| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
EXZODIER
   |
Posted - 2006.02.20 01:13:00 -
[1]
Edited by: EXZODIER on 20/02/2006 01:15:09
collecting kill rights at this time when it is bugged should shorly be called an exploit -
in the latest DEV BLOG - it says that the bug where people cant shot back at those collecting kill rights will be fixe - CCP's rules say that useing a bug to get an advantage is an exploit and u can be punished
- so why isent this taken as an exploit and why do ccp have to spend so muct time replacing ships coz people use this bug -
if u collect kill right CCP will replace there ship
HMMMMMMMM the end ? i think not |
Sylie Silentsong
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 01:56:00 -
[2]
Because to get kill rights against you, you would have to have unlawfully killed someone, so you deserve it. :)
|
Palpatinus
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 02:43:00 -
[3]
Hey, I know you... you're the suicice pirate who ganked my buddy in a 1.0 system last night and took our control tower. Strangely enough, the sentry guns at the gate didn't take you out. Funny to see you talking about "exploits".
Thanks for the info, though - nothing would make me happier than to give you a taste of your own medicine. 
"Yes, I killed the Matar Thukker, and I hope he burns in Hell!" |
Mace Blackhammer
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 05:28:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Sylie Silentsong
Because to get kill rights against you, you would have to have unlawfully killed someone, so you deserve it. :)
 if they deserve it why has a dev said it was a bug
|
Patric Murphy
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 06:33:00 -
[5]
Ok, all of the people who have responded to this are IDIOTS.
The exploit he is talking about it NOT being able to shoot back. If you decied to get even with somedbody who ganked you then you better be shure that you can beat them.
|
Nihn Lemai
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 06:59:00 -
[6]
Caps in name and caps in topic... man, I hate caps...
---
I want instas gone... now |
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 07:35:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Patric Murphy
Ok, all of the people who have responded to this are IDIOTS.
You can make sure you're not affected by this "bug" by refraining from unlawful kills. The original poster fails to mention how he got on the receiving end of such a "bug" to begin with - but players seeking justice in accordance with the game systems and patch notes are not exploiting anything.
Do you mean to tell me they should not be allowed to do anything in response? Why's that fair for the victim but unfair for the original aggressor?
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Alliaanna Dalaii
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 07:38:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Alliaanna Dalaii on 20/02/2006 07:38:28
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Originally by: Patric Murphy
Ok, all of the people who have responded to this are IDIOTS.
You can make sure you're not affected by this "bug" by refraining from unlawful kills. The original poster fails to mention how he got on the receiving end of such a "bug" to begin with - but players seeking justice in accordance with the game systems and patch notes are not exploiting anything.
Do you mean to tell me they should not be allowed to do anything in response? Why's that fair for the victim but unfair for the original aggressor?
Killing another player unlawfully is within game mechanics, and even advertised on the release box as the career called "Pirate"
This however is a bug, so please get a clue
Alliaanna
Official Follower of =-= Royal Hiigaran Navy =-= |
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 07:44:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Alliaanna Dalaii
Killing another player unlawfully is within game mechanics
So is the victim being able to get revenge. Please get your own clue.
They've not explicitly stated it's a bug, only that they are changing the kill rights to be in accordance with their original intent. Until then, the best way to make sure you aren't a victim of this "bug" is to not put yourself in the situation.
Why do you expect to be able to kill someone without retribution, yet it's a "bug" when they do the same?
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Snake Jankins
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 07:57:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Snake Jankins on 20/02/2006 07:59:16
Edited by: Snake Jankins on 20/02/2006 07:57:07
1) someone kills you, correct
2) you get kill-rights, correct
3) you attack him in high sec, correct
4) he fights back, correct
5) concorde reacts and kills him for you, bug !!!
6) he writes petition and gets his ship replaced, correct  (edit: At least I hope that he gets it replaced)
___________
'Only ships can be assembled, this is a Frigate.' |
Cairo dog
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 08:09:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Palpatinus
Hey, I know you... you're the suicice pirate who ganked my buddy in a 1.0 system last night and took our control tower. Strangely enough, the sentry guns at the gate didn't take you out. Funny to see you talking about "exploits".
Thanks for the info, though - nothing would make me happier than to give you a taste of your own medicine.
As long as he lost his ship its not an exploit. He prolly scanned you and thought the cargo was worth loosing his ships for.
-------------------------------------
Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow but someday I will |
Alliaanna Dalaii
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 08:27:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Originally by: Alliaanna Dalaii
Killing another player unlawfully is within game mechanics
So is the victim being able to get revenge. Please get your own clue.
Can you read ?
The Victim is entitled to get their revenge, But the person on the recieving end is entitled to fight back without getting concordokken. As currently they are not its clearly a bug, and should be deemed an exploit if not fixed in the next patch
Or wait let me guesse the victim of killrights doesn't deserve to fight back cos he's ebil ?  Carebears 
Alliaanna
Official Follower of =-= Royal Hiigaran Navy =-= |
Fester Addams
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 08:32:00 -
[13]
Its always fun to see the "justified" whining when the hardcore players get hurt.
You know the "feature" is in there so adapt to it, quit whining about it.
|
Mace Blackhammer
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 09:26:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Originally by: Alliaanna Dalaii
Killing another player unlawfully is within game mechanics
So is the victim being able to get revenge. Please get your own clue.
They've not explicitly stated it's a bug, only that they are changing the kill rights to be in accordance with their original intent. Until then, the best way to make sure you aren't a victim of this "bug" is to not put yourself in the situation.
Why do you expect to be able to kill someone without retribution, yet it's a "bug" when they do the same?
A) the devs have said youre spose to be able to return fire without getting killed by sentries/concord.
B) You say it isnt a bug yet in the same paragraph say that its not working like it spose to, last time I checked that = bug
C) Players are free to fight back if they are attacked in lowsec.
So maybe you stop posting when you clearly don't have a clue about what the thread is about mainly due to the fact that you never leave highsec.
|
Corp Scammer
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 09:28:00 -
[15]
losing a ship brings out the bets in ppl
|
Malken
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 09:54:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Originally by: Patric Murphy
Ok, all of the people who have responded to this are IDIOTS.
You can make sure you're not affected by this "bug" by refraining from unlawful kills. The original poster fails to mention how he got on the receiving end of such a "bug" to begin with - but players seeking justice in accordance with the game systems and patch notes are not exploiting anything.
Do you mean to tell me they should not be allowed to do anything in response? Why's that fair for the victim but unfair for the original aggressor?
thats the most stupid response ive seen to something ever.
with that reasoning you could just say that mining veldspar is the fault in eve since it is used in the ship that the person used when he killed you.
if i shoot at you in .4-0.0 then you are allowed to fire your guns back.
you get killright
you exploit killright by attacking me in say .5 because i cannot fire back or concord shoots me.
thats why killrights are bugged, you are allowed to fire back and defend yourself but when i am attacked in the .5 system i am not=killright collector is exploiting.
|
Laqum
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 11:44:00 -
[17]
Just keep in mind to be polite.
|
HippoKing
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 11:47:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Fester Addams
Its always fun to see the "justified" whining when the hardcore players get hurt.
You know the "feature" is in there so adapt to it, quit whining about it.
its not a feature, its a bug.
so i think people have full rights to whine
sigs of the 23/24/25 hijack just as well -eris
yarrrr, i shall retake my sig -HippoKing
Not a chance, our 1337 sig haXx0r sk1llz are too powerful! - Wrangler
Ho-Ho-Hooooooo, Merry Saturday!11 - Immy
Yo ho ho and a bottle of BReeEEEEeee.... - Jacques ARRRRRRchambault |
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 11:55:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Fester Addams
Its always fun to see the "justified" whining when the hardcore players get hurt.
