EVE Search - Turn off your invite in battle

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

Turn off your invite in battle

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Tomahawk Bliss	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:12:00 - [1] So now that i understand it the convo select is next to the lock select. Not an exploit but still rude becuase it is accidental. set your game to Auto-reject before entering battle. simple fix that CCP added in just for this case most likely. simple and no longer any need to complain about it, any one who has flown any length of time should already know this but sometimes things slip. cheers all
Tholarim	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:16:00 - [2] Edited by: Tholarim on 24/01/2005 02:25:28 Bull%$#@. 1 convo is an accident, 3 at a time isn't. JQA lost all respect today and only made my resolve stronger. No matter what it takes. We won't leave. JQA trying to win a fight There ya go. Now let's see what CCP does about this.
Tomahawk Bliss	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:26:00 - [3] Originally by: Tholarim Edited by: Tholarim on 24/01/2005 02:20:20 Bull%$#@. 1 convo is an accident, 3 at a time isn't. JQA lost all respect today and only made my resolve stronger. No matter what it takes. We won't leave. JQA trying to win a fight There ya go. Now let's see what CCP does about this. please read my post, turn off invites, problem goes away. your respect is neither desired nor required my good man. you are the Invading Huns that are bothering a peaceful alliance. I don't think the JQA will lose sleep over your loss of respect. by the way, howÆs working with Clan Killers and Armored Assassin working out for your respectability? In summary TURN ON AUTO REJECTàunless you want to try and use petitions against the JQA?
n0sPIG	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:30:00 - [4] Looking at the linkage, i thought this was happening in the battle of VV-VCR? This could just be a case of that pilot being particulary popular? "Your never really dead till your body stops twitching"
C4w3	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:31:00 - [5] Im my Words it would be WTFOWNED JQA. Lame ass tactics, CCP your response to the public SUCKS! Nodes chrashes game unplayable, and no i dont work @ CCP HQ doing programing so i do not have constructive critics, just atm Large fleet battles are not an option CCP stand up say the words. "ATM we at CCP do not recomend large Fleet battles due to lag" See i can now its your turn CCP. C4 --> Out "If all the heroes are standing together around a strange device and begin to taunt me, I will pull out a conventional one.
Tholarim	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:32:00 - [6] Originally by: Tomahawk Bliss Originally by: Tholarim Edited by: Tholarim on 24/01/2005 02:20:20 Bull%$#@. 1 convo is an accident, 3 at a time isn't. JQA lost all respect today and only made my resolve stronger. No matter what it takes. We won't leave. JQA trying to win a fight There ya go. Now let's see what CCP does about this. please read my post, turn off invites, problem goes away. your respect is neither desired nor required my good man. you are the Invading Huns that are bothering a peaceful alliance. I don't think the JQA will lose sleep over your loss of respect. by the way, howÆs working with Clan Killers and Armored Assassin working out for your respectability? In summary TURN ON AUTO REJECTàunless you want to try and use petitions against the JQA? you will realise what JQA called over themselves today. Supremacy can lose BS after BS without caring. Only thing i do care about is how our enemies conduct themselves in battle. For what you lot did today you will go down. You guys made up my mind for me. cya.
Daakkon	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:34:00 - [7] even though it is a lame "tactic" it was your own fault for not turning on auto-reject www.dark-cartel.com
Tholarim	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:38:00 - [8] Originally by: Daakkon even though it is a lame "tactic" it was your own fault for not turning on auto-reject Probably yes daak. But i'll be making it very clear to them over the next months, that it ain't acceptable for me . It's still not a in-game feature.
BUYmeSTUFF	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:40:00 - [9] that pic isnt specific to the battle, its just there to show that jqa do infact employ covoing tactics to disrupt a players .... well play... im sure there will be more pics to come
Daakkon	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:40:00 - [10] yeah and it just shows how lame they are for doing it they should get punished one way or another...either by you are ccp but still it was partially your fault www.dark-cartel.com
Daakkon	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:41:00 - [11] Originally by: BUYmeSTUFF that pic isnt specific to the battle, its just there to show that jqa do infact employ covoing tactics to disrupt a players .... well play... im sure there will be more pics to come actually if you look hes in a pod he lost his ship and warped out and got those convo's www.dark-cartel.com
Racknan	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:41:00 - [12] Originally by: Tomahawk Bliss So now that i understand it the convo select is next to the lock select. Not an exploit but still rude becuase it is accidental. set your game to Auto-reject before entering battle. simple fix that CCP added in just for this case most likely. ok, 2 things, 1 - This is an exploit. Players have been warned/banned afaik for this. 2 - When you attempt a convo you have to click on 'ok' to pay the charge to start it... No way that is an 'accident'.
n0sPIG	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:42:00 - [13] Edited by: n0sPIG on 24/01/2005 02:43:59 Edit - sorry im tired bit on the moody side, shouldnt have typed that "Your never really dead till your body stops twitching"
Tholarim	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:44:00 - [14] Originally by: n0sPIG Originally by: Tholarim you will realise what JQA called over themselves today. Supremacy can lose BS after BS without caring. Only thing i do care about is how our enemies conduct themselves in battle. For what you lot did today you will go down. You guys made up my mind for me. cya. I dont like to stir, or start rumours () but has it been considered that the person they were convo'ing could have been their spy within your ranks? Comming from an EX-JQA member, could i consider you biased? kthx.
n0sPIG	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:46:00 - [15] Originally by: Tholarim Originally by: n0sPIG Originally by: Tholarim you will realise what JQA called over themselves today. Supremacy can lose BS after BS without caring. Only thing i do care about is how our enemies conduct themselves in battle. For what you lot did today you will go down. You guys made up my mind for me. cya. I dont like to stir, or start rumours () but has it been considered that the person they were convo'ing could have been their spy within your ranks? Comming from an EX-JQA member, could i consider you biased? kthx. plz refer to edited post. kthx "Your never really dead till your body stops twitching"
Ubute	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:47:00 - [16] ahhhmm. 3 points..... 1. Battle was in VV, not y9g, 2. Time of alleged incident. 23:23. Battle was over then was it not?? 3. Where did those big red letters come from? I know unEDITED screenies dont have those.
Tholarim	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:50:00 - [17] Edited by: Tholarim on 24/01/2005 02:51:22 Originally by: Ubute ahhhmm. 3 points..... 1. Battle was in VV, not y9g, 2. Time of alleged incident. 23:23. Battle was over then was it not?? 3. Where did those big red letters come from? I know unEDITED screenies dont have those. 1. it was after he got killed. 2. that was when he was finally able to log back on 3. Paint?
Daakkon	Posted - 2005.01.24 02:51:00 - [18] paint is considered a sploit tbh www.dark-cartel.com
fugazii	Posted - 2005.01.24 03:40:00 - [19] if its such an easily done thing to accidentaly convo someone, why is it only jqa doin it, and how do you explain the fact you hav to click accept charge to actually start the convo?
n0sPIG	Posted - 2005.01.24 03:49:00 - [20] Originally by: fugazii if its such an easily done thing to accidentaly convo someone, why is it only jqa doin it, and how do you explain the fact you hav to click accept charge to actually start the convo? You dont have your enemies in your addressbook and visa versa? "Your never really dead till your body stops twitching"
fugazii	Posted - 2005.01.24 04:00:00 - [21] Originally by: n0sPIG Originally by: fugazii if its such an easily done thing to accidentaly convo someone, why is it only jqa doin it, and how do you explain the fact you hav to click accept charge to actually start the convo? You dont have your enemies in your addressbook and visa versa? so the ex-ca guys r supposed to hav all of fa, norad, jqa, xetic, stain, bob, 3rd, and whoever else theyre fighting in thier adressbooks? thats like 15000 ppl. m i in ur adress?
Hyey	Posted - 2005.01.24 04:18:00 - [22] Originally by: n0sPIG Originally by: fugazii if its such an easily done thing to accidentaly convo someone, why is it only jqa doin it, and how do you explain the fact you hav to click accept charge to actually start the convo? You dont have your enemies in your addressbook and visa versa? If i throw a bone will you go away? :/ Person above me has a good point, we have so many individual pilots as enemies its damned near impossible to have them all in the address book, and its damned near impossible to get all the names wed need in the first place.... ~~ Hyey I just payed 15 dollars this month just to be able to respond on the forums... stupid cancellation error.
j0sephine	Posted - 2005.01.24 04:41:00 - [23] Edited by: j0sephine on 24/01/2005 04:43:24 Isn't it now possible to manually configure the convo charge? Set it high enough, and make some ISK off your enemy's lame tactics... might turn out will cost them more than losing few ships. (make isk as in, make them cost some isk. too late to write coherently, my bad ..
Admiral Pieg	Posted - 2005.01.24 05:14:00 - [24] Originally by: Tholarim Originally by: Tomahawk Bliss Originally by: Tholarim Edited by: Tholarim on 24/01/2005 02:20:20 Bull%$#@. 1 convo is an accident, 3 at a time isn't. JQA lost all respect today and only made my resolve stronger. No matter what it takes. We won't leave. JQA trying to win a fight There ya go. Now let's see what CCP does about this. please read my post, turn off invites, problem goes away. your respect is neither desired nor required my good man. you are the Invading Huns that are bothering a peaceful alliance. I don't think the JQA will lose sleep over your loss of respect. by the way, howÆs working with Clan Killers and Armored Assassin working out for your respectability? In summary TURN ON AUTO REJECTàunless you want to try and use petitions against the JQA? you will realise what JQA called over themselves today. Supremacy can lose BS after BS without caring. Only thing i do care about is how our enemies conduct themselves in battle. For what you lot did today you will go down. You guys made up my mind for me. cya. If i had a penny for every time someone said this.. ______________________ Pod from above.
Flariaf	Posted - 2005.01.24 05:30:00 - [25] Quote: 1. it was after he got killed. 2. that was when he was finally able to log back on 3. Paint? So your saying that he was "spammed" long after the battle was over?
Arimas Talasko	Posted - 2005.01.24 05:35:00 - [26] Quote: If i had a penny for every time someone said this.. ...I'd trade a nickel for all of your pennies. Supremacy Keepin it Real
Budz Fergie	Posted - 2005.01.24 05:38:00 - [27] I remember getting these and gang invites when fighting CA especially the Russian corps. [14:23:44] Seek > lol good tank [14:24:09] Budz Fergie > ty [14:24:14] Seek > :)
Beringe	Posted - 2005.01.24 05:47:00 - [28] Originally by: Flariaf So your saying that he was "spammed" long after the battle was over? This should be brought to attention. It didn't happen during the battle? That's an important piece of information. Isn't it possible that those "spammings" were simply accidental convos of hoplessly lagged out pilots trying to target something? The names behind those convos are people I trust not to cheat. I would look for other reasons behind this. ------------------------------------------- "My main griveance with the Caldari state was that once I had finished my work for them, they wanted me dead." "No, it's none of your business."
Daakkon	Posted - 2005.01.24 05:49:00 - [29] Originally by: j0sephine Edited by: j0sephine on 24/01/2005 04:43:24 Isn't it now possible to manually configure the convo charge? Set it high enough, and make some ISK off your enemy's lame tactics... might turn out will cost them more than losing few ships. (make isk as in, make them cost some isk. too late to write coherently, my bad .. the isk went to ccp not you and they fixed that "sploit" last patch www.dark-cartel.com
Flariaf	Posted - 2005.01.24 05:51:00 - [30] Originally by: Beringe Originally by: Flariaf So your saying that he was "spammed" long after the battle was over? This should be brought to attention. It didn't happen during the battle? That's an important piece of information. Isn't it possible that those "spammings" were simply accidental convos of hoplessly lagged out pilots trying to target something? The names behind those convos are people I trust not to cheat. I would look for other reasons behind this. Sounds like an attempt to justify mass slaughter to me.

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.