| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Swiftgaze
   |
Posted - 2009.11.19 15:10:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: TheHolyJitaChecker
CCP need to cool down on the Censorship...
Hilarious what they made of your topic. :D
|
New ones
Caldari
Koln united
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 15:11:00 -
[32]
Originally by: TheHolyJitaChecker
CCP need to cool down on the Censorship...
You mean they have to stop doing this:
http://i35.tinypic.com/15p66w1.jpg
|
New ones
Caldari
Koln united
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 15:23:00 -
[33]
Wait what, didd 3 post's just gett removed?
|
Swiftgaze
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 15:23:00 -
[34]
You do NOT talk about SUPERCAPS!!! XDDD
|
ARREB
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 18:30:00 -
[35]
We were flying
2 Drakes Battle cruiser
1 Nighthawk Command Ship
1 Myrydian Battle cruiser
1 Catalyst Frig
the Nighthawk left system to go to station when he came back he ckecked WH info befor he jumped in and it siad (it would not last a Day) it did not says it would only last a few hours like they normally do.
He jumped in and it closed.
 So one ship jumped out wnet to station and came back and poof.
It should not close with that description on the WH from 1 ship not even a battleship going through. Thus the wrong info on the label.
|
Slapchop Gonnalovemynuts
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 18:34:00 -
[36]
Originally by: ARREB
...it siad (it would not last a Day) it did not says it would only last a few hours like they normally do..... Thus the wrong info on the label.
Sounds to me like the NH pilot did not read the whole thing, because the stability of the wormhole is also mentioned in the text, and you make no mention of what THAT said. A wormhole can have a full day left but be destabilized and pop from too much mass, and it sounds to me like you had a bit of mass (command ships are very massive, as are BC's, and your most massive ship jumped through the hole 3 times...)
--------------------------------------------
Quote:
EVE-Online... Too rough for ya? Don't like it? GTFO...
|
ARREB
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 18:42:00 -
[37]
Edited by: ARREB on 19/11/2009 18:43:18
Originally by: David Grogan
Originally by: Tau Cabalander
It's not rocket surgery.
lol dont ya mean it's not rocket SCIENCE?
or it's not brain surgery?
I know they are vaque but in that case why would there be 3 or 4 levels of descriptions on the WH for anyone where from a few hours to not a day and others longer?
If this information is not to be trusted then it serves no purpose but to take up space and to confuse players in the game. just call it A Wormhole and be done with it and everyone takes thier chances.
 Since the information is not to be trusted get rid of it entirely or if it is left in ,then CCP needs to stand up and own up to thier mistake and not shrug it off like they are doing now.
No other ships came in the Wh but us. No one jumped back and forth to make it collapse.
|
Oriens Pars
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 18:46:00 -
[38]
Originally by: ARREB
We were flying
2 Drakes Battle cruiser
1 Nighthawk Command Ship
1 Myrydian Battle cruiser
1 Catalyst Frig
the Nighthawk left system to go to station when he came back he ckecked WH info befor he jumped in and it siad (it would not last a Day) it did not says it would only last a few hours like they normally do.
He jumped in and it closed.
So one ship jumped out wnet to station and came back and poof.
It should not close with that description on the WH from 1 ship not even a battleship going through. Thus the wrong info on the label.
that's all fine and everything, but still...
WH + no probes = good luck trying to prove Murphy's Law wrong
|
K'uata Sayus
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 19:34:00 -
[39]
Originally by: ARREB
We were flying
2 Drakes Battle cruiser
1 Nighthawk Command Ship
1 Myrydian Battle cruiser
1 Catalyst Frig
the Nighthawk left system to go to station when he came back he ckecked WH info befor he jumped in and it siad (it would not last a Day) it did not says it would only last a few hours like they normally do.
He jumped in and it closed.
So one ship jumped out wnet to station and came back and poof.
It should not close with that description on the WH from 1 ship not even a battleship going through. Thus the wrong info on the label.
 So......you're telling me there's a WH with all those ships just hanging out waiting for someone to jump in them and fly them to some nice, warm fuzzy place???
(slowly backs away and then starts running to his covops ship.)
EVERYONE SEEMS NORMAL UNTIL YOU GET TO KNOW THEM. |
Aprudena Gist
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 19:59:00 -
[40]
gm always have been and always will be useless at this game why are you suprised at all? CCP is also useless at this game.
|
ARREB
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 20:00:00 -
[41]
Edited by: ARREB on 19/11/2009 20:02:06
WE go to a wormhole and bookmark it then go inside and drop one probe and bookmark all anamollys to kill.
One probe is all you need . All this with a covert ops frig.
Then we get group together and go in.
Thats it.
As far as Murphy's law has nothing to dowith incorrect labeling.
IF a Wh says it wont last a few hours I will not go in . the should be an indicator the Wh is close to collapse.
But CCP just picks a lable from a hat and slaps it on the Wh.
|
000Hunter000
Gallente
Missiles 'R' Us
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 20:28:00 -
[42]
U got pwned by the wormhole!!! 
Stop whining allready, u learned a good lesson and will fit a probelauncher next time 
________________________________________________
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 20:37:00 -
[43]
Edited by: Gnulpie on 19/11/2009 20:41:26
So the wormhole collapsed after you jumped a few ships through them?
Well, that is perfectly intended game mechanics.
You didn't care having some probing abilities at your gang? I hope you learned your lesson then.
Originally by: ARREB
IF a Wh says it wont last a few hours I will not go in . the should be an indicator the Wh is close to collapse.
It is well documented that wormholes have TWO triggers for collapsing. The first is the mass limit going through, the second is the lifetime. If you watch only one trigger (lifetime) and ignore the other (mass limit), then it is your problem.
|
Kiri Serrensun
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 20:50:00 -
[44]
If you really can't spare a slot for a probe launcher, something I've done once or twice is fly a disposable T1 astrometrics ship to a safespot and ejected before coming back with the actual ship. Instant backup in case you need a way out.
|
Slapchop Gonnalovemynuts
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 21:24:00 -
[45]
This is purely your fault for not having someone fit a probe launcher. You cannot tell me that with that many ships nobody had room for a probe. Going into w-space with no probes is just stupid and is setting yourself up to get trapped. Even if the hole showed plenty of mass and time left, what is to stop someone from collapsing it on you while you are off shooting sleepers? As a rule of thumb you should assume any wormhole you jump through is going to collapse and as such fit your ships accordingly. And whining on the forum is not going to fix anything so stop.
--------------------------------------------
Quote:
EVE-Online... Too rough for ya? Don't like it? GTFO...
|
Ranger 1
Amarr
Dynaverse Corporation
Vertigo Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:48:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 19/11/2009 22:50:12
Quote:
Since the information is purposefully vague, I should take it with a grain of salt and go in with at least the most rudimentary level of preparation,then if I screw up, I should stand up and own up to my mistake and not shrug it off on CCP like I am doing now.
I fixed this for you.
Unfortunately, CCP can't fix stupid.
=====
If you go to Za'Ha'Dum I will gank you. |
Alaura Aquila
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 23:41:00 -
[47]
LOL Wormhole collapse ruined your pew pew.
|
Roisi
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 23:42:00 -
[48]
Originally by: ARREB
Edited by: ARREB on 19/11/2009 20:02:06
As far as Murphy's law has nothing to dowith incorrect labeling.
... erm surely it has everything to do with the incorrect labeling?
|
Rrebel
|
Posted - 2009.11.22 14:41:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Rrebel on 22/11/2009 14:46:13
Originally by: Roisi
Originally by: ARREB
Edited by: ARREB on 19/11/2009 20:02:06
As far as Murphy's law has nothing to dowith incorrect labeling.
... erm surely it has everything to do with the incorrect labeling?
Actually has everything to do with incorrect labeling. As for game mechanics , there was nothing said about game mechanics.
Labeling has nothing to do with game mechanics.
When a gate puts you into a wrong system or a laser shoots a missle instead of a beam that is game mechanics.
The labels are like the game telling me it will take 10 second to reload my missles but actually take 10 minutes, this is mislabeling. I am sorry some of you can not tell the difference so this is to help you understand.
If the system tells you it your ships will last a few hours and you fly it for 10 seconds and it blows up then 1 of 2 things is either wrong. either the mechanics is not set right or the label info is wrong as with the WH.
I unerstand to use probes but do not plan on going to another wormhole because tyhe descritption may say it wouldn't last a day and you enter it with a shuttle and it may close up behind you.
The desrpitions on the Wormholes give you an misleading description on how long the Wh may last when actually the info it shows has no real helpful info you can trust on it at all which is why it is totaly useless.
Why put something on a label that serves no purpose?
Like me slapping a Please Dry clean only tag on my car. Its totaly useless as with the WH info CCP provides.
We are better off to have it removed and just call the dang thing unstable worm hole and be done with it.
We thrusted the label thinking we had a less then a day in it when a Command cruiser went through and it callapsed we found out how umtrue the info really was.
I bet half the people blaming us are some how affiliated with CCP becuse most Companies would rather point the finger at the people then take the blames for thier own mistakes as in the case.
The labels are misleading and not usefull or to be trusted .
We did not take probes in because we went by the despription with they show different levels of time they may last. Cant trust it as we found out.
|
Zartanic
Red Federation
|
Posted - 2009.11.22 14:59:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Zartanic on 22/11/2009 15:03:55
Edited by: Zartanic on 22/11/2009 15:03:12
The label is not misleading at all. It says 'longer than' which means 'up to' not 'will last for at least'. It's simple. Why do you think every WH guide and post says to ALWAYS take a probe with you? For fun? You took all those ships in without bothering to read up on WH's or be prepared to suffer the consequences? Why did you do that?
If I make a stupid mistake in a game I always look to see how many posts there are about it. If there are none its a massive hint I was in the wrong. There are no posts moaning about this. Take that hint.
You can go on about it as much as you want and there are numerous mechanics in EVE that have terrible and misleading wording, WH's are not one of them.
And to say half of us work for CCP is the sort of paranoia that tells me you're useless at learning from you're mistakes and I'm not even remotely surprised you screwed up, which is what you did.
|
Isurus Paucus
Omicron Resource Technologies Limited
|
Posted - 2009.11.22 17:01:00 -
[51]
The problem is that the OP isn't reading the WHOLE description. (and is more intent on pushing blame elsewhere, but that's another issue.) If you stop at the decay description and pay NO ATTENTION WHATSOEVER to the bit about "This wormhole has not yet had its stability significantly disrupted by ships passing through it" then it is quite understandable that you would feel mislead.
However, if you did read that bit and never questioned why that would even be there or what it meant, then I would guess that said feeling of misleading is misplaced.
|
Oriens Pars
|
Posted - 2009.11.22 17:13:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Rrebel
I bet half the people blaming us are some how affiliated with CCP becuse most Companies would rather point the finger at the people then take the blames for thier own mistakes as in the case.
On the contrary......if we were Devs we'd be ignoring you. 
|
Ikathis sihtaki
|
Posted - 2009.11.22 22:50:00 -
[53]
What you can't trust either, is the website that tells you the mass allowance of these holes. Was trying to force one closed, jumped through with an orca 8 times, followed by 2 hics 50 times. When by the info givin by one of those wormhole sites said it should have closed after the 8 orca trips, and 9 trips with the hic.
|
Some Advisor
|
Posted - 2009.11.22 23:38:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Tau Cabalander
It's not rocket surgery.
i thoguth it was rocket science? :P
@OP: what description was the WH? could be a low mass wh that doesnt allow BS trough.
5 Cruisers could get the mass down. There prolly was shrinking involved^^
|
Waukesha
Amarr
Interstellar eXodus
BricK sQuAD.
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 00:50:00 -
[55]
Originally by: ARREB
Edited by: ARREB on 16/11/2009 23:03:04
Below is a response from a GM when we enetered a stable wormhole with 5 cruisers and a frig and it collapsed leaving us stuck in a WH.
The description said it was stable and would not last a day and not significantly affected by ships passing through. This Wh should not have collapsed but did against what the desciption stated.
Here is the GMs response .I bolded the inportant info:
GM correspondence removed. Navigator
So do not go into a WH without probes. As for myself I will not be going into any Wormholes since CCP can not get the descpitions correct and if most of us stay out of these wh maybe CCP will corroctly label these so we can enjoys them and not losse ships and implants because of a poorly designed info system.
ARREB
Pro tips:
Do not trust the description
Do not trust the GM's advice
Do not trust your own testing as CCP may change it without telling anyone
|
ARREB
|
Posted - 2009.12.01 21:57:00 -
[56]
Edited by: ARREB on 01/12/2009 21:57:38
Update
For all of you who said that the Wormholes decriptions were not wrong boy do I have a surprise for you.this includes you GMs as well.
Under the patch to day they had fixed the following which was copied from CCP's own patch notes proving that me and the rest are right.
Wormhole descriptions had some formatting issues that have now been fixed.
Now for our reimbursments that we are now due. 
|
Akhmed TDT
|
Posted - 2009.12.01 22:03:00 -
[57]
Formatting. Not content.
|
ARREB
|
Posted - 2009.12.01 23:16:00 -
[58]
You are right the info is still the same just they changed the way it looks . Darn it Jim.
|
Phoebus ApolloX
Reasonable People
|
Posted - 2009.12.01 23:43:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Phoebus ApolloX on 01/12/2009 23:44:29
Sounds like the wormhole collapsed due to mass. I know it doesn't seem like cruiers should be a problem but some of the lower mass wormholes (especially ones linking to class 1 w-space) can really blow out quick if you don't take the proper precautions. All it takes is one of those ships having a disproportionately sized afterburner/mwd or armor plate to have them wreak havoc on the wormhole's remaining mass, something that needs to be meticulously considered before flying a fleet in.
As a rule of thumb, use no plates or propulsion mods when doing wormhole spelunking, and check the wormhole's info as every person passes through. You don't get the same kind of warnings with mass on a wormhole's info as you do time (with time you get a fairly concise "this wormhole is reaching the end of it's natural lifetime" message at 25% time remaining, a minimum of 4 hours - with mass you get the messages at 45% and 5%, and the final message is sometimes too little mass remaining to act on with a fleet).
So the message you got on that wormhole could've meant it was at 46% mass, which on the smallest wormhole (Z971) to a w-space system is 46,000,000 kg remaining. A Drake with no fittings is 14,010,000 kg. And you flew in 2 of those plus 3 other ships, which could certainly collapse a wormhole with that little mass remaining in just one pass, especially considering some ships may not be flying with mass-conscious fittings.
Just need to make sure that you are always considering the worst case scenario when dealing with wormholes, things like mass need to have a close eye kept on it.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |