Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
BLACK-STAR
91
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 10:15:00 -
[31] - Quote
hired goon wrote:I bet you all think Manifest's post was genius and funny. Well personally I had a few moments of excitement on the news that the slow auto-spin was coming back. Shame on you all no....If you undock from station within CQ you load CQ back when you dock. If you're in the Hangar and undock, you'll load the Hangar when you dock again. [img]http://www.imgbox.de/users/S7AR/star.png[/img] |
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
57
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 10:22:00 -
[32] - Quote
I DEMAND WE HAVE SHIP FLIPPING!
I want to flip my ship UP AND DOWN not just clockwise and anticlockwise |
Thorn Galen
The Scope Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 11:03:00 -
[33] - Quote
non judgement wrote:Headerman wrote:CCP Manifest wrote:I have not read this thread, and for that I apologize. However, I thought it more important to jump in immediately and clarify that ship spinning actually means that we will all start moving in circles again--either clockwise or counterclockwise depending on the preference of the pilot. Oh good. Cause down under here, the water spins counter clockwise, so a spinning ship going <-- that way <-- will remind me of "Back to the Future", an awesome film. PS: Everyone war dec the OP and pod this PoS. The confusing part of how water spinning would remind someone of Back to the Future was sadly ignore. Isn't water spinning in different directions north or south of the equator a bit of a fallacy?
It's called the Coreolis effect. In terms of North/South spinning :
(from http://stratus.ssec.wisc.edu/courses/gg101/coriolis/coriolis.html) "As to whether there's a conspiracy among sink manufacturers to sell only clockwise-encouraging faucets south of the Equator and counterclockwise faucets north of it is a topic for another day. The reader is encouraged to search the journal Science where I am told a pair of serious studies are presented (unfortunately, I don't know which issues the articles are in, or even which year...my information is still secondhand). The results were that after you carefully control all the variables (use a large wooden tub, control the temperature throughout the tub, have the drain be a tube extending up into the tub to avoid friction effects with the tub walls, start the water off spinning the "wrong" way, etc) and wait 18 hours for the water to settle down, water does indeed spiral down the sink opposite directions in the two hemispheres. But this effect is so subtle that it wouldn't ever be seen in your bathroom sink."
(This space for rent) |
Ladie Scarlet
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
118
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 11:05:00 -
[34] - Quote
Meryl SinGarda wrote:Ladie Scarlet wrote: This is a horrible post. Don't ever do this again.
Not that I agree with the OP, but every single time I see you post something, it's this. I know...there is so much bad posting. People should have to get some sort of posting license before they can post here.
The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet. |
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
58
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 11:08:00 -
[35] - Quote
Ladie Scarlet wrote:Meryl SinGarda wrote:Ladie Scarlet wrote: This is a horrible post. Don't ever do this again.
Not that I agree with the OP, but every single time I see you post something, it's this. I know...there is so much bad posting. People should have to get some sort of posting license before they can post here.
Your avatar needs a license.
|
My Postman
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 11:23:00 -
[36] - Quote
By making CQ NOT optional from the beginning, CCP did it wrong. Now they are correcting it, and you call it a step backwards.
Usually i-¦m a friendly, polite person, but you sir, are an idiot. |
Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
260
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 11:24:00 -
[37] - Quote
Miilla wrote:Ladie Scarlet wrote:Meryl SinGarda wrote:Ladie Scarlet wrote: This is a horrible post. Don't ever do this again.
Not that I agree with the OP, but every single time I see you post something, it's this. I know...there is so much bad posting. People should have to get some sort of posting license before they can post here. Your avatar needs a license.
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh, burn!
haha, just kidding, that was really weak and you should be ashamed |
AlleyKat
The Unwanted.
22
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 11:34:00 -
[38] - Quote
Phizban wrote:CQ wah. Ship spinning, wah. NEX wah.
Lets move the game backwards by re-adopting past iterations. Let us embrace the past, and let EVE stagnate. No change, only the same reliable unchanging predictable experience.
Now CCP can simply re-introduce the CQ / Ship Spin Hanger option and call it new content. Weeeeee!
So now the winter expansion suffers. Lets bring back previous AB and MWD and NANO specs. Lets bring back wrecks that can not be salvaged by anyone, and get back to the old RIG prices.
Oh, also, bring back the times when Dreads cost LESS than Carriers.
Finally, I would like all my ISK refunded from all my losses, in the past.
You'll be glad to hear that a WireFrame version of EVE is being discussed, then. This will move EVE so far back, it will receive a round-house kick to the face and land in the 80's.
AK "Few have found anger in solace, than solace in anger."
"Sincerity is a game best played by the insincere"
|
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
58
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 11:35:00 -
[39] - Quote
AlleyKat wrote:Phizban wrote:CQ wah. Ship spinning, wah. NEX wah.
Lets move the game backwards by re-adopting past iterations. Let us embrace the past, and let EVE stagnate. No change, only the same reliable unchanging predictable experience.
Now CCP can simply re-introduce the CQ / Ship Spin Hanger option and call it new content. Weeeeee!
So now the winter expansion suffers. Lets bring back previous AB and MWD and NANO specs. Lets bring back wrecks that can not be salvaged by anyone, and get back to the old RIG prices.
Oh, also, bring back the times when Dreads cost LESS than Carriers.
Finally, I would like all my ISK refunded from all my losses, in the past.
You'll be glad to hear that a WireFrame version of EVE is being discussed, then. This will move EVE so far back, it will receive a round-house kick to the face and land in the 80's. AK
Do not mock Elite, EVER.
|
Cailais
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
30
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 12:15:00 -
[40] - Quote
Phizban wrote: Lets bring back previous AB and MWD and NANO specs.
This is actually quite a good idea.
C.
|
|
Alissa Solette
University of Caille Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 12:16:00 -
[41] - Quote
CCP Manifest wrote:I have not read this thread, and for that I apologize. However, I thought it more important to jump in immediately and clarify that ship spinning actually means that we will all start moving in circles again--either clockwise or counterclockwise depending on the preference of the pilot.
How much AUR will this feature cost? Also, will we be able to buy a monthly flat rate or will it be pay-as-you-spin?
Would be funny if it wasn't so sad. |
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
58
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 12:34:00 -
[42] - Quote
Talking of flat , so is your avatar :)
|
Tyrnaeg en Varche
29
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 13:58:00 -
[43] - Quote
Grey Stormshadow wrote:Congrats OP. You're the 1st person I add to my forum block list. That is reward from the brilliance of that highly intelligent post you made :) Oh, you should try that more, very handy to quickly browse through threads :) |
Herping yourDerp
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
72
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 15:21:00 -
[44] - Quote
forcing CQ was moving eve backwards.... this is a step in the right direction. either way, post with your main, trolls trolling |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
15
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 17:18:00 -
[45] - Quote
Alissa Solette wrote:CCP Manifest wrote:I have not read this thread, and for that I apologize. However, I thought it more important to jump in immediately and clarify that ship spinning actually means that we will all start moving in circles again--either clockwise or counterclockwise depending on the preference of the pilot. How much AUR will this feature cost? Also, will we be able to buy a monthly flat rate or will it be pay-as-you-spin? Would be funny if it wasn't so sad.
Much like your post.
(Badoom ching) To kill the enemy and break their toys!
It's not so much a mission statement,-áit's more like a family motto. |
Satav
Latinum Exports
11
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 17:42:00 -
[46] - Quote
Phizban wrote:CQ wah. Ship spinning, wah. NEX wah.
Lets move the game backwards by re-adopting past iterations. Let us embrace the past, and let EVE stagnate. No change, only the same reliable unchanging predictable experience.
Now CCP can simply re-introduce the CQ / Ship Spin Hanger option and call it new content. Weeeeee!
So now the winter expansion suffers. Lets bring back previous AB and MWD and NANO specs. Lets bring back wrecks that can not be salvaged by anyone, and get back to the old RIG prices.
Oh, also, bring back the times when Dreads cost LESS than Carriers.
Finally, I would like all my ISK refunded from all my losses, in the past.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHA! *gasps for air* HAHAHAHAHAHA
I knew it. All this input of wanting ship spinning back and now we are hearing that "eve is moving backwards and becoming stagnate"
lol. can anyone say STFU? lol. seriously. CCP can't satisfy all your wants and desires. The best pc game companies can't. So why don't we focus on the important stuff and tackle the small stuff when we can.
Sheesh ******* children these days huh?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
"250 Hellcats inbound sir! They have us outmanned and outgunned. What are we going to do?" "catnip of course......." |
Vertisce Soritenshi
SHADOW WARD Tragedy.
17
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 18:42:00 -
[47] - Quote
Albetta wrote:Man your stupid
Oh the irony...his stupid what?
"You are" = You're
I think that's what, third grade English right there?
To the OP:
They aren't taking anything away from EvE. They are just adding back the ship spinning portion that was originally removed and giving us a button to make accessing CQ optional. Just like everybody with any common sense was saying when Incarna released.
How is this moving backwards? If anything this is moving forward. |
Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 18:45:00 -
[48] - Quote
Albetta wrote:Man your stupid
It's, "you're." Which is fine and all idc tbh, but come on you just called him stupid.
|
Zofe Stormcaller
B4D W0LF B4D W01F
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 20:38:00 -
[49] - Quote
OP needs to get bent. Getting CQ implented in the way the community wanted instead of the dumbass way it was is going forward. Lets just see if it actually gets implemented somewhat close to the dev blog |
The D1ngo
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.21 20:59:00 -
[50] - Quote
Phizban wrote:CQ wah. Ship spinning, wah. NEX wah.
Lets move the game backwards by re-adopting past iterations. Let us embrace the past, and let EVE stagnate. No change, only the same reliable unchanging predictable experience.
Now CCP can simply re-introduce the CQ / Ship Spin Hanger option and call it new content. Weeeeee!
So now the winter expansion suffers. Lets bring back previous AB and MWD and NANO specs. Lets bring back wrecks that can not be salvaged by anyone, and get back to the old RIG prices.
Oh, also, bring back the times when Dreads cost LESS than Carriers.
Finally, I would like all my ISK refunded from all my losses, in the past.
If only we would roll back to before you "rolled" your toon... |
|
Soi Mala
Whacky Waving Inflatable Flailing Arm Tubemen
45
|
Posted - 2011.09.22 14:46:00 -
[51] - Quote
Phizban wrote:CQ wah. Ship spinning, wah. NEX wah.
Lets move the game backwards by re-adopting past iterations. Let us embrace the past, and let EVE stagnate. No change, only the same reliable unchanging predictable experience.
Now CCP can simply re-introduce the CQ / Ship Spin Hanger option and call it new content. Weeeeee!
So now the winter expansion suffers. Lets bring back previous AB and MWD and NANO specs. Lets bring back wrecks that can not be salvaged by anyone, and get back to the old RIG prices.
Oh, also, bring back the times when Dreads cost LESS than Carriers.
Finally, I would like all my ISK refunded from all my losses, in the past.
We should spend decades/centuries designing methods to interface directly with ships, enabling the pilots to control the systems via their own nervous system. Man and machine interwoven, sacrificing their previous lives for the honour of becoming a capsuleer. They gain fame, riches, and immortality, all in exchange for their dedication, for their imprisonment in the war machine.
That doesn't sound very fun, so lets just roll that back, and have him jump out of that interface every time he docks, so he can prance around and show of his new sunglasses.
Get a grip you ******* ******.
|
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
23
|
Posted - 2011.09.22 15:53:00 -
[52] - Quote
Miilla wrote:I DEMAND WE HAVE SHIP FLIPPING!
I want to flip my ship UP AND DOWN not just clockwise and anticlockwise
Thanks for showing the OP how to troll Millia - a shining example for all of us.
His attempt was a disgrace really.
NOSTRO AURUM NON EST AURUM VULGI |
Azelor Delaria
We Are So Troubled Everyone Runs Screaming The 0rphanage
21
|
Posted - 2011.09.22 16:05:00 -
[53] - Quote
OP, I would like you to do the following, in this order:
1.) Get a potato. 2.) Wrap it in tin foil. 3.) Put said potato-wrapped-in-tin-foil into your pocket. 4.) Die in a fire, that way the world is rid of your stupidity and I get a baked potato! \o/ |
jason hill
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
4
|
Posted - 2011.09.22 16:10:00 -
[54] - Quote
I think the OP forgot to take his med`s and is currently suffering from a stupidity leak ! |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
38
|
Posted - 2011.09.22 17:46:00 -
[55] - Quote
Phizban wrote:CQ wah. Ship spinning, wah. NEX wah.
Lets move the game backwards by re-adopting past iterations. Let us embrace the past, and let EVE stagnate. No change, only the same reliable unchanging predictable experience.
Now CCP can simply re-introduce the CQ / Ship Spin Hanger option and call it new content. Weeeeee!
So now the winter expansion suffers. Lets bring back previous AB and MWD and NANO specs. Lets bring back wrecks that can not be salvaged by anyone, and get back to the old RIG prices.
Oh, also, bring back the times when Dreads cost LESS than Carriers.
Finally, I would like all my ISK refunded from all my losses, in the past.
Unlike my troll brothers and sisturs I'm going to attempt to broach your concerns seriously.
Reintroducing ship spinning is not a move backwards. In fact, having to load CQ, get out of your ship and walk somewhere for tasks as simple as adding more ammo to your cargo bay or turning in missions or unloading/loading ore or buying/selling or any other numbers of actions requiring repetitive docking/undocking is an impediment to the game. Sir, you will get tired of having to wait for CQ to load everytime you do one of these things. The good news is you will still have that option. So, moving backwards? No. I would guess that CCP realized that having to spend 30s to dock, 30s to load CQ and however long to walk down the hall to your agent's office everytime you want to turn in/get a mission would be needlessly laborious and a detriment to game play. IDK. But that would be my guess.
Or, another way to look it is that they realized that for the vast majority of their players who can't afford +$5,000 rigs of bleeding edge technology that WiS is ultimately going to be a performance fiasco when more than one character and one room are involved in the rendering and that it might be best to give everyone the option of turning that sh&t off. IDK? We want breast augmentations and sluttier clothing in the NeX! |
Jonah Gravenstein
1
|
Posted - 2011.09.22 18:17:00 -
[56] - Quote
Confirming OP is either a troll or as dumb as a brick, probably the latter to be brutally honest
Miilla wrote:
Do not mock Elite, EVER.
Quoting Miillia, & actually agreeing... Damn it.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |