Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 27 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
341
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 20:45:00 -
[601] - Quote
Fractals 4Lyfe wrote:Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:They can both be addressed by banning NPC corps and making individuals wardecable - neutral Orca/logi alt is wardec'd in turn. Ban NPC corps. Repeat until aggressor corporation has compiled a list of all the alts that need to be wardec'd the next time they want to take a swipe at the offending corp. That's just trying to bandaid something that's already broken. Why let them keep switching corps? If a tower is reinforced, then don't let it be transferred to another corp. Well I was responding to a specific question about Orcas and RR-ships. Corphopping I agree is another big problem and I've argued in the past that an exponentially increasing 'cooldown' period (over the span of say a month) to join another corp would be a good solution, in combination with the other suggestions I just made.
1) A corp is wardec'd 2) POS is reinforced 3) POS owner drops corp, has to wait 24 hours before rejoining 4) POS is reinforced 5) POS owner drops corp, has to wait 48 hours before rejoining 6) POS owner is individually wardec'd
Depending on the stront timer, the POS now either leaves reinforcenment when the player has zero allies, or he might luck out and have it leave for another cycle, which he then has to wait 96 hours before joining a corp (and being individually wardec'd). I don't think there should ever be a timer to leave corp because both corp and member must be able to drop a member at a moment's notice for a number of reasons (scam corps, awoxers, etc). |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
254
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 20:48:00 -
[602] - Quote
JamesCLK wrote:Cearain wrote: :words::words::words::words::words::words: and more :words:
Mittens prefering to test 0.0 sov mechanics on FW, and Mittens (as the chairman) trying to push the CSM to advocate 0.0 sov mechanics to be tested on FW, are two entirely different arguments. His stance is from my understanding the former of the two.
Ignoring your bad/pointless distinction, his suggestion is still horrible. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
341
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 20:53:00 -
[603] - Quote
No it isn't |
Levy Break
Martyr's Vengence Test Alliance Please Ignore
8
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 20:57:00 -
[604] - Quote
EVE Programs you so that you become a bot while playing it, it's that un-interactive. Bots hurt the economy blah blah blah, just have CCP make the game more fun to play and bot numbers go down. Simple as that. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
254
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 21:45:00 -
[605] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:No it isn't
Yes it is for the reasons I spelled out at great length.
But if you want to keep thinking that faction war/low sec players, and sov null sec players are after the same things in eve, thats your right. Just like its your right to mindlessly defend mittani for any of his other idiotic suggestions for the game. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Imryn Xaran
Coherent Light Enterprises
26
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 22:40:00 -
[606] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:learn what the word "active" means
also he said it's for his constituents, so get out
i love how you manage to inflate "thou shalt not file petitions against other goons" into "WE ACTIVELY PROTECT BOTTERS LOL" i guess that's just autism at work???
Osabojo wrote:What's really dumb about your posting is not so much your deliberate refusal to understand things that have been explained more clearly and patiently than you deserve, but your seeming expectation that other people reading this thread are going to share your deliberate misunderstandings and false presuppositions, and go along with the implied claim that you are trying to bludgeon them with.
Perhaps I am overestimating the average reader of this thread, but I think most of them will find your hamfisted attempts to manipulate the discourse rather insulting, regardless of how they feel about The Mittani as CSM Chair.
More goonie stooges spewing crap to cover for the Mittanis failure to address my question. To dignify the above posts more than they deserve:
1. If he is a candidate for chairman surely every EVE player is his constituent? Or did I misunderstand, and he is only running for chairman of 0.0 and theres going to be 2 other chairmen for the other to zones? Stupid goonie.
2. How is "If you report a goonie for botting I will kick you out of the corp" not protecting botters. Unless you are asking me to believe that no goonie has ever run a bot? Please make that claim, because I think everyone could do with the laugh.
3. I agree that lots of goonies have confirmed that I am right about your Alliance policy, but none have offered any real explanation of how the Mittanis position is not contradictory. More importantly, the first post in this thread states that the Mittani will offer clarification on issues of concern. I'm not interested in hearing from random goonie stooges, I want to hear from him.
Fact is he clearly offered this thread as a place where he would answer questions, but it seems he is only willing to answer "certain" questions, and not ones where he seems to be on dodge ground.
I'm not going anywhere, still waiting for that answer. |
Akirei Scytale
Test Alliance Please Ignore
630
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 22:44:00 -
[607] - Quote
A constituent is a person who voted for you. They elected you to represent them, so you represent them. |
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
38
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 22:49:00 -
[608] - Quote
Imryn Xaran wrote: I'm not going anywhere, still waiting for that answer.
whatever will we do with yet another nameless pubbie angryposting about goonies |
Ogi Talvanen
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
88
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 22:49:00 -
[609] - Quote
Imagine that. Politicians representing their voters. Crazy idea. |
Sullivar N
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 23:18:00 -
[610] - Quote
Dear Mittani:
I'm having somewhat conflicting feelings at this point. I've worked my way up to the KV, gotten the derp gun, can penetrate the better tanks, yet I don't feel like I've ~arrived~; I'm still trying to grind my way up to the KV-3 and through other trees. This wasn't supposed to happen! I want to have fun with the KV! Any tips on how to play well with it and to enjoy the experience to boot?
So far my "strategy" has been to snuggle up against the higher-teir heavy tanks and use them as protection, ducking out to fire, and generally just react to what they do. This generally ends up for worse than for the better, since if they do stupid things my choices are to follow and be useless too or to go out on my own and still be generally ineffective/die. Am I playing too passively? Is this just an indication of a lack of skill on my part? |
|
Imryn Xaran
Coherent Light Enterprises
26
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 23:32:00 -
[611] - Quote
Akirei Scytale wrote:A constituent is a person who voted for you. They elected you to represent them, so you represent them.
Really? suggest you buy a dictionary. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
78
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 23:37:00 -
[612] - Quote
Retar Aveymone wrote:whatever will we do with yet another nameless pubbie angryposting about goonies The same thing we do with every nameless pubbie angryposting about goonies, Retar Aveymone.
Get out our Strip Miner IIs and load them with Pubbie Tears crystals.
Ogi Talvanen wrote:Imagine that. Politicians representing their voters. Crazy idea. Haha, let me tell you about the time there were tons of pubbies running for the CSM. |
Akirei Scytale
Test Alliance Please Ignore
631
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 23:53:00 -
[613] - Quote
Imryn Xaran wrote:Akirei Scytale wrote:A constituent is a person who voted for you. They elected you to represent them, so you represent them. Really? suggest you buy a dictionary.
Noun: constituent kun'sti-choo-unt
1) An artifact that is one of the individual parts of which a composite entity is made up; especially a part that can be separated from or attached to a system "a component or constituent element of a system";
2) A member of a constituency; a citizen who is represented in a government by officials for whom he or she votes "needs continued support by constituents to be re-elected"
//
con-+stit-+u-+ent noun
1) one who authorizes another to act as agent : principal |
The Mittani
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3167
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 23:58:00 -
[614] - Quote
my furnace blew when it got down to 14 last night, got it up and running again and i'm going to chill out and play some tribes tonight; will hit up the new questions from actual humans later
i see that the roleplaying publord has been frantically trying to imitate a demagogue while i've been away and posting up a storm
heh The Office of the Chairman: A Thread for Constituent Issues |
The Mittani
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3167
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 00:00:00 -
[615] - Quote
incidentally the publord's question was answered in the previous 30 pages, but he's too cool for school to actually read the thread rather than smearing poop on the walls and howling for validation from me The Office of the Chairman: A Thread for Constituent Issues |
doombreed52
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
5
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 02:31:00 -
[616] - Quote
publord if i like one of your posts will you take a hike? or go play in traffic whatever ppl do in highsec.... |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
79
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 02:35:00 -
[617] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:i see that the roleplaying publord has been frantically trying to imitate a demagogue while i've been away and posting up a storm Well I guess, but he's irrelevant, we're now discussing how much we love having you represent us.
As kun'sti-choo-unts. |
Osabojo
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
90
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 03:07:00 -
[618] - Quote
Imryn Xaran wrote: More goonie stooges spewing crap to cover for the Mittanis failure to address my question. To dignify the above posts more than they deserve:
1. If he is a candidate for chairman surely every EVE player is his constituent? Or did I misunderstand, and he is only running for chairman of 0.0 and theres going to be 2 other chairmen for the other two zones? Stupid goonie.
2. How is "If you report a goonie for botting I will kick you out of the corp" not protecting botters. Unless you are asking me to believe that no goonie has ever run a bot? Please make that claim, because I think everyone could do with the laugh.
3. I agree that lots of goonies have confirmed that I am right about your Alliance policy, but none have offered any real explanation of how the Mittanis position is not contradictory. More importantly, the first post in this thread states that the Mittani will offer clarification on issues of concern. I'm not interested in hearing from random goonie stooges, I want to hear from him.
Fact is he clearly offered this thread as a place where he would answer questions, but it seems he is only willing to answer "certain" questions, and not ones where he seems to be on dodgy ground.
I'm not going anywhere, still waiting for that answer.
I've met lots of people like you. You are too dumb to know how stupid you are. There can never be an actual discussion with someone like you.
The next time you are in a crowded place, take a look around. Over 99% of the people you look at are significantly smarter than you are. The sad part is, I'm not talking about any kind of innate intelligence, but rather a deliberate decision on your part not to use your mind.
|
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis Moar Tears
480
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 03:15:00 -
[619] - Quote
Osabojo wrote:I've met lots of people like you. You are too dumb to know how stupid you are. There can never be an actual discussion with someone like you.
Basically, you are saying he's a Dunning-Kruger poster child. Representing experience and reason in CSM 7 |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
268
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 03:26:00 -
[620] - Quote
Or George Lucas. Signature removed, CCP Phantom |
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
79
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 03:32:00 -
[621] - Quote
The likihood he's George Lucas is pretty small. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
268
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 03:35:00 -
[622] - Quote
Anything is possible with the Force. Signature removed, CCP Phantom |
Osabojo
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
91
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 04:09:00 -
[623] - Quote
But hey, since botting seems to be the topic of the day, let's ask The Mittani about botting. The Mittani, what would you say is the root cause of botting? Would you be more inclined to attribute it to the moral failings of botters, or would you instead say that it has more to do with isk being a tedium based currency, and that botting would be less of a problem if earning isk were a byproduct of successfully playing the game in an enjoyable way? Or perhaps some other cause that I have unintentionally excluded?
|
Pseudo Ucksth
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
78
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 04:20:00 -
[624] - Quote
Osabojo wrote:moral failings of botters
Haha. Oh wow. |
Vordak Kallager
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
61
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 04:30:00 -
[625] - Quote
JamesCLK wrote:Cearain wrote: :words::words::words::words::words::words: and more :words:
Mittens prefering to test 0.0 sov mechanics on FW, and Mittens (as the chairman) trying to push the CSM to advocate 0.0 sov mechanics to be tested on FW, are two entirely different arguments. His stance is from my understanding the former of the two. Put the Drama Llama away?
If you test 0.0 mechanics on FW and Lowsec, you are going to get very different results and feedback than if you test them on the player base they are designed for.
FW/Lowsec inhabitants and 0.0 inhabitants differ greatly in their expectations of the game and why they play the game. Something that might work in 0.0 might not work in FW and vice versa. Therefore, it is a waste of time to try to use one player base as a "test-bed" for the other.
To use an extremely straightforward analogy that you might be able to more clearly understand:
CCP gives their Dog a bath. The Dog loves it. Dogs and Cats are both animals. Therefore, CCP is going to give it's Cat that same bath. You can guess how that will turn out.
Hans Jagerblitzen for CSM7 |
Tyran Scorpi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Test Friends Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 04:35:00 -
[626] - Quote
Having read your thoughts on the Assembly Hall, where would you suggest bringing up an idea then? |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
79
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 04:35:00 -
[627] - Quote
Vordak Kallager wrote:CCP gives their Dog a bath. The Dog loves it. Dogs and Cats are both animals. Therefore, CCP is going to give it's Cat that same bath. You can guess how that will turn out. The cat was buggy and crashed the bath.
Queue a day of bugfixing to restore the cat to its proper state of accepting baths.
|
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
269
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 04:41:00 -
[628] - Quote
Thanks Jinli mei for doing the hard work of finding the official stance on the botting issue. I wanted to know, but was too lazy to do it myself.
I suppose the botting is a Two Final Solution. Either you hate bots so much you leave your alliance, or you love your allaince so much you stay and ignore the botting. Makes sense to me. Not much else you can do I suppose.
Also with the low sec test bed. When I read it, it seemed a way to add features to low sec, so its more fun and enjoyable and has things going for it. I never felt it would restrict low sec the way players feel about it. I actaully liked hearing about the test bed and it is a bit surprising the players reactions to it. Signature removed, CCP Phantom |
Vordak Kallager
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
61
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 05:32:00 -
[629] - Quote
rodyas wrote:Thanks Jinli mei for doing the hard work of finding the official stance on the botting issue. I wanted to know, but was too lazy to do it myself.
I suppose the botting is a Two Final Solution. Either you hate bots so much you leave your alliance, or you love your allaince so much you stay and ignore the botting. Makes sense to me. Not much else you can do I suppose.
Also with the low sec test bed. When I read it, it seemed a way to add features to low sec, so its more fun and enjoyable and has things going for it. I never felt it would restrict low sec the way players feel about it. I actaully liked hearing about the test bed and it is a bit surprising the players reactions to it.
So far, those "features" have been potential new 0.0 Sov Mechanics. We don't want "nullsec lite" in lowsec. There will be a lot of unsubs if we have to start doing 0.0 Sov war bullshit over in lowsec. Lowsec is about casual/instant pvp, not about long form ups/waits and alarm-clock ops. Hans Jagerblitzen for CSM7 |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
341
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 05:47:00 -
[630] - Quote
yeah that's why nullsec voters came out in droves to vote in representatives because they're really happy with the current sov war mechanics as is so happy that clearly they want to make lowsec a copy of the current model |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 27 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |