work if you removed all default warp points for asteroid belts from the system menu. At the same time, make asteroid belts scanable via core probes. Otherwise, if you just remove local, it gives everyone the equivalent of a cloaking device until they're practically on top of you.
NOT if we change the EVE UI to extend your ships sensor ranges.
Remove local AND make the graphical interface of EVE zoom all the way out to solar system level, and each ship has a viewing range of anywhere from a couple hundred or thousand KM, to a couple AU.
^^^^real spaceship sh*t |
Leto Aramaus
Ixion Defence Systems
Tactical Narcotics Team
62
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 12:28:00 -
[733] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:EVE is a sandbox and a sandbox is about choice. Let's avoid overcomplicating the process to a better game and leave people with choices. How about allowing those who wish to remain in local to do so and those who wish to opt out to do so. I mean it's not meant to be a free intelligence channel right? Sounds like a compromise. If you wish to display power you could and if you wished to remain hidden from power you could as well. Its win/win.
You wouldn't want to continue forcing a playstyle upon me me would you?
Such a good idea. |
Lord Zim
747
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 12:31:00 -
[734] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:EVE is a sandbox and a sandbox is about choice. Let's avoid overcomplicating the process to a better game and leave people with choices. How about allowing those who wish to remain in local to do so and those who wish to opt out to do so. I mean it's not meant to be a free intelligence channel right? Sounds like a compromise. If you wish to display power you could and if you wished to remain hidden from power you could as well. Its win/win.
You wouldn't want to continue forcing a playstyle upon me would you?
I'm sure you wouldn't ever abuse the fact that by removing yourself from local you've cut the possible response time from 15-30 seconds to 4, right? |
Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
265
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 12:33:00 -
[735] - Quote
Its not abuse. Abuse is what's being done with local as it is. And with that being said im not even considering your timing argument as proof or even factual. Bottom line you feel entitled to keep unlimited tabs on my character when the game says otherwise. Why did we get rid of faction standings being publically displayed again? |
Lord Zim
747
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 12:36:00 -
[736] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:Its not abuse. Abuse is what's being done with local as it is.
I'd call it "game balance". |
Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
265
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 12:39:00 -
[737] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Caliph Muhammed wrote:Its not abuse. Abuse is what's being done with local as it is. I'd call it "game balance".
Not its not. Its called listening to a bunch of people who want to play EVE but never be forced to take a risk. Whoever declared that balanced needs to be fired as an absolute incompetent. We know your opinion Zim. Double digit sh!tpoasts throughout the thread.
Define how making the entire scouting profession a complete waste of time so that you can avoid any risk whatsoever in a game designed as nonconsensual pvp focused is balanced. You can't. The most you can do is declare it.
Spreading syrup on sh!it doesn't make it pancakes. |
Xhaiden Ora
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
54
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 12:44:00 -
[738] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:Define how making the entire scouting profession a complete waste of time so that you can avoid any risk whatsoever in a game designed as nonsensual pvp focused is balanced. You can't. The most you can do is declare it.
Personally, I perfer sensual pvp myself. At least it calls you the next day. |
Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
265
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 12:47:00 -
[739] - Quote
The trick is to throw in a editing error every so often and the lemmings will keep your idea plastered on the front page. I actually like your post i'm just saying in general. =)
One guy sifted through the thread looking for errors and found one with nonconsensual I had spelling it with a T. Ironically no one else noticed it because the root word is consent. But having a lack of ideas doesn't help in creating a page length rant so you have to find filler.
Consentual says the same thing as consensual though its accepted as the latter. Though in essense all words are made up so it's not necessarily incorrect as long as the idea is expressed in a way most can understand. It's like Brits jonesing on American English because it doesn't follow the Queen's decree. |
Lord Zim
747
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 12:52:00 -
[740] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Caliph Muhammed wrote:Its not abuse. Abuse is what's being done with local as it is. I'd call it "game balance". Not its not. Its called listening to a bunch of people who want to play EVE but never be forced to take a risk. Whoever declared that balanced needs to be fired as an absolute incompetent. We know your opinion Zim. Double digit sh!tpoasts throughout the thread.
Having 4-6 seconds to respond at a random point in time over a playsession of, say, 8 hours, isn't risk, that's certainty. The only one not wanting to take a risk is the one who wants the current system changed to this, since that would dramatically cut down his risk, and after an interestingly short time he'll be back bitching and moaning about lack of targets because most people moved back to hisec to do L4s instead of staying in nullsec/lowsec. The only thing that'd be left would be PVPers who had a hisec L4 alt (or similar) for moneymaking. |
Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
265
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 12:55:00 -
[741] - Quote
Okay we've heard your opinion I don't want to block you and I won't but i'm not interested in having a back and forth. |
Lord Zim
747
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 13:01:00 -
[742] - Quote
Hey, all I'm saying is that if what you want out of nullsec is a place where PVPers go to do SOV war or shoot eachother's moons, then log out and go play on their L4s in hisec (leaving nullsec a complete desert devoid of life), then go ahead and remove local.
If, however, you absolutely want to add risk to nullsec, then work on making the sov system harder to defend, and stations go boom. |
Leto Aramaus
Ixion Defence Systems
Tactical Narcotics Team
62
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 13:11:00 -
[743] - Quote
Guys...
Lord Zim...
risk, no risk, balance... whatever, all that is secondary.
The fact is, Local is stupid and juvenile. As soon as you enter a solar system... you see every other ship listed there for you?
Please... WORST. gameplay. mechanic. ever.
It sucks, change it. Period. |
Wibla
Backwater Redux
Tactical Narcotics Team
59
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 13:29:00 -
[744] - Quote
How is local stupid or juvenile?
Just curious, if you feel that living in space with local chat is so stupid and juvenile, maybe you should go join a WH corp instead of being in TNT? |
Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
265
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 13:33:00 -
[745] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Hey, all I'm saying is that if what you want out of nullsec is a place where PVPers go to do SOV war or shoot eachother's moons, then log out and go play on their L4s in hisec (leaving nullsec a complete desert devoid of life), then go ahead and remove local.
If, however, you absolutely want to add risk to nullsec, then work on making the sov system harder to defend, and stations go boom.
Zim, F#CK NULL. I don't care about null or its mechanics. What I care about is EVE and the tedium that is camping for a kill. I dont mind work, risk or failure. What I mind is being willing to work, take a risk and accept failure and nothing about being so changes that to kill anyone in particular requires the target to be braindead and me to be enthralled with the tedium of sitting at a gate because stealth is impossible. |
Lord Zim
747
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 15:51:00 -
[746] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:Zim, F#CK NULL. I don't care about null or its mechanics.
Don't worry, that's been apparent for a very, very long time. Only, you should include lowsec and hisec to that list as well. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc
Mordus Angels
313
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 16:27:00 -
[747] - Quote
I support the removal of local.
I also recommend a modification to current sensor use, as described in this linked thread:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=112964&find=unread
Local has been a block to make cloaking diminished, which would be released from this in it's absence.
Some means of hunting cloaks may be viable if local goes away. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1090
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 16:36:00 -
[748] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:
Having 4-6 seconds to respond at a random point in time over a playsession of, say, 8 hours, isn't risk, that's certainty. The only one not wanting to take a risk is the one who wants the current system changed to this, since that would dramatically cut down his risk, and after an interestingly short time he'll be back bitching and moaning about lack of targets because most people moved back to hisec to do L4s instead of staying in nullsec/lowsec. The only thing that'd be left would be PVPers who had a hisec L4 alt (or similar) for moneymaking.
That's not even the risk the average ice miner runs every hour, every day.
They are stuck in totally rare and very easy to reach few system know to everybody, always have 80+ in local and the same systems are also missioning systems (so forget them being "tranquil" systems) and are stuck at a nicely visible belt everybody see on their overview.
Unlike you, they have a Mackinaw loltank, a sitting duck ship that takes ages to align and 5 drones as only defense.
8500 of them (along with others) died in 1 month.
How many 0.0 PvE ships died in 1 month again?
How many other "hard core, for hardened, skilled men" MMOs have an immediate mode local chat? Zero? One?
CCP should just make D-Scan a regular radar like every sim game past 1980 got and have players rely on it. End of AFK anything. 4-6 seconds too little? Welcome to EvE.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Lord Zim
747
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 17:05:00 -
[749] - Quote
Yes, I'm well aware of the fact tons and tons of hisec miners are dying all over the place. I suspect, however, that you know what the proper fix to that particular problem is. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc
Mordus Angels
313
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 17:17:00 -
[750] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Yes, I'm well aware of the fact tons and tons of hisec miners are dying all over the place. I suspect, however, that you know what the proper fix to that particular problem is.
I will guess that you would suggest some form of proactive defense. Considering the mackinaw's limits, that would most likely be having others escort you, all the way to setting bubblecamps on Null gates.
Sure, you could try to mount a tank on a mack, but past a certain point you just change ships entirely, and load a rokh up and use it instead.
Hisec is a unique puzzle. How do you prevent a pilot from killing you, when they already expect and have accepted they will also die in the process?
As far as I can see, the best deterrent you can imply is that they will die alone.
In low and null, the threat of them dying is often the actual deterrent.
Perhaps if an orca boosted defense rather than mining results, it might help. (Assuming an orca here, it could be any BC or command ship really) |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |