| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
EnderCapitalG
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
   |
Posted - 2011.06.15 01:29:00 -
[61]
 Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Diva Bara
Just like every other MMO, Eve should have noob zones which are protected and killing or harrasing new players there should either be impossible, or carry a strong penalty.
EVE already has such zones.
Several of them to be exact.
Hint: Noob systems.
|
Diva Bara
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 11:29:00 -
[62]
Originally by: EnderCapitalG
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Diva Bara
Just like every other MMO, Eve should have noob zones which are protected and killing or harrasing new players there should either be impossible, or carry a strong penalty.
EVE already has such zones.
Several of them to be exact.
Hint: Noob systems.
Really? How exactly are noobs protected in those systems?
Hint: not at all.
|
HeIIfire11
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 11:58:00 -
[63]
Originally by: ShahFluffers
your quotes are garbage..I've told you that before...
Okay I'll start here. As much as I would love the Idea that convincing you guys would be enough to change something in eve,it sadly wont. If the ideas that are brought to the csm and passed up to ccp don't get acknowledged then neither will mine. And to an extent I agree that this change would most likely be too much work for ccp for the small change that it would bring forth. That said my main goal in this thread was not to change anything but to simply state my opinion. Apart from that the people who would have to vote on my behalf would be the mission runner crowd which for the most part have no interest in pvp what so ever. Because while being a solution to much confusion it would do just that,offer a new opportunity for pvp in high sec while eliminating a risk free way to earn isk.
Originally by: ShahFluffers
I personally don't see an issue with ninja-salvaging (and the quotes I posted on the first page show CCP doesn't have an issue with it either). And skimming through this thread I think it's safe to say that many others here do not see it as a problem.
First off I have to say I disagree that ninja salvaging doesn't cause a problem. So being a topic that has been beaten to death I'm not too sure where to start. I think I'll start with your quotes on page one that everyone values so highly.Lets break them down and see what they actually bring to the table.
Keep in mind that I will treat what ccp says as gods word just for the sake of argument. After all it is their game.
1. CCP Mitnal: Originally by: CCP Mitnal
"Our policy on this is extremely clear... Salvaging is a mini-profession within EVE and does not constitute stealing."
In quote one the link doesn't work so all I have to go on is the quote itself and not what was said in the thread. And the quote says nothing other than that ccp wants it to be a mini profession and doesn't consider salvaging as theft.
2. GM Faolchu : Originally by: GM Faolchu
Salvaging other peoples wrecks.... This is an intended game mechanic and is in no way an exploit. People salvaging your missions npcs or the player you just blew up are doing nothing wrong. The players are salvaging what is effectively floating rubbish in space and Concord places no value on this wreckage.
Eve is a harsh place you won't always have everything go your way, its a do or die world and people do what they can to get along. If salvaging some wreckage gets them a few more ISK someone will do it, it doesn't matter who just blew it up.
In quote two say the same thing basically,that its an intended game mechanic and not an exploit. I for one never said it was an exploit but that it was a bad game design. But I'll get to that later on in this post.
The key part of this quote is the bottom half.
Originally by: GM Faolchu
Eve is a harsh place you won't always have everything go your way, its a do or die world and people do what they can to get along.
"Eve is a harsh place....it's a do or die world".
What is harsh about scanning down a player who cant shoot you,and salvaging his wrecks while he tanks the mission? Nothing at all. Its free isk. Not only that but it takes nothing to train an alt which can do this,I estimate two weeks if not less. Even faster now that we have the 100% training time bonus on new characters.
Continued below...
|
HeIIfire11
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 12:01:00 -
[64]
Originally by: HeIIfire11
3. Senior GM Ytterbium : Originally by: GM Ytterbium
Players are still completely free to salvage other pilot wrecks at will ... and doing so is not considered as an exploit.
This one is very very interesting and a major key in my argument. You quoted the part that you wanted to see but not the relevant part. One of the most used arguments are "it's not your wreck and only the loot inside is yours". I am going to kill this argument once and for all. Now again,keep I'm mind that we are taking the word of CCP as the word of god. The part you should have quoted is this...
Originally by: GM Ytterbium
The wreck ownership mechanism has recently been changed, and as such will not belong to the character doing most damage to the NPC anymore, but to the pilot who first accepted the mission.
Wow..now this brings a whole new light on the subject now doesn't it? This is a senior GM who states that the wreck does in fact belong to the pilot who accepted the mission. This along with the fact that the wreck has my corp name on it,can not be shot or tractor beamed by anyone but myself and my corp clearly proves that the wreck is in fact...mine. He doesn't say It belongs to me as long as my loot is in there,but that it is plain and simple..mine.
4. CCP Prism X : Originally by: CCP Prism X
Why is stealing salvage OK? It's not. It shouldn't even be possible to move an item from your cargo-hold / hanger to another persons cargo-hold / hanger without opening a trade window. Before the salvage enters those containers it is not considered your stuff by the server code. Hence it's not stealing.
In this quote CCP Prism x took it upon himself to get a little sarcastic.
Originally by: CCP Prism X
Why is stealing salvage OK? It's not. It shouldn't even be possible to move an item from your cargo-hold / hanger to another persons cargo-hold / hanger without opening a trade window.
No **** Sherlock. But he doesn't address any of the key points players bring up in this or any other thread on this subject. All he says is that "It's not stealing" which clearly contradicts what Senior GM Ytterbium stated in the quote above. As far as I know taking anything from a wreck that is mine (which we have proven to be mine) is stealing. So either they need to talk it over what it is exactly that they want,or to fix the game mechanic to reflect this choice. Like change the ownership of the wreck when looted. So until they decide what it is they want,I will call it bad game design. Simple as that. Why? Because the game mechanic doesn't reflect what they say it is intended to be.
5. CCP Incognito : Originally by: CCP Incognito
Had a chat with some designers this evening.
Ninja salvaging is intended game play. It was always intended that the wrecks are public, the loot is private.
They do not see it as a problem if others salvage your wrecks.
This quote confirms my statement from above and again contradicts what Senior GM Ytterbium stated in his post. It confirms my statement that the game mechanic doesn't reflect what the designers intend it to be hence its bad game design as I have said many times in this thread. Bad game design which causes confusion and these threads that keep arising on this subject.
He has spoken with the designers and they have concluded that the wreck is not mine but the loot is. Why then after the wreck is looted,does it remain unchanged? I still can't shoot it or tractor beam it as a salvager or someone not in that corp.
This again confirms a problem and a contradiction in the game design as far as salvaging goes.
Continued below...
|
HeIIfire11
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 12:14:00 -
[65]
Quoted posts above come from this thread..
Linkage
|
Sir Hillary
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 13:06:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Diva Bara
Originally by: EnderCapitalG
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Diva Bara
Just like every other MMO, Eve should have noob zones which are protected and killing or harrasing new players there should either be impossible, or carry a strong penalty.
EVE already has such zones.
Several of them to be exact.
Hint: Noob systems.
Really? How exactly are noobs protected in those systems?
Hint: not at all.
They can petition acts of griefing that prey on poor game mechanic knowlage (things like can baiting for example), and people entering tutorial mission sites. CCP have a history of reimbursing losses and banning persistant offenders in these cases.
|
HeIIfire11
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 13:47:00 -
[67]
And because Tippia seems to be repeating the same thing after being proven wrong..I'll just leave this here as ammo for the "the can is yours not the wreck" argument.
"In Kali all ships (player and NPC) will spawn wrecks upon destruction. This will replace the loot can."
But that's as far as I go into this argument. Just dropping off some ammo for the op 
|
salty Milk
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 14:45:00 -
[68]
Edited by: salty Milk on 15/06/2011 14:46:08
Something from Kali is your "proof"?
Do you know what Kali is and what happened since Kali?
EDIT:
QUITE IMPORTANT BIT AT THE TOP:
confessions of a married man
reported by CCP SoniClover | 2006.07.07 10:42:43 | Comments
|
HeIIfire11
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 15:01:00 -
[69]
Originally by: salty Milk
Edited by: salty Milk on 15/06/2011 14:46:08
Something from Kali is your "proof"?
Do you know what Kali is and what happened since Kali?
EDIT:
QUITE IMPORTANT BIT AT THE TOP:
confessions of a married man
reported by CCP SoniClover | 2006.07.07 10:42:43 | Comments
Wut?
Way to go.. read around the relevant part and really think that I care lol. The only words you need to be reading are wreck, replace and can. Take it slow I'd say..you gotta crawl before you walk.
|
salty Milk
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 16:00:00 -
[70]
Originally by: HeIIfire11
Originally by: salty Milk
Edited by: salty Milk on 15/06/2011 14:46:08
Something from Kali is your "proof"?
Do you know what Kali is and what happened since Kali?
EDIT:
QUITE IMPORTANT BIT AT THE TOP:
confessions of a married man
reported by CCP SoniClover | 2006.07.07 10:42:43 | Comments
Wut?
Way to go.. read around the relevant part and really think that I care lol. The only words you need to be reading are wreck, replace and can. Take it slow I'd say..you gotta crawl before you walk.
yes i run not walk
i know which 3 words you want me to read
the issue is the other hundred words on the subject you dont wanna read and believe
in particular, the words that came from ccp long after 2006
you are bent on CCP's words appearing in 2006 BEFORE kali appeared (pro tip it wasn't called kali when it came out)
but you have no interest in CCP's words appearing in any year after that
you are so unbelievably wrong its difficult to assume you are trolling thats how unfeasibly wrong you are
bill oreilly cant explain you
|
|
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 19:00:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Diva Bara
Really? How exactly are noobs protected in those systems?
Hint: not at all.
By banning people who break the rules.
Originally by: HeIIfire11
And because Tippia seems to be repeating the same thing after being proven wrong..I'll just leave this here as ammo for the "the can is yours not the wreck" argument.
And none of that changes the fact that salvaging a wreck is never stealing, so regardless of what you think of it, the ownership of the wreck is 100% irrelevant.
You keep getting tripped up by a heuristic that explains what you can and cannot do to the wrecks and why. The easiest of these heuristics is "the wreck is not yours, the can inside it is" because that explains everything you need to know. Whether that model is following the exact wording of every dev statement ever doesn't matter ù the model is in line with what actually happens in game and is therefore a better representation and explanation.
ùùù
ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö
ù Karath Piki |
Vaju Katru
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 19:49:00 -
[72]
rofl @ ****** carebears failing to understand EvE Online.
World of CarebearCraft -----------------> its over their, bye.
|
HeIIfire11
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 20:57:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Diva Bara
Really? How exactly are noobs protected in those systems?
Hint: not at all.
By banning people who break the rules.
Originally by: HeIIfire11
And because Tippia seems to be repeating the same thing after being proven wrong..I'll just leave this here as ammo for the "the can is yours not the wreck" argument.
And none of that changes the fact that salvaging a wreck is never stealing, so regardless of what you think of it, the ownership of the wreck is 100% irrelevant.
You keep getting tripped up by a heuristic that explains what you can and cannot do to the wrecks and why. The easiest of these heuristics is "the wreck is not yours, the can inside it is" because that explains everything you need to know. Whether that model is following the exact wording of every dev statement ever doesn't matter ù the model is in line with what actually happens in game and is therefore a better representation and explanation.
No..I'll tell you what the problem is. The "miniprofession" is unfinished like every other profession in eve. The only reason this is so confusing is because they would either have to change all the wrecks to flag the salvager..or create a seperate wreck model to use in missions. Both is too much work. You keep defending them lol. Makes you look just as stupid..I don't mind. There is no can inside the wreck but you can continue to make pretend there is and ignore what I quote. Only what you quote is true right? You may also continue to think ccp is perfect and salvaging is perfectly as intended
What an idiot..I'm done with it fanboy.
|
Haiyai Higashi
Caldari
Bridgeburner Brigade
|
Posted - 2011.06.16 19:01:00 -
[74]
As someone who has run quite a few missions i offer up a tip for those of you having issues with people salvaging your wrecks.
shoot the wreck
if i can't have it, they can't have it
its really that simple
if that doesn't work for you and you would say that missions should be perfectly safe, id agree on one condition. Remove the NPC corps and make you be in an actual corp. This way risk-reward is maintained by letting people war dec you. Still, some of you may not like that. So i would suggest a major reduction in high sec money making if you want it perfectly safe. The basic problem with the suggestion of making missions a locked area is that you get reward with very little risk. So what about explorers? Why should we make less isk per hour on average then someone who is perfectly safe assuming we implement the idea of locked areas? If people could run level 4s with even less risk then they do, which is minimal currently, then no one would do anything else for isk making because there is a risk associated with the isk making when compared to running a level 4.
as a side note, level 4s are already too profitable for their level of risk
|
Xythe Marstolt
Minmatar
Stark Industries PtyLtd
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 10:32:00 -
[75]
Originally by: HeIIfire11
You may also continue to think ccp is perfect and salvaging is perfectly as intended
I think you're confusing "working as intended" with "working how I think it should work". You are of course entitled to your opinion, if you think the system is stupid as it exists and think it should be changed then so be it, but that doesn't make it broken.
|
Wa'roun
Quantum Cats Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 10:37:00 -
[76]
This topic again?
Time and time again it has come up and shot down due to CCP themselves basing it on maritime law.
You can salvage the hull but the contents still belong to the owner(s).
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 11:26:00 -
[77]
Originally by: HeIIfire11
The only reason this is so confusing is because they would either have to change all the wrecks to flag the salvager..or create a seperate wreck model to use in missions.
Why would they have to do either of those? Flagging the salvager wouldn't serve the purpose of making the roles clearer ù it would in fact do the opposite. Creating separate wreck models for missions wouldn't make much sense either, since they'd still be free for all.
Quote:
You keep defending them lol.
Not really, no. I'm simply explaining how the game works.
Quote:
There is no can inside the wreck but you can continue to make pretend there is and ignore what I quote.
How is this so hard for you to understand: what you wrote is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that the wrecks are free for all. This is best explained through the model of saying "wrecks are not yours, the can inside them are". Whether that is what happens code-wise isn't important. What is important is for people to understand what they can and cannot do, and that model ù short and simple as it may be ù explains it fully.
Quote:
salvaging is perfectly as intended
Wrecks being free for all to salvage is working just as intended, yes.
ùùù
ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö
ù Karath Piki |
HeIIfire11
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 11:35:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: HeIIfire11
The only reason this is so confusing is because they would either have to change all the wrecks to flag the salvager..or create a seperate wreck model to use in missions.
Why would they have to do either of those? Flagging the salvager wouldn't serve the purpose of making the roles clearer ù it would in fact do the opposite. Creating separate wreck models for missions wouldn't make much sense either, since they'd still be free for all.
Quote:
You keep defending them lol.
Not really, no. I'm simply explaining how the game works.
Quote:
There is no can inside the wreck but you can continue to make pretend there is and ignore what I quote.
How is this so hard for you to understand: what you wrote is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that the wrecks are free for all. This is best explained through the model of saying "wrecks are not yours, the can inside them are". Whether that is what happens code-wise isn't important. What is important is for people to understand what they can and cannot do, and that model ù short and simple as it may be ù explains it fully.
Quote:
salvaging is perfectly as intended
Wrecks being free for all to salvage is working just as intended, yes.
Really? Fascinating! I don't need you of all people to tell me how the game works. I on the other hand am telling you what causes these countless threads of confusion and that is bad game design..same bad game design you constantly try to justify and thus make yourself look like a narrow minded fanboy. But do carry on.
|
Unbendable McRib
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 11:40:00 -
[79]
Edited by: Unbendable McRib on 17/06/2011 11:41:33
Originally by: Sobek Thoth
When I run a mission, it's MINE, is it not?
I am referring to the loosely phrased, "High Security Space".
NPC's were removed from the gates in "High Sec" space some years ago because of the ludicrous notion that gate-rats could exist in "High Security" where Concord supposedly rules the roost. I was all for this because it seemed foolish.
As for running a mission in "High Sec", now we not only contend with the NPC's trying to kill us, but now with pirates invading and looting our mission. I have enough excitement in my own life, I do not need for you to create it for me.
First there was "Ore Looting":
Instead of making use of Concord, CCP took the route of "kill rights"?
Now, IRL, I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy. But this is a game, a game where running a mission, salvaging a wreck and selling the loot OR mining ore, refining it, building ships/modules is a source of INCOME for a LOT of us and we CHOOSE to do it in "High Sec" so we won't be bothered. Some may say that seems boring, but for some of us, we're willing to pay $15 a month for it because that is what we WANT. Bending to a few that wanted the opportunity to fight, but not go to 0.0 or be at war, "kill rights" was invented. I saw this as a bad idea and a further degeneration of what "High Sec" space is at it's core.
Thieving should be strongly encouraged to stay out of "High Sec" space.
New Players:
I have seen multiple people come in on a trial account. I endeavor to be an ambassador for Eve and help them with questions and even give them a decent frigate once in a while from my Industry Alt (from one of my THREE accounts).
It was done for me when I joined up, so I am passing along the good intentions. BUT, after the trial is over, I've seen far too many of these people leave and NOT stay. A HUGE factor is them trying to build up isk and having their mission loot or mining ore stolen.
Do we want a challenge? Sure, we're human. Do we want our GAME to become WORK? Not remotely. Some of us prefer to be 'less challenged' than others.
Having the two different types of space is a fantastic idea for garnering a wider range of players/income. But if some of the annoyance of "Low Sec" is going to be allowed to spill over into "High Sec", you will lose players.
I don't think we'll be able to steal ships/ore/modules from other players inside a station once we're walking around in them, so why is Concord left to be so ineffective in "High Sec" space?
Set alarms on cans/wrecks, Lock the mission to only the player and/or fleet members, I don't care what you do, but I want to run my mission in my own way........ALONE and UNHINDERED.
In closing, for the players who will read this and shout to the heavens, "stop whining!" or "Go play X3 or Star Trek then!". CCP, these ARE options.
Obviously this post is not for the likes of those people as THEY are happy with their lawlessness, but rather the exceptionally large amount of players that enjoy "High Sec" for the same reasons I used to, to relax and unplug.
Graphics does not a game make,
Quote:
I agree with that! Poeple who like to Play pvp can Play in Low Sec or 0.0 (W.H.) Space. Pilots who want to play PVE can stay in High Sec an Fly Mission or Mine! Stop that Crime in High Sec its boring! Stop High sec Gatecamps this is also ****!
Someone write EVE is only for PVP!! Great Please CCP Stop Mining remove Asteroids, POS, Planetary Indu and Productions remove Haulers and Mining Ships! Its not nessesary for PVP!
Please CCP find an Solution where both sites can live with it and have fun to play!
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 11:56:00 -
[80]
Originally by: HeIIfire11
Really? Fascinating! I don't need you of all people to tell me how the game works.
No, but others do, and you're only confusing them by futzing over irrelevancies.
Quote:
I on the other hand am telling you what causes these countless threads of confusion and that is bad game design.
àwhich doesn't help in clearing up the confusion.
Quote:
same bad game design you constantly try to justify
No, I'm explaining it. Different thing.
ùùù
ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö
ù Karath Piki |
|
|
HeIIfire11
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 12:17:00 -
[81]
Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 17/06/2011 12:18:24
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: HeIIfire11
I on the other hand am telling you what causes these countless threads of confusion and that is bad game design.
àwhich doesn't help in clearing up the confusion.
You justifying it doesn't help either. And while you highjack every thread on this subject with your arrogant opinion no solution or ideas on how to make it better can be established.
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: HeIIfire11
same bad game design you constantly try to justify
No, I'm explaining it. Different thing.
You explain the bad game design...right. Look at what you're posting please.
|
HeIIfire11
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 12:28:00 -
[82]
I don't understand why you argue about this. It is clear that this game is full....full of flaws.Fw is broken and unfinished, PI is broken and under constant work, the bounty system is worthless, hybrids being broken have taken Gallente out of the competition, npc ewar is broken, the rr mechanic was broken which you defended and was fixed just like I said it would be as incursion came out..there is so much unfinished work in this game and the wreck mechanics which cause confusion is one of them.
Who says these things are broken? A forum full of people complaining about them..thats who.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 12:45:00 -
[83]
Originally by: HeIIfire11
You justifying it doesn't help either.
It's a good thing that I'm not doing that, then.
Quote:
And while you highjack every thread on this subject with your arrogant opinion no solution or ideas on how to make it better can be established.
Sure they can ù it's just that no-one ever wants to offer any ideas for how to solve the problems.
Quote:
You explain the bad game design...right.
No, I explain the mechanics.
Quote:
I don't understand why you argue about this.
Argue what? I'm saying that wrecks are free for all to salvage. I'm saying it because they are. There's nothing broken about that.
Quote:
there is so much unfinished work in this game and the wreck mechanics which cause confusion is one of them.
Fortunately, those mechanics can be explained very easily by saying "the wreck isn't yours, the can inside it is".
Quote:
Who says these things are broken? A forum full of people complaining about them..thats who.
There's a difference between "broken" and "not working the way I want them to"à A vast majority of the people claiming salvaging is broken is actually saying "I want that salvage to be mine without any additional work", which isn't really the same thing.
ùùù
ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö
ù Karath Piki |
HeIIfire11
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 12:58:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: HeIIfire11
You justifying it doesn't help either.
It's a good thing that I'm not doing that, then.
Quote:
And while you highjack every thread on this subject with your arrogant opinion no solution or ideas on how to make it better can be established.
Sure they can ù it's just that no-one ever wants to offer any ideas for how to solve the problems.
Quote:
You explain the bad game design...right.
No, I explain the mechanics.
Quote:
I don't understand why you argue about this.
Argue what? I'm saying that wrecks are free for all to salvage. I'm saying it because they are. There's nothing broken about that.
Quote:
there is so much unfinished work in this game and the wreck mechanics which cause confusion is one of them.
Fortunately, those mechanics can be explained very easily by saying "the wreck isn't yours, the can inside it is".
Quote:
Who says these things are broken? A forum full of people complaining about them..thats who.
There's a difference between "broken" and "not working the way I want them to"à A vast majority of the people claiming salvaging is broken is actually saying "I want that salvage to be mine without any additional work", which isn't really the same thing.
Your arguments are no longer worth quoting because they are the same worthless crap you always say "the can blah blah". The can was replaced and this was said by a dev who introduced wrecks. No Tippia your make believe can does not exist. Keep defending your perfect game and while you are at it pull apart this thread why don't you.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1529511
I will no longer read or respond to any of your posts. Those that have eyes...let them see. You are not worth another second of my time.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 13:50:00 -
[85]
Originally by: HeIIfire11
Your arguments are no longer worth quoting because they are the same worthless crap you always say "the can blah blah".
And you still don't get it.
It is a model. An illustration. A heuristic. A simplification.
It is an explanation ù not a description ù of the entirety of the wreck behaviours.
You have yet to show that it doesn't work like that.
Quote:
The can was replaced
Irrelevant. The model still works.
Quote:
and this was said by a dev who introduced wrecks.
Irrelevant. The model still works.
Quote:
No Tippia your make believe can does not exist.
Irrelevant. The model still works.
Quote:
Keep defending your perfect game
You have never read anything I've written, have you?
Quote:
and while you are at it pull apart this thread why don't you.
Why would I?
Quote:
Those that have eyes...let them see.
Those who have eyes will be able to look at the model, then look at the game, then look at the model again and see that the two match. They will also understand why this heuristic is helpful.
Regardless of how much you dislike it, the model works perfectly for its purpose and you haven't been able to argue its usefulness as a learning tool. Instead, you only try to confuse people, for no good reason. It's almost is if you want people to not understand salvaging and lootingà 
ùùù
ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö
ù Karath Piki |
HeIIfire11
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 16:35:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Tippia
Bunch of useless bull****
You really are one stupid mother ****er. One thing is sure..you have made an enemy in this game. Don't say you weren't warned.
|
Liang Nuren
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 16:44:00 -
[87]
I am Tippia please war dec my corp. :)
--
Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire
On Twitter
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 18:03:00 -
[88]
Edited by: Tippia on 17/06/2011 18:10:12
Originally by: HeIIfire11
You really are one stupid mother ****er.
At least I know what a "model" is, unlike some simpletons.
Do you want me to go through the model, step by step, and explain why it works?
It's a very short and simple model ù it's only eight words ù which is a large part of why it works. So you don't have to be afraid: the step-by-step won't be long and complicated.
Quote:
One thing is sure..you have made an enemy in this game.
Awwwà snookums. If you didn't understand, you just had to ask. No need to get angry, especially not with other people, but not with yourself either, even if it is you who has the problem.
Quote:
Don't say you weren't warned.
Why would I need to be warned? You are irrelevant.
ùùù
ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö
ù Karath Piki |
Baaldor
Ascendent.
Gentlemen's Agreement
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 18:15:00 -
[89]
Originally by: HeIIfire11
Originally by: Tippia
Bunch of useless bull****
You really are one stupid mother ****er. One thing is sure..you have made an enemy in this game. Don't say you weren't warned.
That is some funny **** right there.
|
Riedle
Minmatar
Paradox Collective
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 19:37:00 -
[90]
Originally by: HeIIfire11
Originally by: Tippia
Bunch of useless bull****
You really are one stupid mother ****er. One thing is sure..you have made an enemy in this game. Don't say you weren't warned.
I can haz your enemy too?
Because i think your argument is full of crap, you have been unable to make your point other than to say that you want it to work your way because you are used to getting your way with everything in life.
Awaiting war dec
Riedle
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |