|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
|
Wrangler
   |
Posted - 2006.01.14 18:06:00 -
[1]
Why is everyone so upset? It's not like this will happen anyway, so why troll? 
[Read the Rules!] - [Email the Moderators] - [Give me money!] |
|
|
Wrangler
|
Posted - 2006.01.14 18:22:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Deja Thoris
Originally by: Wrangler
Why is everyone so upset? It's not like this will happen anyway, so why troll?
Because its people like this that try to ruin a special game. If we dont smack them down hard and repeatedly CCP might change the game to a massive mining and npc'ing sim where noone purchases goods because nothing gets blown up
And if you do smack them down hard and repeatedly on saturday evenings I will have to put away the beer for the short time it takes to issue a warning. So basically we all lose, even though it's worse for me.
[Read the Rules!] - [Email the Moderators] - [Give me money!] |
|
|
Wrangler
|
Posted - 2006.01.14 18:33:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Edited by: Maya Rkell on 14/01/2006 18:27:31
Originally by: Tedeski
Yeah this'll help CCP with their one shard dream
They've abandoned that with their plans for Serenity. Wrangler, why is it "not going to happen?". Certainly now a second shards is comming - it's perfectly viable from my pov now that the origional vision has been thrown over.
I'd like to see an utterly different set of varient rules (faction based security) on a second server, but hey.
Cause I say so.
[Read the Rules!] - [Email the Moderators] - [Give me money!] |
|
|
Wrangler
|
Posted - 2006.01.14 18:35:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Deja Thoris
Originally by: Wrangler
Originally by: Deja Thoris
Because its people like this that try to ruin a special game. If we dont smack them down hard and repeatedly CCP might change the game to a massive mining and npc'ing sim where noone purchases goods because nothing gets blown up
And if you do smack them down hard and repeatedly on saturday evenings I will have to put away the beer for the short time it takes to issue a warning. So basically we all lose, even though it's worse for me.
So I need to agree with his POV then?
My first post in the thread said its a seriously silly idea. I stand behind that. I responded to the idea.
Sure, I was blunt, I usually am.
Anyway
/me waves hand in Jedi fashion...think of the beer
Disagreeing and trolling is two different things. The main way of learning what the difference is, provided you don't know already, is that in the latter case you get a warning. Or, if you're lucky, a moderator such as myself posts and tells people to calm down.
[Read the Rules!] - [Email the Moderators] - [Give me money!] |
|
|
Wrangler
|
Posted - 2006.01.14 18:41:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
I or you can say a lot of things - fact of the matter remains that with two servers, what's a third one?
I don't think it'll happen soon, but I'll put the idea out there. (I would of laughed at it myself pre-Serenity announcement. Now? Not so)
Yea, but Serenity is based on chinese laws not allowing TQ, a new TQ would probably be based on the current one not being able to support all players. Of course anything can happen in the future, unless this is the past and the future has happened already, but all that time travel stuff makes my head hurt.
[Read the Rules!] - [Email the Moderators] - [Give me money!] |
|
|
Wrangler
|
Posted - 2006.01.14 18:43:00 -
[6]
Originally by: James Lyrus
This is a bad idea.
Cool, now explain why.
[Read the Rules!] - [Email the Moderators] - [Give me money!] |
|
|
Wrangler
|
Posted - 2006.01.14 18:48:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Wrangler,
I appreciate that. I also appreciate that CCP believe it's good business sense.
But it's STILL throwing the one-server design out the window.
Appreciating is very different from liking. But as it WILL happen, I might as well make suggestions to use it :)
So, I'd like the old hardware to be used for a faction-based security standing server.
Ok, nice idea then. I'd like to have it at home and run EVE on it. 
[Read the Rules!] - [Email the Moderators] - [Give me money!] |
|
|
Wrangler
|
Posted - 2006.01.14 18:53:00 -
[8]
Originally by: MadGaz
Originally by: Wrangler
Originally by: James Lyrus
This is a bad idea.
Cool, now explain why.
Exactly how is it cool?? Explain!!!
I told you to explain first! And I'm a big bad moderator with lots and lots of power, explain or feel my wrath!!
[Read the Rules!] - [Email the Moderators] - [Give me money!] |
|
|
Wrangler
|
Posted - 2006.01.14 19:25:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Originally by: Sable Schroedinger
Originally by: Maya Rkell
I or you can say a lot of things - fact of the matter remains that with two servers, what's a third one?
I don't think it'll happen soon, but I'll put the idea out there. (I would of laughed at it myself pre-Serenity announcement. Now? Not so)
Serenity has been brought about by very specific circumstances (laws in china), and so don't really form a valid precedent.
That's an excuse.
Regardless of reasoning, it is a second shard. Period.
There may be good reason for it, but it is still throwing a guiding principle away.
And it might even be one of the signs that the end of the world is approaching. 
[Read the Rules!] - [Email the Moderators] - [Give me money!] |
|
|
|
| |
|