| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
   |
Posted - 2010.02.08 09:03:00 -
[1]
You ppl whine way too much.
You whine when they dont release details.
You whine when they do release details.
You whine when the node crashes.
You whine when they prevent the node from crashing.
Anyone else noticing a pattern here?
Im pretty much convinced everone living in null is a 4 yr old girl.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.08 14:00:00 -
[2]
you ppl act like timestamps were put there by the almighty himself. Did it occur to anyone that if the node was experiencing lag- maybe the killmail generation would be delayed? Or any of a thousand other things could be the problem.
You lost your ship because you undocked. HTFU. Its not a phrase for everyone but you.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.09 09:48:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: San Ti
CCP you can see that quite a lot of your paying customers are pretty upset with the way you are dealing with this situation.
You should seriously consider the strength of feeling on this.
Perhaps you got carried away with your last vid and have applied the "burn them all" statement as a management directive in response to legitimate player concerns and lines of argument? Seriously, does CEO Hilmar Veigar Petursson have BURN THEM ALL stuck up on the wall in his office? How about Chief Marketing Officer Ryan Dancey?
Do you want your next promo vid to feature empire ice mining and/or a bunch of people in Motsu running missions? I think not.
You try to attract new players to the game using 0.0 imagery and game-play, but you treat your paying customers who bring this part of the eve universe to life like dirt.
It's time you did the right thing by us.
Yes ccp- replace all ships that are lost- and keep doing it forever. Im sure it will completely unbalance the game and make it worse then hello kitty but eh, as long as it makes the girls in null happy.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.09 11:52:00 -
[4]
I ALSO LIKE TO WHINE IN ALL CAPS!
Whats that phrase again? Dont fly what you cant afford to loose?
Ppl in null are supposed to be the experienced players. The ones who have their **** together. The ones who have succeeded against long odds.
Instead all i see is complete rubbish. Congratulations i now have less respect for anyone living in null.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.09 17:19:00 -
[5]
What morons decided to stuff 1600 ppl into a system? What did you think was going to happen?
Well guess what? It happened- deal with it.
For those who are saying theyre unsubbing. Thank god-i hope that means less whining.
To everyone else- yes you got a bad hand. Man up. Or accept your a 6 yr old girl and leave.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.10 14:39:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Zenst
Edited by: Zenst on 10/02/2010 14:36:07
Edited by: Zenst on 10/02/2010 14:31:11
Originally by: Silent Wispa
Originally by: Tarhim
Now, reimbursement is quite another issue. Canned "we do not interfere" response is not valid when there was interference and I think you should push for satifactory outcome (rollback, reimbursement, whatever). I wouldn't just attribute malice to CCP.
How about "We're not discussing this any further and we're closing your petition, if you talk about this to anyone you'll be banned" is that enough CCP malice for you?
No that's breach of freedom of speach; Blackmail wouldn't go far from that line of posturing. CCP wouldn't do that and like break the law now, have they?
What brand of ****** are you anyway? Thats the stupidest ****ing thing ive ever heard. Go to a law library and pick up a ****ing book sometime.
Dont want to do that? then let me sumarize.
ITS THEIR GAME THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.10 15:05:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Zenst
Originally by: Future MutantLOL
What brand of ****** are you anyway? Thats the stupidest ****ing thing ive ever heard. Go to a law library and pick up a ****ing book sometime.
Dont want to do that? then let me sumarize.
ITS THEIR GAME THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT[/quote
Who says they dont already. But didn't that approach to managment die off with Sadan Hussain 
Tell you what- next time your at a store take all your items to the counter and ***** for an hour straight. Be as belligerent as ppl are being here.
I have five on them giving you the boot well before the hours up.
To everyone who lost a ship under "suspect" circumstances- i understand. Id prolly be ****ed for a few mins too. But damn i mean get over it. They cant reimburse you w/o setting a precedent that makes all fleet fights pointless. Because anything over 500v500 gets fully reimbursed.
And thats on top of the ridiculous amount of time said reimbursements would take.
Tl/dr- yea it sucks, deal with it. Wish it was different but we have to live in reality not some fantasy land where each and every one of us is the most important customer ever.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.12 18:12:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Manks Girl
Quite funny the people that are *****ing "CCP CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT" forget that we pay for a game to play not to be test guinea pigs and not to be spin doctored at any official response from the designers.
The people talking in this thread are the people that have been directly effected in the LAGFEST F*ck up of dominion sov warfare.. people used to play the game to control sov and enjoy the epic big cap fights that pursued.
This part of the game is now over.. we have to admit the mechanic is shagged and as a result people need to get their opinions across to the developers here than speak to the mindless morons on the petitions customer service desk.
Calling their employees "mindless morons" is a nice touch. That might work when your bossing your mom around but irl- you arent worth the bother of having as a customer. To those who are not being insulting- not *****ing, moaning, threatening- this next part doesnt apply to you.
To those who are- you have a choice- to pay or not to pay. Pick one or the other- but please stop acting like your special. In the magical world you live in apparently technical limitations dont exist. If you honestly think you can do better, then by all means start your own mmorg.
Tl/dr- you can help with testing or not- neither answer requires a whine thread explaining your reasoning.
You can continue playing- or not. Again, neither answer requires you to post your tantrums.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.13 05:41:00 -
[9]
Or maybe we can just stop being complete morons about it. Case and point- whose idea was a 1500+ fleet fight again?
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.13 16:33:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Aralis
Originally by: Future Mutant
Or maybe we can just stop being complete morons about it. Case and point- whose idea was a 1500+ fleet fight again?
CCPs. Pay attention.
I must have missed the ccp post saying "when you attack a system make sure you bring 800+ pilots- because this way you crash our node and can come ***** and moan at us in the forums"
If anyone can find that post feel free to link it.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.13 19:36:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Ban Doga
Maybe you can find the link where it says "no more than 1000 people per battle or our nodes will crash and you will lose ships that we won't reimburse..."
Much obliged
You really are so dense you need everything spelled out in one place? Its been mentioned several billion times that the servers cant handle huge amounts of ppl- hell even jita is capped around 1300. Thats 1300 ppl most of whom arent fighting. As for the "wont get remibursed" nonsense- if you really want to play a game where you cant take losses- those games exist.
The cluster cannot gracefully handle a 1600 person fleet fight right now
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.14 16:26:00 -
[12]
Under your definition then eve has been and always will be broken. It cant hold everyone in a single system- must be unplayable amirite?
Well wrong- it is playable. There are limits to everything and eve is no exception. It doesnt take a genius to figure out that under the current mechanics the defenders have a rather large advantage. That coupled with the node limitations greatly limits attacking- not defending as its been suggested.
It also doesnt take a rocket scientist to realize that if jita, the most heavily reinforced node, can only handle around 1300 pp then more then that actually fighting is prolly a bad idea.
If ccp somehow managed to get reinforced nodes to support 750 v 750 figts- one of you would find a way to break the node just so you can come back to the forum and complain about how bad things are.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.14 21:50:00 -
[13]
The magic number is.... x-1 with x being the amount of ppl in a system that borked the node.
Unless some idiot fired a bomb at the cyno and then its (y/3)* x^3
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.16 14:18:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Tharrn
Hey Future Troll, what's your solution then? A hardcap on systems? Or are you just fanboying?
The game has been coded so that 'considerably moar people than enemy' = 'win'. The problem is thus the way CCP want people to play although they know it doesn't work.
The population has clearly outgrown the technology (again). The solution thus can't be to expect people to moronically limit themselves and thus possibly loose although they could have won - the solution must be to encourage a dispersal of the large blobby fleets into a number of smaller fleets. Ball is in CCP's court to come up with a sov system that does NOT revolve about blobbing and thus crashing the nodes.
You think theres a solution? Go back to the oldest part of the forums- read about the epic lag during a 20 vs 20 fleet fight. This doesnt have a solution, its going to be around forever. Ccp fixes it for 750v750- ppl start *****ing 1kvs1k dont work. Ccp fixes it for 1kvs1k- ppl ***** cause 1.25kvs1.25k dont work.
As for the game mechanics force this argument- well duh. Any type of objective anyone can think up- can be achieved easier with twice the ppl. Its just the nature of gaming- theres no easy way around it.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 16:06:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Tharrn
Originally by: Future Mutant
As for the game mechanics force this argument- well duh. Any type of objective anyone can think up- can be achieved easier with twice the ppl. Its just the nature of gaming- theres no easy way around it.
Unless you somehow force people to be in severall places at the same time. 1600/2 = 800. 1600/4=400. Take your complete blob to one spot and you win the battle but loose the strategic objective.
That would somewhat work now. But what happens when the nap train rolls up and you have 6k players total? even divided by 4 thast 1500 each place. It would also have the effect of limiting defense/attack to "only" the largest alliances. And would simply reinforce the more is better argument.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 01:38:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Future Mutant on 18/02/2010 01:42:39
I honestly didnt see anything in all that bolded text that would be helpful in any way.
mentioning eve and throwing in ww2 references- funny but not helpful.
afk cloakers- its like you started with lag and then decided to throw in everything else that annoys you
dividing attackable structure into 7 parts- unless they are each on their own node- what does this change? Im sure having seven things to attack at once wont force larger and larger attack fleets.
mentioning dominion caused lag and then asking what did they learn? WTF are they supposed to learn? that coding is hard?
im fairly sure ive read that post before- at least add something useful before you post i again.
I liked this one the most-6: BEFORE a ship warps offgrid/jumps, make it invulnerable for 1-1.5 seconds,
because if im aligned and moving- ccp should know before i do when im going to jump.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 12:56:00 -
[17]
If you want less bugs upon release of a patch- cross your fingers. Bugs happen. You can test for as many things as you can think of but infinity is a big number- good luck expecting perfection.
As for lag caused by fleet sizes being too large. I still dont see the answer being more objectives which to me would encourage larger fleets (on both sides)
A sane approach- is one no ones going to like. Eliminate blues. Eliminate standings towards each other altogether. Eliminate naps and alliances. Hard cap a limit of ships in a system. Is any of this a good idea? No. Would it reduce the number of lagged out fights? Yes
The one idea i liked- increase the cloak time after a ship jumps through a gate. It may or may not be possible. To me, a layman, i would think you would have to load grid before the cloak happens. Not loading grid= not cloaking. But honestly neither of us can say with certainty.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 17:44:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Future Mutant on 18/02/2010 17:44:32
Nothing would make me happier if ccp made the next expansion nothing more then fixing current issues and optimizing their software. Im not saying ccp shouldnt strive for less bugs- but who is to say they are not? What i am saying is bugs happen, they are literally impossible to weed out beforehand. And that doesnt mean you dont try- and you must fix what does crop up. But then again- thats exactly whats happening. They are trying to fix the problems.
On the second point- im not really trying to justify anything. Ive made arguments for and against things i thought would work/not work. Usually suggestions on all sides are a moot pt because we lack complete knowledge of the situation.
One thought ive had recently ill pose as a question mostly meant for ccp. Given the nature of server technology, and eve software that in many cases cannt utilize it, has there been any thoughts on a complete redo of server/client software? A complete rewrite with the ultimate goal of software that interacts as best as possible.
|
| |
|