You know the "feature" is in there so adapt to it, quit whining about it.
are you even reading the thread or just repeatedly banging your head against the keyboard while mourning the loss of your barge/hauler/npc ship that got spanked by an evil pirate?
|
EXZODIER
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 12:04:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Palpatinus
Hey, I know you... you're the suicice pirate who ganked my buddy in a 1.0 system last night and took our control tower. Strangely enough, the sentry guns at the gate didn't take you out. Funny to see you talking about "exploits".
Thanks for the info, though - nothing would make me happier than to give you a taste of your own medicine.
strangley enought i lost a raven to the sentry guns he dident see it coz the nub was AFK.
theres a patch comeing out this month wich should fix this so if your bunndy wants to come and collect his kill rights feel free, infact get him to mail me and ill come to where he is so that he can try.
Now if he wants to shoot me before the patch - coz i will just shoot back let police kill me and then pettion to get my stucc back so he wastes his kill rights
HMMMMMMMM the end ? i think not |
EXZODIER
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 12:10:00 -
[21]
- also to add to this - if u collect a kill right that is more then 30 days old i belive that they get there ships back as well as kill rights are sposed to only last 30 days -
also im not whining about it coz i know i can get my ship back and theres nothing like sitting there watching some idiot kill a shuttel and waste his kill rights.
Im just poining out that useing this bug to gain an advantage should be considered an exploit BUT for some reason it isent so im just letting all the people out there know that they should shoot back lose ship to police and then get it back
another note if he collects your can after he will be flagged for 15 mins so u can then get corp members to kill him :-)
HMMMMMMMM the end ? i think not |
Captain Merkin
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 12:39:00 -
[22]
If someone attacks you anywhere anytime you should be able to attack them back without police intervention....
Proving natural selection and Charles Darwin wrong since 1981.
The Kamikaze pilot
|
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 13:43:00 -
[23]
nullLook, the point is simple:
For those of you who feel this issue is a bug, you have a surefire way to avoid it.
Only you can choose to do something that earns your victim kill rights. Until the next patch, there's one simple thing you can do to make sure you're never without the ability to return fire.
You know how it's going to turn out, so why start it?
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 13:52:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
nullLook, the point is simple:
For those of you who feel this issue is a bug, you have a surefire way to avoid it.
that's where your argument falls down. we don't "feel" this is a bug, it IS a bug and is not how killrights were designed to work. the devs themselves have admitted it's a bug (can't find the thread, I'm sure another forum ***** will dig it out). In fact, the only one who seems to be hanging on to this "feel like it's a bug" is you.
there is an unspoken truth in eve-online: if you are attacked by another player - regardless of why he's attacking or whether he's allowed to or not - you have the right to try and defend yourself without concord/sentries getting involved. Being able to gank someone freely in empire without them being able to fight back (i.e. the exact situation we have with kill rights) goes against all of this.
|
Selena 001
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 13:58:00 -
[25]
So you now have to give piracy the extra 0.5 seconds thought before you decide to fire?
Pity for you.
And its getting fixed, soon, so who cares.
___________
Dont mind me, I'm Forum-Whoring cause I dont have anything better to do with my life... |
Kryss Darkdust
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 14:55:00 -
[26]
I'm a noob so I'm sure this is going to sound .. noobish.. but correct me if I'm wrong here.
Right now with the current version of the game it works like this.
1. You get attacked and killed by a player which means you have the right to kill him. (To me this makes perfect sense)
2. So you spot him in a secured sector and attack him (He is a pirate after all) and when he fights back concord jumps him and blows him up for you...
To me that's sounds exactly as it should be. I mean hell, he's a pirate, killing for gain. If I spot a killer in the mall and try to capture him and he fights back, then the cops show up and whoop his @#$, why would that be unfair. He's a killer ... That's what he gets for coming into secured space (or a guarded mall). As far as I'm concerned if your a pirate you have no rights in secured space.
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 17:02:00 -
[27]
same like using wasps, everybody knows its bugged
|
Silly Twat
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 17:12:00 -
[28]
Originally by: EXZODIER
- also to add to this - if u collect a kill right that is more then 30 days old i belive that they get there ships back as well as kill rights are sposed to only last 30 days -
also im not whining about it coz i know i can get my ship back and theres nothing like sitting there watching some idiot kill a shuttel and waste his kill rights.
Im just poining out that useing this bug to gain an advantage should be considered an exploit BUT for some reason it isent so im just letting all the people out there know that they should shoot back lose ship to police and then get it back
another note if he collects your can after he will be flagged for 15 mins so u can then get corp members to kill him :-)
Still harrasing old ladies ?
|
Fester Addams
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 17:26:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Sarmaul
are you even reading the thread or just repeatedly banging your head against the keyboard while mourning the loss of your barge/hauler/npc ship that got spanked by an evil pirate?
I know its a bug and I hope it will soon be fixed however Im just giving the same suportive help that usually gets snapped back when the bug runs the other way.
Since there is a bug and you know it is you should take care not to become the victim of it.
If you choose to shoot at a player, fine, but there are ramafications.
If you then choose to place yourself in a situation that meens that you will risk running into this bug then I feel for you but on both accounts it was your actions that placed you in the situation.
Finally then, since it is a known bug returning fire will bring down concord on you and you get refunded (as have been stated) so whats the problem?
It really odd that its not the player that tries to take vengeance that is complaining as he gets a hollow vengeance... but thats just my opinion.
|
Liu Kaskakka
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 17:28:00 -
[30]
This is just like back when low sec sentries were bugged so that outlaws could be shot at but they couldnt shoot back or they would have sentries on them as well. The carebears were rejoycing like never before and camping gates and smacking local pierats. Let them have their fun while it lasts, and stay out of empire - it will be fixed soon enuff.
King Liu is RIGHT!!
|
Espen
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 18:09:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Nafri
same like using wasps, everybody knows its bugged
Hmm... Didn't they fix that like.. a long time ago?
|
Hllaxiu
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 18:47:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Selena 001
So you now have to give piracy the extra 0.5 seconds thought before you decide to fire?
Pity for you.
And its getting fixed, soon, so who cares.
I bet most low sec empire combat is not pirates ganking people, but extensions of alliance 0.0 wars. Around a half dozen people have killrights on me, and most of them are in bob.
|
Malthros Zenobia
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 19:16:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Sylie Silentsong
Because to get kill rights against you, you would have to have unlawfully killed someone, so you deserve it. :)
You can get kill rights against someone even if they only shoot at you, leave, and yor ship blows up a few seconds later.
Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu
I'm probably one of the biggest Bush fanboys in Eve...
This is like, Darth Vader, can't-reach-climax-without-killing-a-puppy evil.
RAWR!11 Sig Hijack!11 - Imaran |
Jarloo Griffin
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 19:23:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Kryss Darkdust
I'm a noob so I'm sure this is going to sound .. noobish.. but correct me if I'm wrong here.
Right now with the current version of the game it works like this.
1. You get attacked and killed by a player which means you have the right to kill him. (To me this makes perfect sense)
2. So you spot him in a secured sector and attack him (He is a pirate after all) and when he fights back concord jumps him and blows him up for you...
To me that's sounds exactly as it should be. I mean hell, he's a pirate, killing for gain. If I spot a killer in the mall and try to capture him and he fights back, then the cops show up and whoop his @#$, why would that be unfair. He's a killer ... That's what he gets for coming into secured space (or a guarded mall). As far as I'm concerned if your a pirate you have no rights in secured space.
now that is an interesting point of view, i must admit. as a matter of fact, known pirates should not be allowed to .5 or above at all - concord should greet them as soon as they get there:)
but this is just a game, and a game must be fair, especially when u have pvp involved:) so regardless any other reasons, concord shouldn't gank attacked player because he had been attacked. if they allowed him to above .5 space in the first place, he shouldn't be treated in any special way. and i think that is main point of this thread.
|
Malthros Zenobia
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 19:23:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Originally by: Alliaanna Dalaii
Killing another player unlawfully is within game mechanics
So is the victim being able to get revenge. Please get your own clue.
They've not explicitly stated it's a bug, only that they are changing the kill rights to be in accordance with their original intent. Until then, the best way to make sure you aren't a victim of this "bug" is to not put yourself in the situation.
Why do you expect to be able to kill someone without retribution, yet it's a "bug" when they do the same?
Not being able to defend yourself from someone with klill rights *is* a bug, the defender is ment to be able to defend themself, but currently they can't. Example:
You pop my ship in low sec, I run away, have kill rights.
I see you in jita, I shoot at your nice faction BS with my AF, and scramble/web you so you can['t go anywhere.
You lock me and nos/drone/shoot me, because you are suppose to be allowed to defend yourself.
CONCORD appears and turns your ship into space dust, and a nice can of t2 mods for me.
You have just lost something as the result of a bug, as self-defense, and I probably still have kill rights since CONCORD got the kill.
Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu
I'm probably one of the biggest Bush fanboys in Eve...
This is like, Darth Vader, can't-reach-climax-without-killing-a-puppy evil.
RAWR!11 Sig Hijack!11 - Imaran |
Zysco
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 19:47:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Jarloo Griffin
Originally by: Kryss Darkdust
I'm a noob so I'm sure this is going to sound .. noobish.. but correct me if I'm wrong here.
Right now with the current version of the game it works like this.
1. You get attacked and killed by a player which means you have the right to kill him. (To me this makes perfect sense)
2. So you spot him in a secured sector and attack him (He is a pirate after all) and when he fights back concord jumps him and blows him up for you...
To me that's sounds exactly as it should be. I mean hell, he's a pirate, killing for gain. If I spot a killer in the mall and try to capture him and he fights back, then the cops show up and whoop his @#$, why would that be unfair. He's a killer ... That's what he gets for coming into secured space (or a guarded mall). As far as I'm concerned if your a pirate you have no rights in secured space.
now that is an interesting point of view, i must admit. as a matter of fact, known pirates should not be allowed to .5 or above at all - concord should greet them as soon as they get there:)
but this is just a game, and a game must be fair, especially when u have pvp involved:) so regardless any other reasons, concord shouldn't gank attacked player because he had been attacked. if they allowed him to above .5 space in the first place, he shouldn't be treated in any special way. and i think that is main point of this thread.
...They arent. Hello, sec status?
|
Jarloo Griffin
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 20:06:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Zysco
(lots of quoting)
...They arent. Hello, sec status?
thats what i thought but someone gave example that u kill someone below 0.5 and when he finds u in .5 or above and uses his kill rights to get his revenge, u cannot answer his fire 'coz u get ganked by concord. so there is a way for pirates to visit .5 and above, right? the point is world consistency vs 'fair' play u see. in truth, since kill rights give u privilege of unsanctioned fight in .5 or above, that means concord gave u those kill rights. if they gave u kill rights, then they must have known that certain person attacked u. if they did, why do they allow such a person to .5 or above?
now to be perfectly honest with u i'm not into pvp very much, nor into below .5 systems:)), so there may be some rules i don't know of, or situations i didn't consider, i admit.
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2006.02.20 20:21:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Espen
Originally by: Nafri
same like using wasps, everybody knows its bugged
Hmm... Didn't they fix that like.. a long time ago?
last hotfix I guess, but same problem
|
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.22 16:37:00 -
[39]
You can still return fire if you wish... if you don't mind Concord retaliation.
It didn't seem to be a problem for the OP when he earned the mark, why should it bother him so much now?
All I'm hearing is "I'm all for non-consentual PvP as long as I'm not on the receiving end!"
Sounds to me like a coward whose only idea of a "fair fight" is one that he can win easily.
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Deja Thoris
|
Posted - 2006.02.22 17:00:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Sounds to me like a coward whose only idea of a "fair fight" is one that he can win easily.
Talk sense ffs.
He wants to fight back, not stand there and take it. It's the fact he cant fight back hes complaining about.
|
Tvilsom Type
|
Posted - 2006.02.22 17:08:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
You can still return fire if you wish... if you don't mind Concord retaliation.
It didn't seem to be a problem for the OP when he earned the mark, why should it bother him so much now?
Are you just writing this to start a flame or are just trying to be smart and fail miserably? Like so many people have tried to tell those of you who fail to understand the problem here, let me explain again... I shoot you, you die, you get killrights, you find me in 0.5-1.0 and attack me, I can shoot back, BUT <--- the big BUT ---> Concord eliminates me be becasue of a BUG... if it worked correctly I would be able to defend myself WITHOUT Concord interfering... if you can't understand this then we can't help you. There isnt anything to debate or whine about, its a bug plain and simple, not working as intented with suger on top (petitions to replace ships, more work for CCP). Mod please lock thread its getting stupid...
|
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.22 17:22:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Deja Thoris
He wants to fight back, not stand there and take it. It's the fact he cant fight back hes complaining about.]
He CAN fight back! Yes, Concord will retaliate... just like they did the first time - which didn't seem to bother him when he did it.
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Galien Carnifex
|
Posted - 2006.02.22 17:23:00 -
[43]
What baffles me about this whole thing is why on earth should concord issue kill rights to someone to seek revenge on someone else for a crime they commited (It must be a crime in the eyes of concord if it caused sec status loss and made them issue kill rights) and then sit back and allow the person they have clearly shown they consider a criminal to fight back in what is supposedly secure space (0.5 and above)? |
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.22 17:27:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Tvilsom Type
Are you just writing this to start a flame or are just trying to be smart and fail miserably?
If I were trying to be smart, how would you tell?
You can't even grasp the simple truth of what I stated: The OP is complaining that Concord will retaliate against him for returning fire, but he didn't seem to mind losing a Raven to them for initiating the original hostilities.
Quote:
Concord eliminates me be becasue of a BUG... if it worked correctly I would be able to defend myself WITHOUT Concord interfering... if you can't understand this then we can't help you.
If you're so certain that it's a bug, there's a surefire way to avoid being the victim of it. The only person who can put you in such a situation is YOU. Perhaps you might want to refrain from actions that will earn your victim kill rights until this "bug" is fixed.
If you knowingly put yourself in such a situation in the meantime, you have only yourself to blame. It's quite clear that you're well aware of what will happen, so why would you want to keep doing it? Talk about failing miserably at being smart...
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Deja Thoris
|
Posted - 2006.02.23 11:10:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Originally by: Deja Thoris
He wants to fight back, not stand there and take it. It's the fact he cant fight back hes complaining about.]
He CAN fight back! Yes, Concord will retaliate... just like they did the first time - which didn't seem to bother him when he did it.
Concord did NOT retaliate.
Concord arent even in lowsec.
Why not just drop it? I dont think you've made a post in this thread that isnt full of inaccuracies?
|
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.23 13:48:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Corunna ElMan on 23/02/2006 13:48:01
Originally by: Deja Thoris
Concord did NOT retaliate.
He wasn't in lowsec either. He was in a 1.0 system and he sacrificed his Raven to get the control tower that Palp's corpmate was transporting.
Put on your reading glasses - that might fix the "inaccuracies" you complain of.
Seriously, people here are like the fools who will burn their hand on a hot stove, then touch it again just to be sure. You know what causes this, so don't do it until it's changed.
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
meoff
|
Posted - 2006.02.23 16:14:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Galien Carnifex
What baffles me about this whole thing is why on earth should concord issue kill rights to someone to seek revenge on someone else for a crime they commited (It must be a crime in the eyes of concord if it caused sec status loss and made them issue kill rights) and then sit back and allow the person they have clearly shown they consider a criminal to fight back in what is supposedly secure space (0.5 and above)?
Here is a post that makes sense, you IMO you should not be able to fire back if someone is exersising their Kill Rights; as an example it looks like in this instance that you sacrifised a Raven to kill and Indy to get some POS materials - bet that Indy was really fighting back!
Regardless you committed a criminal act by killing someone, the killed gets the same rights to kill you in return seems fair and right the way it is now I certanitly hope they never "Fix" it as then it would truly be broke.
|
Kabil Ajedrez
|
Posted - 2006.02.23 17:08:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Kabil Ajedrez on 23/02/2006 17:12:12
Quote:
He wasn't in lowsec either. He was in a 1.0 system and he sacrificed his Raven to get the control tower that Palp's corpmate was transporting.
Point is that NOT all kill rights are gained in this manner.
Edit: Therefore you cannont say that this BUG is justified because of it.
-
|
Lorth
|
Posted - 2006.02.23 17:31:00 -
[49]
You do know that dissagreeing witha persons play style, or the role they choose in the game doesn't mean that a bug that effects them is somehow justified.
As of right now the current situation, is simply wrong, and no right thinking individual can dissagree with it. Kill rights were placed into the game in order to allow a person a chance at player despensed justic. Right now they are a an 'I win' button, and are a result of a bug nothing more.
 |
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2006.02.23 18:26:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Fester Addams
Originally by: Sarmaul
are you even reading the thread or just repeatedly banging your head against the keyboard while mourning the loss of your barge/hauler/npc ship that got spanked by an evil pirate?
Finally then, since it is a known bug returning fire will bring down concord on you and you get refunded (as have been stated) so whats the problem?
the thing is, ccp will only reimburse what's in the killmail - anything in your cargo container goes to the first person who can scoop it.
Originally by: Zzazzt
Originally by: thoth foc
PA doesnt stand for anything..
Punchbag Alliance...
|
Garreck
|
Posted - 2006.02.23 18:27:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Kabil Ajedrez
Edited by: Kabil Ajedrez on 23/02/2006 17:12:12
Quote:
He wasn't in lowsec either. He was in a 1.0 system and he sacrificed his Raven to get the control tower that Palp's corpmate was transporting.
Point is that NOT all kill rights are gained in this manner.
Edit: Therefore you cannont say that this BUG is justified because of it.
Precisely. This is a pretty big bug and affects all manner of play styles.
I engage pirates in low security space on a regular basis. Not all "pirates" are "outlaws" (lower than -5) which means I eat the sec hit and sometimes tank sentries because I'll engage when I like the scenario, not wait until the pirate is actually flagged or whatever.
As a result, there are several pirates that have kill rights against me.
If I understand this bug properly, if I'm caught outside a station or gate in low sec, one of those pirates could engage me free of sentry gun interference...and the moment I shoot back I'M the one who will take heat from the sentries.
This situation needs fixed. I don't begrudge anybody kill rights against me...yes, I made the choice to put myself in that position. However, if I'm aggressed, I should have the choice to shoot back without Concord interference. Against those who have kill rights against me...I don't have that option. My only option is run, or embrace the futile hope that I can tank sentries and the aggressing pirate who has kill rights against me long enough to polish off said pirate.
To that end, I can absolutely see where Exo is coming from. Cashing in on kill rights at the moment is almost a "free kill" card.
|
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.24 03:02:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Kabil Ajedrez
Point is that NOT all kill rights are gained in this manner.
Actually, the POINT was that Deja was wrong - Concord did retaliate and it was not in low-sec.
And if it WAS in low-sec, what would stop you from returning fire anyway?
Let me reiterate for those who seem tooo dense to comprehend:
There's nothing about kill rights that magically prevents the other party from returning fire if they choose to do so. The only complication is that Concord will intervene.
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Garreck
|
Posted - 2006.02.24 04:12:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
There's nothing about kill rights that magically prevents the other party from returning fire if they choose to do so. The only complication is that Concord will intervene.
Whereas, when the victim is initially fired upon and chooses to fire back, Concord will NOT intervene.
This is the imbalance. This is the bug. And it needs sorted. Until it is, anyone with kill rights has a free kill. Which is why Exzo feels it should be considered an exploit to cash in on kill rights.
|
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.24 05:01:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Garreck
Whereas, when the victim is initially fired upon and chooses to fire back, Concord will NOT intervene.
Whom do you consider the "victim" here?
Quote:
Until it is, anyone with kill rights has a free kill.
Anyone with kill rights got them by being killed by the other individual. Let's not make the initial aggressor out to be some injured party here.
You know what causes it, you know how to avoid it - if you dfo it anyhow there are consequences. Whether or not that's the way it "Should Be", it's the way it is at the moment - so if you're in such a situation, you put yourself there, let's not forget that.
This is not about "fairness", it's about vengeance. It's an Eye for an Eye. Those interested in a "fair fight" might want to pit their Ravens against something other than Bestowers instead of whining here when they get their come-uppance for it. 
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Jonis Sinmaker
|
Posted - 2006.02.24 05:27:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Originally by: Garreck
Whereas, when the victim is initially fired upon and chooses to fire back, Concord will NOT intervene.
Whom do you consider the "victim" here?
Quote:
Until it is, anyone with kill rights has a free kill.
Anyone with kill rights got them by being killed by the other individual. Let's not make the initial aggressor out to be some injured party here.
You know what causes it, you know how to avoid it - if you dfo it anyhow there are consequences. Whether or not that's the way it "Should Be", it's the way it is at the moment - so if you're in such a situation, you put yourself there, let's not forget that.
This is not about "fairness", it's about vengeance. It's an Eye for an Eye. Those interested in a "fair fight" might want to pit their Ravens against something other than Bestowers instead of whining here when they get their come-uppance for it.
I am a forum ***** and throughout these forums I never see you once post anything other then borderline flame post's....All you do is post anything that is the opposite of what an OP writes. QFT You know it is a bug and all you want to do is get your kicks by stirring peoples nerves...MOD PLEASE LOCK THIS THREAD SO THIS GUY CAN GO BACK TO BANGING HIS HEAD OFF A WALL.
-------
Semper Fi
Jonis Sinmaker
Bring back Mines
vlinc.moon-nexus.info/images/Jonis.jpg[/IMG]
Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 kbs, ty - Cortes |
Garreck
|
Posted - 2006.02.24 06:32:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Whom do you consider the "victim" here?
The one who got the kill rights by being popped initially. I'm sorry if that was not more clear.
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Anyone with kill rights got them by being killed by the other individual. Let's not make the initial aggressor out to be some injured party here.
It's a bug. The fact that it affects the "initial aggressor" is neither here nor there. It's a defective feature, and yes, the injured parties would like to see it fixed.
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
You know what causes it, you know how to avoid it - if you dfo it anyhow there are consequences. Whether or not that's the way it "Should Be", it's the way it is at the moment - so if you're in such a situation, you put yourself there, let's not forget that.
An accurate enough statement. I can't go so far as to say this is an "exploit" myself. I'm satisfied with the knowledge that if I petition a ship loss due to kill rights being bugged, I'll get my ship back from CCP.
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
This is not about "fairness", it's about vengeance. It's an Eye for an Eye.
Incorrect. Everything in Eve is about "fairness," or more accurately about "balance." When someone is shot at, they should be allowed to shoot back without consequence. End of line. As it stands right now, if you've "wrongfully" killed somebody in .1-1.0 space for whatever reason, you can no longer defend yourself from that person. At all.
Your vengeance is being able to engage the one who "wrongfully" destroyed your vessel at any location without Concord interference. However, just as the initial victim had the option to shoot back when they were victimized...so should the initial aggressor be able to shoot back when victim comes for revenge.
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Those interested in a "fair fight" might want to pit their Ravens against something other than Bestowers instead of whining here when they get their come-uppance for it.
You're limiting your scope far too much here. This is a far reaching bug. Not everybody who engages in combat against a non-war target is shooting at an unarmed vessel.
|
Deja Thoris
|
Posted - 2006.02.24 11:07:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Originally by: Kabil Ajedrez
Point is that NOT all kill rights are gained in this manner.
Actually, the POINT was that Deja was wrong - Concord did retaliate and it was not in low-sec.
And if it WAS in low-sec, what would stop you from returning fire anyway?
Let me reiterate for those who seem tooo dense to comprehend:
There's nothing about kill rights that magically prevents the other party from returning fire if they choose to do so. The only complication is that Concord will intervene.
It seems like you are right and the rest of the community is wrong.
I was not 100% clear (but common sense would have prevented misunderstanding) but I was refering to scenarios that can / may happen.
Please take off your blinkers and leave your myopic POV at the door when posting. Your "me vs. the world" attitude is tiresome and incorrect.
It's a bug, it's not somehow justified because you choose not to like the playstyle of the person that gets shafted by it.
|
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.24 13:54:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Deja Thoris
I was not 100% clear (but common sense would have prevented misunderstanding) but I was refering to scenarios that can / may happen.
You're right - a little common sense, on your part, would have prevented any misunderstanding.
Backpedalling and attempting to revise what you said won't change the facts. Say what you mean and you won't have those problems.
You referred to a very specific scenario: "Concord did NOT retaliate" and then chided me for alleged inaccuracies.
I never made this issue about you, but you felt a need to leap in and call me out on something when you were the one who was wrong. So I (quite correctly) pointed that out. Look to your own inaccuracies before you judge others.
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.24 14:00:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Garreck
As it stands right now, if you've "wrongfully" killed somebody in .1-1.0 space for whatever reason, you can no longer defend yourself from that person. At all.
I'm OK with the rest of what you say, but you need to be more clear here:
You can still defend yourself the same way you would if you were the initial aggressor. You can return fire if you wish. Yes, Concord will retaliate in high-sec... but that didn't seem to be a concern to an aggressor when he initiated original hostilities, now was it? And I am not just referring to the OP in this situation.
Those who are concerned that Concord or sentries will open fire as a result of their actions should take greater care not to set about those events to begin with.
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
SinBin
|
Posted - 2006.02.24 14:02:00 -
[60]
I had a kill rights bug since RMR & even petion guys says its a bug & still its there, top job guys hehe.
_______________________________________
Ill Shutup when CCP remove bookmarks |
Sendraks
|
Posted - 2006.02.24 14:11:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Garreck
Your vengeance is being able to engage the one who "wrongfully" destroyed your vessel at any location without Concord interference. However, just as the initial victim had the option to shoot back when they were victimized...so should the initial aggressor be able to shoot back when victim comes for revenge.
The extension of this point though is what some pirates here seem to be saying is that players shouldn't be making use of the kill rights feature. In short until the bug is fixed, players that are killed by pirates should do nothing about it, because to do so is abuse of a bug.
However, if players were forced not to use their kill rights to get revenge then actually pirating players would indirectly be abuse of this bug. After all the pirates would be using threat of bug abuse to allow them to pirate without consequence of revenge. Which is also wrong.
If players persist in pirating while this bug is in effect then they should be prepared to deal with the consquences of that until the bug is fixed. Expecting players to conveniently not seek revenge for your actions just because it inconveniences you is just as wrong.
|
Garreck
|
Posted - 2006.02.24 14:23:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
You can still defend yourself the same way you would if you were the initial aggressor. You can return fire if you wish. Yes, Concord will retaliate in high-sec... but that didn't seem to be a concern to an aggressor when he initiated original hostilities, now was it?
You're still missing the key point of balance. Firing BACK at somebody should never incite the wrath of Concord.
When the initial aggressor initially aggresses, yes, Concord will fire. However, given circumstances, the initial aggressor will be set to deal with the issue (have wingman in a tougher ship fire first to aggro the guns, have ecm to ensure that he's ONLY tanking the guns, not the guns plus his target...any number of things.) The victim can return fire at his leisure without having to worry about a thing.
Now, when the victim comes back to collect his kill rights...not only can he fire without any concerns from Concord, but the initial aggressor cannot so much as defend himself without Concord interference (whereas, in the initial engagement, the victim COULD defend themselves.)
You've got to drop the entire "but you didn't seem to mind the first time" perspective. As a matter of balance and game-function, if you are fired upon, you should be allowed to return fire without penalty.
Here's where it gets complicated, and why this is such a game-breaking bug:
Viewing this as "not an exploit" leaves people who have killrights against them with no recourse if attacked by somebody who has the killrights until the bug is fixed. Basically, if you have killrights against you, you're as good as dead if you stay and fight.
Viewing this as "an exploit" leaves the people who were victimized and earned said killrights no option to engage their aggressors at all...because any such engagement is going to be taking advantage of the bug. This is unsatisfactory, because pirates would become completely invulnerable to anyone they've victimized until the bug is fixed. (Obviously having a scenario where 'wrongfully' blowing up somebody makes you legally invulnerable to them is totally unfair in every sense of the word.)
Either scenario unbalances a large portion of combat. I can only hope that CCP realizes how broken the situation is and are working on some kind of hotfix to sort it out.
|
Donis Ardis
|
Posted - 2006.02.24 14:45:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Garreck
I can only hope that CCP realizes how broken the situation is and are working on some kind of hotfix to sort it out.
From the Patch Notes:
- Kill rights will now expire after ~30 days.
- You can now defend yourself when being attacked by someone with a Kill Right on you.
no need for hope, wishes, prayers as it has been done.
If between now and next Tuesday you are engaged in empire because of kill rights, fight back, go pop by concord and petition the loss of your ship.
|
Garreck
|
Posted - 2006.02.24 20:19:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Donis Ardis
Originally by: Garreck
I can only hope that CCP realizes how broken the situation is and are working on some kind of hotfix to sort it out.
From the Patch Notes:
- Kill rights will now expire after ~30 days.
- You can now defend yourself when being attacked by someone with a Kill Right on you.
no need for hope, wishes, prayers as it has been done.
If between now and next Tuesday you are engaged in empire because of kill rights, fight back, go pop by concord and petition the loss of your ship.
And there we have it 
|
Drizit
|
Posted - 2006.02.24 23:45:00 -
[65]
The biggest issue with killrights is that only you have the right. You can't go out and hunt the person down with a load of buddies beside you.
Take this scenario:
*High skilled pirate kills noob.
*Noob gets killrights but doesn't stand a chance against the pirate 1v1.
*Noob is not a member of a player corp or one that has a decent financial backing. Also Pirate took item(s) of value that the noob spent a long time earning ISK to buy so noob is now broke.
*Noob cannot therefore hire mercs.
*Noob only has 30 days to get the money to hire mercs or skill up high enough to take on the pirate.
*Noob cannot go out with a few buddies to do the deed because his buddies would get ganked by Concord if they fired on the pirate.
*Ultimately: Kill rights + noob = totally useless.
Now that this "bug" is being fixed, we are back to the pretty much the same issue (for noobs anyway) we had before kill rights were introduced. Older player wins once more because in PVP there is no contest between older players and noobs.
I've been playing for just under a year now and I have seen that this game is fast becoming an older players game. As we see with recent high sec pirating, they can do pretty much what they like when and where they like. I know this is a players game where players are allowed (to an extent) to dictate the playing field. However, it seems that noobs are always the target since they are easy meat. Several new players that I have introduced to the game have quit because of "bullies" who only pick on the weak probably because they can't hold their own against someone on their own level. One paid for a month and then left after being gate ganked and having his gear looted by pirates in 0.9, three others didn't even last out the trial, one other also paid for a month but has let it lapse after that and I'm currently trying to persuade him to stay on.
I was hoping that I could play this game and make my own career as stated on the box and to begin with, it was good. Concord kept the unwanted people out of Empire so that noobs could get somewhere and gain some reasonable skills before being subjected to the gankfest in lower sec.
Now it appears that some players want Eve to be PVP combat and nothing else. All I can say is: You're doing a good job of killing the game completely guys, noobs are leaving in droves. Very soon, you won't have to worry about them at all and you can have Empire as well as low sec all to yourselves. Until the investment that CCP made with these new servers becomes too much of a burden of course, because too few new players are joining up and staying.
6 Months ago, I would have defended this game to the hilt but now I find myself playing less and less. Often only going onine to start a new skill training. Restricted in where I can go and boredom with what's available in Empire has left me with little enthusiam for Eve any more.
I could have the best equipment in the game and the highest skills but I'd still be c**p at PVP combat so 0.0 is pretty much off limits altogether for me and not just until I get better skills either. I'd like to try manufacture but there's no money in it because the ore I need is in 0.0 and it would cost me more than I'd make on the sales of the manufactured goods to buy it. I can't go and mine it cos of people camping out choke points into 0.0 and I'm back to PVP combat again against people with more RL piloting skills than me (not skillbook stuff). Due to 5 of my friends being forced out of the game before they've even started, I can't go out in force and get rid of the gate campers.
Flame away: Personally, I don't give a rats ****
--
My idea of an OS is one that Operates the System, not a complete package of every piece of software ever written.
Computers created "The Paperless Office". But some stupid fool invented a printer |
Gretek Lal
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 02:21:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Patric Murphy
If you decied to get even with somedbody who ganked you then you better be shure that you can beat them.
Why? Last time I was ganked I was flying a little old unarmed Bantam mining ship. He also podded me, which is just not cricket at all.
The way I see it, I should have a free shot at blowing him to kingdom come.
|
Gretek Lal
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 02:26:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Drizit
Flame away: Personally, I don't give a rats ****
I won't quote your entire post but I just want to say you're right, 100%, completely. Thank you!
|
EXZODIER
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 02:42:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Edited by: Corunna ElMan on 23/02/2006 13:48:01
Originally by: Deja Thoris
Concord did NOT retaliate.
He wasn't in lowsec either. He was in a 1.0 system and he sacrificed his Raven to get the control tower that Palp's corpmate was transporting.
Put on your reading glasses - that might fix the "inaccuracies" you complain of.
Seriously, people here are like the fools who will burn their hand on a hot stove, then touch it again just to be sure. You know what causes this, so don't do it until it's changed.
YOU should learn to see what is realy going on efore u try to take a post and twist it - yes i kille dthe guys hauler in a suicide raven - but this isent what im talking about - this is just a general post that i thought i would bring up because of a bug corp m8's have experianced - if the guy whos hauler i killed wants to collect his kill right he can convo me and tell me where i am and i will let him kill me so i can get CCP to replace my ship - or he can wait till the bug is fixed and i can blow him up again -
HMMMMMMMM the end ? i think not |
EXZODIER
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 02:47:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Drizit
The biggest issue with killrights is that only you have the right. You can't go out and hunt the person down with a load of buddies beside you.
Flame away: Personally, I don't give a rats ****
LIVE - LEARN - ADAPT - LEAVE
Choice is yours
HMMMMMMMM the end ? i think not |
JamesTalon
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 02:48:00 -
[70]
Pretty sure it would have been mentioned here already, but the bug will be fixed in Blood in a matter of days now.
Caldari Navy Surplus
Eris was here ~Eris |
Jonis Sinmaker
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 03:45:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Drizit
I've been playing for just under a year now and I have seen that this game is fast becoming an older players game. As we see with recent high sec pirating, they can do pretty much what they like when and where they like. I know this is a players game where players are allowed (to an extent) to ...........blah blah blah
Flame away: Personally, I don't give a rats ****
This is not a 0.0 conversation. If you want make another thread about it. As far as recent high sec priating....man it has been going on sinc ethe game was in beta testing and this is nothing new.
I'm so sick of people complaining about pirates and how they "ruin the game" and "destroy peoples lives". Get real man it's a game. They even advertise pirating ON THE BOX FOR THE GAME! Go to K-Mart and buy a clue bro because the one you got is leading you to WoW.
There are no n0obs leaving in droves...show me the stats on this...where did you get your info...last I checked there are over 100k accounts and rising by the day. Is there a website with this information because I'm sure CCP would LOVE to see it.
You are whining because you can't get into 0.0 to get the ore you need to be in manufacturing....that's lazyness. I was manufacturing battleships in empire for a year before I stepped one foot in 0.0. All you need to do is mine extra high end minerals in empire and "sell them" and "buy" the other high end 0.0 minerals you need for building, which is a well practiced method for most empire only production lines. Think outside the box.
What real life piloting skills are you talking about. What are these guys some sort of NASA experts in RL and you think it gives them a better playing edge? Also instead of using one point of entry into 0.0 find other entry gates...and try, OMG here it comes, using TEAMWORK. Send in a scout (that's a noval idea) and have someone check it out in a shuttle instead of a ship that cost's millions of isk. Once again think outside the box.
This game was design around teamwork. You have to use teamwork to survive and if you don't then you won't like the gaem and no one is keeping you here so if you want a game where you can be the top dog in a month or two game time then roll you arse over to WOW and play that...bet you'll meet people you like over there.
Oh and one more thing...there is not a pirate in their right mind that would waste a battleship in highsec on a no0b ship....just isn't finacialy sound. If you got poped in a no0b ship you were a.) in low sec (gives you a nifty warning about it being dangerous before you jump in" or b.) 0.0 (gives you yet another nifty warning).
Soo to sum things up you need to come here with an educated post before rolling in here and making yourself look like an un educated whiner. You want to throw stats that n0obs are leaving by the droves...prove it and post something to verify don't go off of "well that's what all the other n0obs told me"
-------
Semper Fi
Jonis Sinmaker
Bring back Mines
[green]Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, |
Jonis Sinmaker
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 03:47:00 -
[72]
Edited by: Jonis Sinmaker on 25/02/2006 03:47:58
Originally by: Gretek Lal
Originally by: Drizit
Flame away: Personally, I don't give a rats ****
I won't quote your entire post but I just want to say you're right, 100%, completely. Thank you!
I want to say, you sir, are another un educated whiner....wal-mart has a special on clues....buy one only $5.99
And no i am not a pirate, never have been one and never will be one so don't throw the "YOU JUST AN EVIL PIRATE" at me, becuae that just don't jive... 
-------
Semper Fi
Jonis Sinmaker
Bring back Mines
[green]Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, |
Fester Addams
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 08:46:00 -
[73]
As of tuesdays bloodlines patch this topic can finally be put to rest, this issue will according to the patch notes be fixed then.
|
Vodalus
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 09:03:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Originally by: Deja Thoris
I was not 100% clear (but common sense would have prevented misunderstanding) but I was refering to scenarios that can / may happen.
You're right - a little common sense, on your part, would have prevented any misunderstanding.
Backpedalling and attempting to revise what you said won't change the facts. Say what you mean and you won't have those problems.
You referred to a very specific scenario: "Concord did NOT retaliate" and then chided me for alleged inaccuracies.
I never made this issue about you, but you felt a need to leap in and call me out on something when you were the one who was wrong. So I (quite correctly) pointed that out. Look to your own inaccuracies before you judge others.
holy crap you are an utter ******* moron
--------------------------------------------------------------
Originally by: Oveur
EVE is primarily a PVP game
|
EXZODIER
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 10:46:00 -
[75]
just becaasue they say they will fix it dosent mean they will - still waiting for MINES to be fixed and they saisd they were doing that a year ago :-)
until its ingame it aint real
HMMMMMMMM the end ? i think not |
DukDodgerz
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 13:57:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Sendraks
Originally by: Garreck
Your vengeance is being able to engage the one who "wrongfully" destroyed your vessel at any location without Concord interference. However, just as the initial victim had the option to shoot back when they were victimized...so should the initial aggressor be able to shoot back when victim comes for revenge.
The extension of this point though is what some pirates here seem to be saying is that players shouldn't be making use of the kill rights feature. In short until the bug is fixed, players that are killed by pirates should do nothing about it, because to do so is abuse of a bug.
However, if players were forced not to use their kill rights to get revenge then actually pirating players would indirectly be abuse of this bug. After all the pirates would be using threat of bug abuse to allow them to pirate without consequence of revenge. Which is also wrong.
If players persist in pirating while this bug is in effect then they should be prepared to deal with the consquences of that until the bug is fixed. Expecting players to conveniently not seek revenge for your actions just because it inconveniences you is just as wrong.
readers digest version:
It was ok to steal and the victim to have no recourse, but it is not ok now for the victim to achieve justice while the thief has no recourse...in the thiefs opinions...
anyone else think this points to a balance of circumstances the thieves brought on themselves...
English only, please. -Capsicum translation of old sigy - Bad People Suck |
Sendraks
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 14:17:00 -
[77]
Edited by: Sendraks on 25/02/2006 14:18:45
Originally by: DukDodgerz
readers digest version:
Good way of describing acurately getting across my point in as few words as possible. Nice one.
|
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 17:41:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Vodalus
holy crap you are an utter ******* moron
The fact that you can't even actually address my points tells me who's really the intellectually deficient one here.
After all, it should be so easy, if you are right.
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Olsen'Kra
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 18:06:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Originally by: Vodalus
holy crap you are an utter ******* moron
The fact that you can't even actually address my points tells me who's really the intellectually deficient one here.
After all, it should be so easy, if you are right.
Its very easy.
Kill Rights are not aimed at noobs who get blown up in empire(0.1-1 sec). There are a lot of things that are not geared towards noobs in this game. They are geared towards exacting YOUR revenge where and when you choose. Whether you are up to the task or not is not the point.
This in itself reinforces the ideals of the EVE universe. It is not safe, it doesnt hold your hand, etc.
But lets take this example, a Pirate wanabee (i.e. one thats of more than -1.9sec who still travels in empire) is known to kill people in low sec, or even empire gank, then all you have to do is avertise the fact that you have kill-rights and would like to team up with others who have simliar kill rights, and plot your revenge. Yes this game involves a bit of thinking, a bit of human interaction, thats what makes it so great.
Currently the Kill rights system is broken, and the fixes noted in the patch notes are how its supposed to work.
And yes I have to agree with Vodalus :)
|
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 20:01:00 -
[80]
Edited by: Corunna ElMan on 25/02/2006 20:05:23
I think that you might want to read the whole thread, because you clearly don't have the context necessary to understand my position.
You're right - EVE doesn't hold your hand. But the OP seems to want it to. He wants people to be prevented from retaliating against him for his actions, by labelling that retaliation an "exploit". Meantime, he doesn't seem to refrain from putting people in that situation, nor does he seem to care about Concord intervention when he starts it all to begin with.
Basically, he is the one who wants to hide behind a bug. If anything is an exploit, that is.
I'm beginning to understand why his corp is called "The Short Bus Squad"...
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Olsen'Kra
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 20:25:00 -
[81]
Edited by: Olsen''Kra on 25/02/2006 20:33:59
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Edited by: Corunna ElMan on 25/02/2006 20:05:23
I think that you might want to read the whole thread, because you clearly don't have the context necessary to understand my position.
You're right - EVE doesn't hold your hand. But the OP seems to want it to. He wants people to be prevented from retaliating against him for his actions, by labelling that retaliation an "exploit". Meantime, he doesn't seem to refrain from putting people in that situation, nor does he seem to care about Concord intervention when he starts it all to begin with.
Basically, he is the one who wants to hide behind a bug. If anything is an exploit, that is.
I'm beginning to understand why his corp is called "The Short Bus Squad"...
Firstly, I know exactly what Exzodier is saying, I am afraid your the one loosing the point. If anyone else was the OP, I bet your views would be entirely different. It is clear to see that your opinion is clouded by your hate of the TSDS.
Firstly since its conception, Kill Rights had a time limit. This was omitted as a bug, but still in the description for RMR.
"If you lose your ship within Empire space because of unsanctioned combat, you earn the right to revenge your loss for a limited time"
Now the point that you have issue with is ", and can kill the assailant on sight."
If your up to the task. It is widely understood, and infact proven, that if you take a shot at a person they have every right to fire back without concord intervention.
Oveur said himself you should have the right to fight back. THAT alone should be enough for you, but reasons Vodalus pointed out you still try to push your point. Same applies for Jet Can flagging, you better be ABLE to take him on or else loose your ship.
Your confusing the OP's intent. He does not want to hide, if you want to claim your kill right on him then he deserves a right to fire back without concord intervetion. And the patch notes have cleared that up.
What more do you want?
You, sir, are confused as a direct result of your bias and clearly have not read this thread thoroughly.
Edit: Reference link added.
|
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 20:38:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Olsen'Kra
If anyone else was the OP, I bet your views would be entirely different. It is clear to see that your opinion is clouded by your hate of the TSDS.
Sorry to disappoint you - if anyone else posted the same thing I'd ridicule them, too.
Quote:
Oveur said himself that you should have the right to fight back. THAT alone should be enough for you
You CAN fight back - under the exact same terms as when you initiated hostilities the first time. Kill rights doesn't disable your weapons or anything, can't you see that?
And if you're worried about Concord attacking you for returning fire? Hey, I've got a solution for that too - don't start it in the first place.
Quote:
Your confusing the OP's intent. He does not want to hide, if you want to claim your kill right on him then he deserves a right to fire back without concord intervetion.
If he cared about Concord intervention, he wouldn't sacrifice a Raven to take out a Bestower. Considering that, it's clear that his issue isn't Concord, it's the victim fighting back.
Quote:
You, sir, are confused as a direct result of your bias and clearly have not read this thread thoroughly.
My only "bias" is against those people who are unwilling to accept the consequences for their actions. No one can get kill rights on you unless you inflict an unlawful kill on them in the first place. Don't come crying to me if that means they can have their way with you later.
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Malken
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 20:49:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
rabble...rabble...rabble
pandas are pink and panda hair makes for a great smoke.
|
Olsen'Kra
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 20:59:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
If he cared about Concord intervention, he wouldn't sacrifice a Raven to take out a Bestower. Considering that, it's clear that his issue isn't Concord, it's the victim fighting back.
No, I really think he is ok with the victims fighting back, its concord intervening again. Thats the crux of the problem, which will be solved. The victim has every right to fight back, band together with other victims, and overcome this big bad guy :) lol. You know it makes sense.
-10 guy camping in 0.4 at gate, he is a bad guy, he deserves to be shot, what happens when you shoot him, he can defend himself, without sentry interference, and pwn you if your not up to the task.
Ore thief steals your can of veldspar in Jita, he is flagged to you, you shoot him, he can defend himself, without concord interference, and pwn you if your not up to the task.
Empire pirate kills you, you get kill rights, you fire at him when you think the oppertunity is right, he should be able to defend himself without concord interference, and pwn you if your not up to the task.
See where I am going here.
QED, proven as required, woot I win, what do I win?
|
Nira Li
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 21:04:00 -
[85]
Edited by: Nira Li on 25/02/2006 21:04:12
Ok I'm going to put this out nice and easy:
Situation 1:
Pirate A sacrifice his/hers ship in hope to gain profit but it could aswell go the other way and attacks Pilot B in 1.0 and kill B's ship/hauler.
Or this happens in .4 and under.
Situation 2:
B get a kill right and can kill A where ever he want and A can't defend him self other then tank untill he dies or if B cant break A's tank.
You say this is ok cuz A didn't care about concord killing him and that B was defensless.
Alternetiv option for B:
B can defend him self by using ecm so that when A attacks he gets jam and concord can kill him or use a tank or run when getting locked or fight back and kill A.
Alternetiv option for A:
Stay out of empire if you dont want to get exploited.
It's kinda simple to see where the problem is and I hope it get fixed asap.
You Will Cry My Name |
Donis Ardis
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 21:27:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Olsen'Kra
QED, proven as required, woot I win, what do I win?
Gender affirmation by the looks of your character.
|
FXSlacker
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 21:27:00 -
[87]
I'll start with I am a noob. So don't listen to me.
I can see the points made here. However it can be exploited both ways.
1) A rat smokes you and now you have kill rights that you can't exercise because the rat will petition and get his ship back. This is not balance.
question: does he get his implants and mods or such back?
2) Someone with kills rights engages said rat, rat returns fire and gets smoked by concord. This is not balance.
So if a rat engages now and kills someone, he damn well knows that he can become involved in this bug. That is his problem.
If Mr. revenge engages said rat he knows that said rat will get his ship back because of the bug.
Its a messed up bug/exploit that will hopefully be fixed soon. Quit your whining or I know where to get some really stinky cheese for you.
FXSlacker
|
Donis Ardis
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 21:29:00 -
[88]
Originally by: FXSlacker
I'll start with I am a noob. So don't listen to me.
I can see the points made here. However it can be exploited both ways.
1) A rat smokes you and now you have kill rights that you can't exercise because the rat will petition and get his ship back. This is not balance.
question: does he get his implants and mods or such back?
2) Someone with kills rights engages said rat, rat returns fire and gets smoked by concord. This is not balance.
So if a rat engages now and kills someone, he damn well knows that he can become involved in this bug. That is his problem.
If Mr. revenge engages said rat he knows that said rat will get his ship back because of the bug.
Its a messed up bug/exploit that will hopefully be fixed soon. Quit your whining or I know where to get some really stinky cheese for you.
FXSlacker
Agreed, it does not entitle you to a pod kill though. Just the ship.
If you dont want to be "exploited" then wait until after dt Tuesday to illegaly kill :)
|
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 21:43:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Donis Ardis
If you dont want to be "exploited" then wait until after dt Tuesday to illegaly kill :)
That's what I've been trying to get across to them, too!
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 21:43:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Olsen'Kra
No, I really think he is ok with the victims fighting back,
Then why does he call it an exploit?
Victoms exercising their rights isn't an exploit. Concord intervention isn't the victim's fault. The OP basically suggests that those exercising legitimately earned kill rights are exploiters - and by extension, that they should be punished for exercising those rights.
By extension, we can infer that the OP prefers an environment where he can do unto others without consequence. If that is not the case, then perhaps he should have more carefully chosen his position.
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Angry Dan
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 21:55:00 -
[91]
Amazingly, I agree with yet another bus squad post. This si getting wierd.
Garreck did explain it best.
It is a bug, you are suppsoed to be able to defend yourself when agressed. Kill rights are supposed to remove concord from the equation when a previously killed person goes for revenge. There not supposed to move the agression setting to the target of the kill rights.
Originally by: EXZODIER
just becaasue they say they will fix it dosent mean they will - still waiting for MINES to be fixed and they said they were doing that a year ago :-)
Same here. An enormous minefield around my POS sounds like a great idea.
++++++++++++++++++++
Founder member of the Huzzah Federation.
Remember, the grass is greener on our side of the fence
Widowmakers director
Fear my kneepads of allure!
|
Ishen Villone
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 21:58:00 -
[92]
This entire conversation is pretty much moot because CCP has the bug fixed in the next patch. It's pretty much end of the bug/not bug discussion.
|
Olsen'Kra
|
Posted - 2006.02.25 22:20:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
Originally by: Olsen'Kra
No, I really think he is ok with the victims fighting back,
Then why does he call it an exploit?
Victoms exercising their rights isn't an exploit. Concord intervention isn't the victim's fault. The OP basically suggests that those exercising legitimately earned kill rights are exploiters - and by extension, that they should be punished for exercising those rights.
By extension, we can infer that the OP prefers an environment where he can do unto others without consequence. If that is not the case, then perhaps he should have more carefully chosen his position.
OMG, no. Ok so by using your logic, using wasps when their tracking was uber wasnt an exploit because it wasnt the player fault, or using them now because their mass is all screwed up? huh?
And dont infer a reason, he does not want an environment without consequence. He never said that, he actually reinforces the opposite. He is not complaining about the bug for himself, because he also stated that if you do envolk your kill right on him, all he has to do is fire back, and petition his loss.
There is no hiding, no underlying reasoning, just stating that if you take advantage of the current situation of kill rights then all you do create another petitionable event. You may even not get a kill-mail.
Simple solution, wait until tuesday to earn and envoke kill rights.
Don't "infer", don't "by extension" dont BS.
Re: Donis, yep I am a Tranny Matari.
|
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 01:02:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Olsen'Kra
Ok so by using your logic, using wasps when their tracking was uber wasnt an exploit because it wasnt the player fault, or using them now because their mass is all screwed up?
I'll rely on CCP to tell me when something is an exploit, not the word of someone on the Short Bus.
Punishing a player for using a feature implemented specifically for that purpose is about as stupid as Blizzard punishing players for entering "unfinished areas" without making clear exactly where those areas are.
Don't blame the player for the developer's failure.
It's really sad that you can't arrive at conclusions based on evidence, but fine, we'll play your game. Let's take everything at face value, then. Victim is attacked, victim gets kill rights, victim comes back later and uses their express permission to open fire. Let's not "infer" that it's a bug, since all that was explicitly stated is that the method will be changing in the next patch. Let's not, "by extension" conclude that players know that this differs from the supposed developer intent, because reading the forums and dev blogs is NOT a requirement to play the game. The only information players are responsible to know is in the terms of use and the loading screen. Therefore, let's not presume that this is an exploit, unless and until CCP says otherwise.
Clear enough for you? Because if it isn't, you've got no right questioning other's intelligence.
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Alexis DeTocqueville
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 06:23:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Corunna ElMan
I'll rely on CCP to tell me when something is an exploit, not the word of someone on the Short Bus.
Nice to see that when you're not accusing other people of espousing fallacies, you're dropping them left and right. You've completely convinced me his opinion is wrong simply by trying to demonize him based on his association!
Quote:
Clear enough for you? Because if it isn't, you've got no right questioning other's intelligence.
Oh, such irony.
|
Olsen'Kra
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 12:02:00 -
[96]
The evidence is that I can shoot back at a person claiming kill rights on me and then claim my ship back via petition. Thats a fact.
True, its not an punishable exploit because the victim does not gain anything by claiming kill rights, and because CCP hasn't said so. But CCP remaining quiet on exploits does not mean it doesn't exist, and that logic alone cannot be used in determining if its an exploit or not. Let's all quietly recall ALL the exploits that CCP has remained quiet about in recent history.
Agreed, you should not rely on the Short Bus to inform you of exploits, but when the majority of the community voice that something is wrong then ... it usually is.
|
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 16:25:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Alexis DeTocqueville
Nice to see that when you're not accusing other people of espousing fallacies, you're dropping them left and right. You've completely convinced me his opinion is wrong simply by trying to demonize him based on his association!
So, saying that it's not an exploit unless CCP says so is a "fallacy"?
Did I miss the part where the SDS/SBS gets to define exploits and set policy for CCP?
Amazing - you lack reason and a sense of humor. Maybe you should join the Short Bus Squad too.
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
Corunna ElMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.26 16:30:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Olsen'Kra
True, its not an punishable exploit because the victim does not gain anything by claiming kill rights, and because CCP hasn't said so.
That's all that needs to be said about that, then.
Quote:
when the majority of the community voice that something is wrong then ... it usually is.
When we hear from the majority, you might have a point. We've heard from a few people, even in this thread.
There are about 70 to 100 thousand people playing the game. There are over 15,000 people playing it right this very moment. Show me where 7500 of them have registered an opinion on this, one way or the other, and we'll talk about the majority.
The only person represented by any individual opinion here is the person posting it. "Vocal minority" does not equal majority - especially when other people here have pointed out the shortcomings of the initial argument.
I'm not here to win any popularity contests. I couldn't care less what you think of me - all that matters is this: Can you defend your opinions? |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |