| 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) |

Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
168
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 21:09:00 -
[121] - Quote
Removing local is a two way street. You won't be present either. Sure, you'll have to turn off your bots and actually play but you should be doing that anyway. |

Avid Bumhumper
Furian Necromongers
60
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 21:11:00 -
[122] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:Get rid of local, all secs. It fixes almost everything. You would have to work to locate a target. You would have to work to avoid a target. There would be risk in high sec. There would be risk in all secs.
Freighters could be caught during a war dec. Freighters could get through during a war dec.
You would still have Concord retaliation in high sec. You could still be camped, though if you break the camp it would be harder to hunt you down. Certainly no worse that what we have now but with compelling gameplay.
It would solve cloaky camps people complain about. It would give a point to cloaks of which people complain about.
It would make neutral alts almost irrelevant. Though not 100%. It would certainly make playing with one account a lot less of a disadvantage. Sure you might lose a few alt account subs, but you would gain many more subs by having more compelling gameplay. What good is a scout profession when they're revealed as soon as they enter system?
The changes the expansion are bringing aren't going to revitalize low sec or null sec and its certainly not going to promote or fuel war. Quite the opposite.
The devs and the playerbase talk a lot about EVE being hardcore, but as of yet i'm not really seeing the hardcore aspect to the game.
The game is a boring campfest. Removing local removes that to a large degree.
To my ultra Orthodox carebear players, uncle Caliphy isn't throwing you under the bus. The threats you worry about occuring with this change would actually be resolvable by a merc corporation. If you are decced and you hire a merc the merc cannot sneak up on the enemy with everything displayed for them. They may be able to make your tormentors life a little more difficult but in most cases can't force a fight under those conditions. With no local they could. If you are camped by a griefdec and you hire a reasonably sized merc to help you the griefer will never see them coming. It's win/win.
Even null entry points would be camped far less. Lets see the thirty man bubble camp consistently do it when a 150 man roaming gang warps in on them and they never see it coming.
Local is holding EVE back. Period. Get rid of it and let EVE become great.
Incompetent griefers?  Very sad.....
My Tinfoil hat has been sugically implanted, so no,it is not for sale..... |

Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
168
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 21:13:00 -
[123] - Quote
You quoted the original post to post a worthless 4 word post and im incompetent? Thanks for the bump I guess, but quote spam makes baby Jesus cry. |

bongsmoke
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
39
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 21:17:00 -
[124] - Quote
Asuka Solo wrote:This OP is filled with "no" and seasoned with "unsubstantiated fail".
Grow some balls.
Biomass yourself.
This
Shame soo many threads like this one are full of pure fail. |

Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
169
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 21:19:00 -
[125] - Quote
bongsmoke wrote:Asuka Solo wrote:This OP is filled with "no" and seasoned with "unsubstantiated fail".
Grow some balls.
Biomass yourself. This Shame soo many threads like this one are full of pure fail.
Like his killboard, lol. |

Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
455
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 21:36:00 -
[126] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Caliph Muhammed wrote: And if removing hisec local will only help in a war than the obvious reverse of that statement is that removing hisec local will only hinder you during a war. Why should you get free intelligence?
My main point is the basis of the sec status as how it was originally set up Hi-sec = Safest Lo-sec = less safe Null sec = Dangerous and lawless Wormholes = Insanely dangerous. Any alterations to the system should follow this pattern. But I do agree wars are boring as hell and with the new ability to call in an infinite number of allies to help the defenders will probably become rare.
so you want nullsec to be more dangerous than wormholes? lol eh |

Pok Nibin
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 21:49:00 -
[127] - Quote
It takes a CCP to lock intelligent threads and let one with this title ride. Says it all. Yes, we respect you, CCP. Sony's gonna love you. Don't fight it.-á Rejoin your Amarrian patriarchs.-á You know you want to. |

specializt
Angry Angels Constructions The Kadeshi
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 21:54:00 -
[128] - Quote
bombers are certainly not "uncounterable" - in fact, bombing-runs are pretty dangerous because anyone can just fire up the MWD, overload tthe disruptors aaand the little bomber is gone with a few hits ... without even being able to to do noticeable damage. In reality, you cant break a camp with bombers, even if you bring 10 of them to the field - the second after you launch the bomb, the campers jump through and laugh about your ultra-slow and not-so-powerful-at-all bomb. After 30 seconds, they'll jump back and maybe tackle one of the slower guys.
Not having local will terminate 99,99999% of the industrial complex of EvE Online. No (noticeable) mining anymore, no transports -- which results in a degrading market, isolation of nullsec and lowsec and ultimately making the game unplayable because every 12yo camper / gankerkiddie now has the chance to pwn everyone with zero effort. If your whole gamestyle depends on ganking, camping and the likes EvE Online certainly is the wrong game for you - go play some MMORPG which is built around PvP ... its pretty common to wear NO ARMOR AT ALL in these games because everyone gets ganked the moment they leave the safe place. And now you might as well guess which type of game is the most unsuccessfull ..... exactly : the one which has no limiting (and harsh) regulations whatsoever. |

Lord Zim
710
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 22:02:00 -
[129] - Quote
Huh. Another "I'm having some problems ganking efficiently enough so I need some more help in stacking the deck in my favour" thread. Interesting. |

Serene Repose
Perkone Caldari State
775
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 22:02:00 -
[130] - Quote
No thanks, OP. I'll pass on growing those. I don't want anything dragging me DOWN. I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility toward every form of tyranny over the mind of man.-á |

snake pies
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
32
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 22:33:00 -
[131] - Quote
remove local? only if you remove cloaking ability altogether |

specializt
Angry Angels Constructions The Kadeshi
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 23:02:00 -
[132] - Quote
snake pies wrote:remove local? only if you remove cloaking ability altogether alternatively, they could turn the local into a REAL local - which would show you players within ... lets say about 300km or so, since you cant lock targets at that range ganking would remain the same BUT noone could ever be sure about enemys in the system. On an additional, positive side it would make system-camping useless - which would **** off about 30% of the playerbase hence enhance my experience :-) |

Karn Dulake
Souls Must Be Trampled The.Alliance
795
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 23:10:00 -
[133] - Quote
OP is a douche. He is currently in a war with me and wont undock.
Ive even come back from lowsec to highsec to fight him and he never undocks.
Easy to see that this is another change that he wants in his favour.
I dont normally troll, but when i do i do it on General Discussion. |

Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
171
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 23:55:00 -
[134] - Quote
Look at all the terribaddies squirming when they have their easy mode questioned. The same few posters with sandy vaginas repeating the same vacuous diatribe.
Look it up, cretins.
I do appreciate you guys giving my words their due attention. |

Lord Zim
710
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:00:00 -
[135] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:Look at all the terribaddies squirming when they have their easy mode questioned. The same few posters with sandy vaginas repeating the same vacuous diatribe.
Look it up, cretins.
I do appreciate you guys giving my words their due attention. Sounds like you need to undock about it. |

Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
171
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:02:00 -
[136] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Caliph Muhammed wrote:Look at all the terribaddies squirming when they have their easy mode questioned. The same few posters with sandy vaginas repeating the same vacuous diatribe.
Look it up, cretins.
I do appreciate you guys giving my words their due attention. Sounds like you need to undock about it.
Keep on believing Karn if you want. If I tell you exactly how much of a fail candyass pansy you are when you're in a 8000 man alliance what on earth makes you think Karn could ever put fear into me. You are a silly lemming. |

Blabb3r M0uth B11tch
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:02:00 -
[137] - Quote
It never ceases to amaze me the people in this game that can't ever seem to be satisfied with finding things to kill. Now we have a new term "Prey", and "Predators" lol Sounds a little like child p0rn to me, but who am I, just an observer in this battle of the royal about who should have the advantage over who.
Let me recant a very important fact about EvE to all the Predators Here. There happens to be a very large sect of family, and others that play eve more for social impact of the game, than anything else. Friends that gather to Mine, run Missions, Incursions and the such. These people are interested because they can build things, build an empire so to speak, visit with there friends, and have fun. There really have no interest at all in getting ganked, or destroyed, or even fighting. Just having there good time in there own way. OK, you may think it's lame, But what about em.
Bottom line is this, there are other games, and maybe, just maybe, that's where they belong? I wonder how CCP would really feel, if they did succeed in making virtually all of the space in the game so dangerous for these type of players, that they simply up and moved on to other things, other games, where they can find something they like.
My guess, CCP might be disappointed in the results. I'm certain it would result in major lost subscriptions. I would guess it wouldn't be the type players that just ganked some poor unsuspecting fools freighter with everything they own in the game. That end up selling all there stuff and buying plexes with the isk to play on. But the players they will most likely loose are the fools with the freighter that got destroyed, that actually paid for his subscription with a credit card. I've seen it, they basically say screw this and never come back to the game. Good riddance I guess. I personally don't think CCP wants this, even if you do..
Bottom line, there are an over abundance of things to kill in the land of EvE, If you can't find them, your first step should be to look in a mirror.
CCP will leave local alone, it's there for a purpose, and it serves it well. Simple fact is if CCP changed it, I'm certain not even they feel warm and fuzzy about the consequences.
PS. Thought I would add my post for your viewing pleasure 
|

Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
171
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:06:00 -
[138] - Quote
Blabb3r M0uth B11tch wrote:It never ceases to amaze me the people in this game that can't ever seem to be satisfied with finding things to kill. Now we have a new term "Prey", and "Predators" lol Sounds a little like child p0rn to me, but who am I, just an observer in this battle of the royal about who should have the advantage over who. Let me recant a very important fact about EvE to all the Predators Here. There happens to be a very large sect of family, and others that play eve more for social impact of the game, than anything else. Friends that gather to Mine, run Missions, Incursions and the such. These people are interested because they can build things, build an empire so to speak, visit with there friends, and have fun. There really have no interest at all in getting ganked, or destroyed, or even fighting. Just having there good time in there own way. OK, you may think it's lame, But what about em. Bottom line is this, there are other games, and maybe, just maybe, that's where they belong? I wonder how CCP would really feel, if they did succeed in making virtually all of the space in the game so dangerous for these type of players, that they simply up and moved on to other things, other games, where they can find something they like. My guess, CCP might be disappointed in the results. I'm certain it would result in major lost subscriptions. I would guess it wouldn't be the type players that just ganked some poor unsuspecting fools freighter with everything they own in the game. That end up selling all there stuff and buying plexes with the isk to play on. But the players they will most likely loose are the fools with the freighter that got destroyed, that actually paid for his subscription with a credit card. I've seen it, they basically say screw this and never come back to the game. Good riddance I guess. I personally don't think CCP wants this, even if you do.. Bottom line, there are an over abundance of things to kill in the land of EvE, If you can't find them, your first step should be to look in a mirror. Yes, we can always go find random pvp. But thats just random. The issue with local is targeted pvp and its amateur inhibition of it. CCP will leave local alone, it's there for a purpose, and it serves it well. Simple fact is if CCP changed it, I'm certain not even they feel warm and fuzzy about the consequences. PS. Thought I would add my post for your viewing pleasure 
|

Lord Zim
710
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:20:00 -
[139] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:Keep on believing Karn if you want. If I tell you exactly how much of a fail candyass pansy you are when you're in a 8000 man alliance what on earth makes you think Karn could ever put fear into me. You are a silly lemming. You're the one who has absolutely no kills outside of hisec, and wants to remove local to make it even easier to gank people (as if it was impossible now; it isn't), and is at least providing no outward clue as to whether you've put any thought whatsoever into what the impact will be for all groups other than the ganker. |

Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
171
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:24:00 -
[140] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Caliph Muhammed wrote:Keep on believing Karn if you want. If I tell you exactly how much of a fail candyass pansy you are when you're in a 8000 man alliance what on earth makes you think Karn could ever put fear into me. You are a silly lemming. You're the one who has absolutely no kills outside of hisec, and wants to remove local to make it even easier to gank people (as if it was impossible now; it isn't), and is at least providing no outward clue as to whether you've put any thought whatsoever into what the impact will be for all groups other than the ganker.
Why would I go to nullsec with 12 people? Nullsec is just the areas you can declare sovereignty in. Its not the "pvp" zone in EVE. I have zero reason to ever go out there and contribute to the success of an alliance that doesn't give a care in the world about its members. Your case as you weaseled your way into one of the very few successful ones is the exception not the standard.
Your whole premise is that any pvp outside of nullsec (where your alliance is the undisputed king of said description) is ganking and griefing. And because of that dimwitted viewpoint anyone with a shred of intelligence views your inane whines and plea to the ignorance of others for what it is. |

Lord Zim
710
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:26:00 -
[141] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:Why would I go to nullsec with 12 people? Nullsec is just the areas you can declare sovereignty in. Its not the "pvp" zone in EVE. I have zero reason to ever go out there and contribute to the success of an alliance that doesn't give a care in the world about its members. Your case as you weaseled your way into one of the very few successful ones is the exception not the standard. What about the effect on lowsec? NPC nullsec? Hisec? None of these places are where you "declare sovereignty", and all of them are "pvp zones". |

Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
171
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:28:00 -
[142] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Caliph Muhammed wrote:Why would I go to nullsec with 12 people? Nullsec is just the areas you can declare sovereignty in. Its not the "pvp" zone in EVE. I have zero reason to ever go out there and contribute to the success of an alliance that doesn't give a care in the world about its members. Your case as you weaseled your way into one of the very few successful ones is the exception not the standard. What about the effect on lowsec? NPC nullsec? Hisec? None of these places are where you "declare sovereignty", and all of them are "pvp zones".
No local would fix all secs. You are so beyond clueless I, are you autistic? I ask because no matter what's said to you, you ignore it and repeat the same misguided questions as if anyone reading what you write doesn't recognize the absurd logic you use.
http://nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
Study. Learn. Your average paragraph covers so many mentioned, listing them individually would be considered spam. |

Lord Zim
710
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:33:00 -
[143] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:No local would fix losec. You are so beyond clueless I, are you autistic? Who were talking about "fix"? I was asking you about the effect your "no local" change would have on people in lowsec, nullsec (all nullsec, tbh, not just NPC, but you seem to have some weird notion that nullsec is just somewhere you claim sov, and that's it, there's .. no PVP there? I've no idea what gave you that idea) and hisec. |

Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
171
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:39:00 -
[144] - Quote
Fallacy: False Dilemma
Also Known as: Black & White Thinking.
Description of False Dilemma A False Dilemma is a fallacy in which a person uses the following pattern of "reasoning":
Either claim X is true or claim Y is true (when X and Y could both be false). Claim Y is false. Therefore claim X is true. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because if both claims could be false, then it cannot be inferred that one is true because the other is false. That this is the case is made clear by the following example:
Either 1+1=4 or 1+1=12. It is not the case that 1+1=4. Therefore 1+1=12. In cases in which the two options are, in fact, the only two options, this line of reasoning is not fallacious. For example:
Bill is dead or he is alive. Bill is not dead. Therefore Bill is alive. Examples of False Dilemma
Senator Jill: "We'll have to cut education funding this year." Senator Bill: "Why?" Senator Jill: "Well, either we cut the social programs or we live with a huge deficit and we can't live with the deficit."
Bill: "Jill and I both support having prayer in public schools." Jill: "Hey, I never said that!" Bill: "You're not an atheist are you Jill?"
"Look, you are going to have to make up your mind. Either you decide that you can afford this stereo, or you decide you are going to do without music for a while."
|

Lord Zim
710
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:47:00 -
[145] - Quote
Don't want to answer that question, then. I can only think of two reasons:
1) You have absolutely no clue what the effect on the population in hisec, lowsec and nullsec (both NPC and claimable) would be, and don't want to expose this fact, or 2) You know exactly what the effect will be, but as long as it becomes easier to gank you don't care.
For some reason I'm going to go out on a limb and just assume it's 2). |

Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
171
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:57:00 -
[146] - Quote
You have no clue of the effect either. Nothing more than pessimistic projection and yet you demand proof of me that you can't provide.
I can answer any question you want me to Zim but having a conversation with you is tedious.
Its not a matter of being unable to but not wanting to. |

DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
2191
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:59:00 -
[147] - Quote
Throwing my 2 ISK worth into this topic.
Empire controls 2 areas of space, high security and low security. Players showing up in Local chat channels is intel provided by Empire Factions. Null security is controlled by Alliances and as such they have to provide their own intel. Null security systems need to be patrolled by the Alliances controlling SOV for intel.
High security local chat channel shows everyone. Low security local chat channel shows Criminals and War Targets. Null security local chat channel shows Alliance and Allies controlling SOV. Wormhole local chat channel shows no one.
All local chat channels show players who speak and as long as that player remains in that system, that player's intel is available in Local chat.
EDIT:
NPC Null security local chat channel would be like Wormhole local chat channel. |

Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
171
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:59:00 -
[148] - Quote
Fallacy: Burden of Proof
Includes: Appeal to Ignorance ("Ad Ignorantiam")
Description of Burden of Proof Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side. Another version occurs when a lack of evidence for side A is taken to be evidence for side B in cases in which the burden of proof actually rests on side B. A common name for this is an Appeal to Ignorance. This sort of reasoning typically has the following form:
Claim X is presented by side A and the burden of proof actually rests on side B. Side B claims that X is false because there is no proof for X. In many situations, one side has the burden of proof resting on it. This side is obligated to provide evidence for its position. The claim of the other side, the one that does not bear the burden of proof, is assumed to be true unless proven otherwise. The difficulty in such cases is determining which side, if any, the burden of proof rests on. In many cases, settling this issue can be a matter of significant debate. In some cases the burden of proof is set by the situation. For example, in American law a person is assumed to be innocent until proven guilty (hence the burden of proof is on the prosecution). As another example, in debate the burden of proof is placed on the affirmative team. As a final example, in most cases the burden of proof rests on those who claim something exists (such as Bigfoot, psychic powers, universals, and sense data).
Examples of Burden of Proof
Bill: "I think that we should invest more money in expanding the interstate system." Jill: "I think that would be a bad idea, considering the state of the treasury." Bill: "How can anyone be against highway improvements?"
Bill: "I think that some people have psychic powers." Jill: "What is your proof?" Bill: "No one has been able to prove that people do not have psychic powers."
"You cannot prove that God does not exist, so He does."
|

Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
171
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 01:03:00 -
[149] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:Throwing my 2 ISK worth into this topic.
Empire controls 2 areas of space, high security and low security. Players showing up in Local chat channels is intel provided by Empire Factions. Null security is controlled by Alliances and as such they have to provide their own intel. Null security systems need to be patrolled by the Alliances controlling SOV for intel.
High security local chat channel shows everyone. Low security local chat channel shows Criminals and War Targets. Null security local chat channel shows Alliance and Allies controlling SOV. Wormhole local chat channel shows no one.
All local chat channels show players who speak and as long as that player remains in that system, that player's intel is available in Local chat.
Why should hisec be safe? Safer, sure, and it is because the punishment for criminal aggression is guarenteed destruction. Local when utilized prevents any chance whatsoever of conflict, and all the lore in the world doesn't justify it. Its stale and stagnant gameplay. |

Lord Zim
710
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 01:09:00 -
[150] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:You have no clue of the effect either. Nothing more than pessimistic projection and yet you demand proof of me that you can't provide.
I can answer any question you want me to Zim but having a conversation with you is tedious.
Its not a matter of being unable to but not wanting to. So when I say that initially, in hisec, of those who does notice that the corp is now at war, even fewer will bother to undock, that's just a "pessimistic projection"?
And when I say that some of the people who are currently making a living in lowsec will probably stop doing so, that's just a "pessimistic projection"?
And when I say that some (or a sizeable portion) of the people who are currently mining and ratting in nullsec will probably go back to hisec to make a similar amount of isk for vastly less effort, that's just a "pessimistic projection"?
Or do you actually assume that everyone'll just go "oh hey I get the wormhole experience without actually going to wormholes" and just trundle along as if nothing happened?
Caliph Muhammed wrote:Local when utilized prevents any chance whatsoever of conflict Tons of killmails, in all security levels, would suggest otherwise. |
| |
|
| 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 |