|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
DantesInfernoRedux
Amarr
ANZAC ALLIANCE
IT Alliance
   |
Posted - 2011.01.28 19:16:00 -
[1]
Question is, how many bubbles were anchored on said pos? Excessive bubbling is an exploit in itself.
Love goon tears though. Never gets old.
|
DantesInfernoRedux
Amarr
ANZAC ALLIANCE
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 19:23:00 -
[2]
Edited by: DantesInfernoRedux on 28/01/2011 19:22:54
 Originally by: Orkasm
Enough to cover the required area and no more, hardly 'Too Many Bubbles' when any less would not have been effective
So that excuse aint gonna fly
CCP doesn't go by goon standards of what is 'enough' sadly.
And to the muppet below, has nothing to do with videos settings. If its too many bubbles on a pos or gate, its an exploit.
Commence with the whinging.
|
DantesInfernoRedux
Amarr
ANZAC ALLIANCE
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 19:30:00 -
[3]
Edited by: DantesInfernoRedux on 28/01/2011 19:32:33
Edited by: DantesInfernoRedux on 28/01/2011 19:32:10
Originally by: Karadion
Prove it.
http://www.eve-search.com/thread/1446795#8 which I believe 20-40 bubbles were deployed per POS including the ones that everyone is concerned about so your standard is that as long it's owned by Test/GOONS, it's an exploit.
I've stated my inquiry in a question format. I haven't made a decision on whether this was the case here. You, and the rest of the goon muppets, are definitively stating it wasn't the case.
And kudos for linking a thread stating nothing about the '20-40 bubbles' bit as anything beyond heresay. Try again?
|
DantesInfernoRedux
Amarr
ANZAC ALLIANCE
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 19:34:00 -
[4]
Edited by: DantesInfernoRedux on 28/01/2011 19:34:51
Originally by: 51layer
It was not too many, it was just enough to be effective. Just shut your mouth trying to justify your cheating, you're just mad you lost a region to a bunch of noobs in rifters, how embarassing.
More goon emo. Now I'm cheating.
Still no definitive proof that the bubbling of said pos was not an exploit and ccp has justification at removing them.
And yeah, more of the end of days scenario based on potentially losing one system.
Shakin in me boots. 
|
DantesInfernoRedux
Amarr
ANZAC ALLIANCE
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 19:51:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Karadion
How is it hearsay when I linked to the exact comment who (confirmed or not) had petitioned CCP on excessive bubbles? Do you need a new dictionary? There are even free sites online that can help you clear up the definition of what hearsay is. I did answer your question though. There were 20-40 bubbles per tower / station which is more than enough but way less than what is considered to be an exploit by CCP because it is supposed to be a strain on the server, not on your GeForce2 MX 200 that you got and still haven't replaced.
Yes I'm a stupid goonie! I don't know what I'm talking about.
Guess you've been watching a bit too much Law and Order there. Hearsay is simply unverified information. So still applicable.
Seen ccp justify removing bubbles from gates and pos's due to excess on a non-IT related op/campaign. I'm awaiting ccp's response to the matter. No stamping my feet in a hissy fit like the brunt of you here.
|
|
|
| |
|