Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 09:01:00 -
[301] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:You are obviously on tilt. Edit your post so the quotes are set straight. The quotes are fine the way they are.
Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
136
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 09:07:00 -
[302] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:You are obviously on tilt. Edit your post so the quotes are set straight. The quotes are fine the way they are.
gg wp
the edits look great lol
(post #281 "edited by: Riot Girl") |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
879
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 09:13:00 -
[303] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote: I've provided plenty of strong arguments. You still haven't explained what is preventing you from being able to complete the mission successfully, other than your own inability to do so (despite having every tool needed).
Having read the entire thread, I have seen no substantiated point offered by you against this proposed change in the ROE.
And as you well know there is nothing a solo mission runner can do to prevent you from stealing the loot and warping out, since you are a suspect for half a second before engaging warp. The option of not accepting the mission at all, or waiting till you are not online to do the mission is available but by not stopping this extortion, I am promoting your type of game play and encouraging others to use the same style, thereby limiting chances of future success by new players in my chosen style. Of course the mission runner can attempt to gank you and loose his ship to concord but that's not really an option either is it?
That's why setting intruders to suspect will give the mission runner a chance to engage and protect what is his, and probably why you are so vehement against it.
Things that keep me up at night;-á Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state,-áOnce you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 09:18:00 -
[304] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:You are obviously on tilt. Edit your post so the quotes are set straight. The quotes are fine the way they are. gg wp the edits look great lol (post #281 "edited by: Riot Girl") They were already edited before you even posted. Your original post reflected that before you removed the quote. Are we going to argue about something meaningful now or are you just going to keep failing at trying troll me?
Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
136
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 09:21:00 -
[305] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:Riot Girl wrote: I've provided plenty of strong arguments. You still haven't explained what is preventing you from being able to complete the mission successfully, other than your own inability to do so (despite having every tool needed).
Having read the entire thread, I have seen no substantiated point offered by you against this proposed change in the ROE. And as you well know there is nothing a solo mission runner can do to prevent you from stealing the loot and warping out, since you are a suspect for half a second before engaging warp. The option of not accepting the mission at all, or waiting till you are not online to do the mission is available but by not stopping this extortion, I am promoting your type of game play and encouraging others to use the same style, thereby limiting chances of future success by new players in my chosen style. Of course the mission runner can attempt to gank you and loose his ship to concord but that's not really an option either is it? That's why setting intruders to suspect will give the mission runner a chance to engage and protect what is his, and probably why you are so vehement against it.
100% on-point and accurate.
To be fair, Princess is making 700 mil per Wei Todaki theft and possibly supporting several accounts with the PLEX generated per month.
He/she has a lot to lose. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 09:26:00 -
[306] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:And as you well know there is nothing a solo mission runner can do to prevent you from stealing the loot and warping out, since you are a suspect for half a second before engaging warp. Such a defeatist attitude. I'm sure there are many things a solo player can do, though that's beside the point. Solo players shouldn't expect to succeed when the odds are stacked against them. That's the part where you engage in player interaction and get people to help you out.
Quote:The option of not accepting the mission at all, or waiting till you are not online to do the mission is available but by not stopping this extortion, I am promoting your type of game play and encouraging others to use the same style That's a good thing.
Quote:thereby limiting chances of future success by new players in my chosen style. What style would that be? The style of ignoring opportunities for enjoyment and cry to CCP when your isk/hr grinding is harmed in some way?
Quote:Of course the mission runner can attempt to gank you and loose his ship to concord but that's not really an option either is it? Yes it is and I've already explained why.
Quote:That's why setting intruders to suspect will give the mission runner a chance to engage and protect what is his, and probably why you are so vehement against it. I wouldn't care about going suspect. If I want something, I suicide gank because I consider can-flipping to be a waste of time. Any legit can-flippers wouldn't care because it just means less work for them. The only people who are actually scared of going suspect here are the mission runners who are afraid to shoot (and still won't shoot even if the rules are changed).
Oh god. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 09:28:00 -
[307] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:To be fair, Princess is making 700 mil per Wei Todaki theft and possibly supporting several accounts with the PLEX generated per month with little to no effort/risk currently.
He/she has a lot to lose. I can guarantee they have put in a lot more effort than you or any of those other mission runners have. If they hadn't, this wouldn't even be a problem for you. Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
136
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 09:31:00 -
[308] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:To be fair, Princess is making 700 mil per Wei Todaki theft and possibly supporting several accounts with the PLEX generated per month with little to no effort/risk currently.
He/she has a lot to lose. I can guarantee they have put in a lot more effort than you or any of those other mission runners have. If they hadn't, this wouldn't even be a problem for you.
Yeah, you're wrong. All spelled out in the original post for those who legitimately wish to know. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 09:37:00 -
[309] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:Yeah, you're wrong. All spelled out in the original post for those who legitimately wish to know. Do you think CCP just saw this guy one day and pointed him in the direction of the site and told him he could get free isk by hanging around there? Do you think they told him the methods he would need to use to succeed and gave him everything he needed? Of course not. He saw an opportunity no one else had and he exploited it. He came up with a plan, practised it, refined it and took all the necessary steps to make it functional and that is why he is winning. You are losing because you are not putting in even a fraction of that effort and you are not willing to either.
You're not even willing to lose a cheap ABC for a 1.5bn profit because you are scared it will hurt your isk/hour. Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
136
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 09:41:00 -
[310] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:Yeah, you're wrong. All spelled out in the original post for those who legitimately wish to know. Do you think CCP just saw this guy one day and pointed him in the direction of the site and told him he could get free isk by hanging around there? Do you think they told him the methods he would need to use to succeed and gave him everything he needed? Of course not. He saw an opportunity no one else had and he exploited it. He came up with a plan, practised it, refined it and took all the necessary steps to make it functional and that is why he is winning. You are losing because you are not putting in even a fraction of that effort and you are not willing to either.
I feel bad for you Princess, but you yourself used the term "exploit."
And it is.
It's a broken mechanic and you are exploiting it.
It's time to fix it.
You will still be able to invade, it's just not going to be so easy and you may lose your ship occasionally.
You're a "pirate" so act like one. |
|
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 09:48:00 -
[311] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote: you yourself used the term "exploit."
And it is.
It's a broken mechanic and you are exploiting it. I said exploiting an opportunity, not exploiting a mechanic. Exploiting a mechanic would be grounds for a ban and this is not.
Quote:It's time to fix it. Yeah good luck with that. CCP don't seem to care.
Quote:You will still be able to invade, it's just not going to be so easy and you may lose your ship occasionally.
You're a "pirate" so act like one. Actually, if this change came into effect, I'd stand to lose LESS ships because if I choose to suicide gank, I'm guaranteed to lose my ships. At least this way, the mission runner may shoot first and actually SAVE me money, and bypass the mechanics put in place to make suicide ganking balanced. As much as that helps me out, I do not want that to happen because I am not selfish and I know it would not be good for maintaining the quality of the Eve online experience. Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
136
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 09:50:00 -
[312] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:
Actually, if this change came into effect, I'd stand to lose LESS ships because if I choose to suicide gank, I'm guaranteed to lose my ships. At least this way, the mission runner may shoot first and actually SAVE me money, and bypass the mechanics put in place to make suicide ganking balanced.
Then don't be afraid. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 09:53:00 -
[313] - Quote
I'm not. You are. You're afraid of going suspect, you're afraid of being concorded, you're afraid of fighting for what you want, you're afraid of player interaction and you're afraid of player created content. Why do you even play? Oh god. |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
879
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 10:06:00 -
[314] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:I'm not. You are. You're afraid of going suspect, you're afraid of being concorded, you're afraid of fighting for what you want, you're afraid of player interaction and you're afraid of player created content. Why do you even play? Just clueless. You don't know anything about these people but your prejudging them to be failing at EVE because they don't do what you do. I have no compunctions going suspect and killing the pirate types, I interact with hundreds of players everyday and I made more ISK than you could spend in a 5 years without victimizing anyone. I can't imagine how limited your EVE experience has been with the limitation you set on yourself and everyone around you.
Try to remember, you sitting in a hole all day, every day, waiting for the next victim to support your desire to sit in a hole all day waiting for another victim, is not an 'I win button', and I will spend my last EVE voice and freedom to use that voice to relieve you of that button so you can actually learn to play and enjoy the rest of the game.
You should fear them, the ones you feel contempt for, but you seem to be to busy insulting them to realise they hold the key to everything you have attained, and from sounds of it, ever will attain.
Things that keep me up at night;-á Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state,-áOnce you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another. |
Lady Katherine Devonshire
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
216
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 10:06:00 -
[315] - Quote
Perhaps the restriction against the use of Warp Bubbles in high security space could be waived when inside of a mission pocket?
That way a defender could simply drop the appropriate device as soon as the thief comes on station, thus preventing them from quickly leaving once they commit their crime, and without necessitating them to carry warp scramblers in their midslots. The sound of the Amarrian heart |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
142
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 10:10:00 -
[316] - Quote
Lady Katherine Devonshire wrote:Perhaps the restriction against the use of Warp Bubbles in high security space could be waived when inside of a mission pocket?
That way a defender could simply drop the appropriate device as soon as the thief comes on station, thus preventing them from quickly leaving once they commit their crime, and without necessitating them to carry warp scramblers in their midslots.
Anything is possible, but this is outside of the scope of what is being suggested.
This would have to be a follow-up suggestion after the suspect flag is implemented for mission invasion. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 10:19:00 -
[317] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote: You don't know anything about these people but your prejudging them to be failing at EVE because they don't do what you do I'm making judgements based on the opinions posted in this thread. It's hypocritical for you to mention it though, as you are making judgements about what I do, when you don't even know what I do.
Quote:I have no compunctions going suspect and killing the pirate types Your arguments indicate otherwise. The fact you described suicide ganking as an impractical solution reflects that.
Quote:I interact with hundreds of players everyday and I made more ISK than you could spend in a 5 years without victimizing anyone. I can't imagine how limited your EVE experience has been with the limitation you set on yourself and everyone around you. What limitation is that? I'm not the one crying to CCP because I'm so adverse to player interaction, that I can't bring it upon myself to get some friends or hire some guys to help me achieve my goals and laugh at my enemies when I succeed. That is enjoyable gameplay, you're missing out.
Quote:Try to remember, you sitting in a hole all day, every day, waiting for the next victim to support your desire to sit in a hole all day waiting for another victim, is not an 'I win button', and I will spend my last EVE voice and freedom to use that voice to relieve you of that button so you can actually learn to play and enjoy the rest of the game. I don't know which hole or button you are referring to but I'm not the one complaining about my inability to learn to play or enjoy the game, so that's another hypocritical statement.
Quote:You should fear them, the ones you feel contempt for, but you seem to be to busy insulting them to realise they hold the key to everything you have attained, and from sounds of it, ever will attain. Fear them? Why? What are they going to do? Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
142
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 10:24:00 -
[318] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Goldiiee wrote: You don't know anything about these people but your prejudging them to be failing at EVE because they don't do what you do I'm making judgements based on the opinions posted in this thread. It's hypocritical for you to mention it though, as you are making judgements about what I do, when you don't even know what I do. Quote:I have no compunctions going suspect and killing the pirate types Your arguments indicate otherwise. The fact you described suicide ganking as an impractical solution reflects that. Quote:I interact with hundreds of players everyday and I made more ISK than you could spend in a 5 years without victimizing anyone. I can't imagine how limited your EVE experience has been with the limitation you set on yourself and everyone around you. What limitation is that? I'm not the one crying to CCP because I'm so adverse to player interaction, that I can't bring it upon myself to get some friends or hire some guys to help me achieve my goals and laugh at my enemies when I succeed. That is enjoyable gameplay, you're missing out. ... Quote:You should fear them, the ones you feel contempt for, but you seem to be to busy insulting them to realise they hold the key to everything you have attained, and from sounds of it, ever will attain. Fear them? Why? What are they going to do?
The more you post, Princess Achaja, the more desperate you look.
And, you're just keeping this thread at the top of the forums.
|
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 10:42:00 -
[319] - Quote
I have this kind of thing where I like to destroy people's arguments and see what kind of reaction I get from them.
Usually, people respond with immature coping mechanisms.
The 'I'm too important to waste time on the forums' coping mechanism - When you win an argument and the other person ignores your post and abandons the thread. This method is popular with people who don;t want to admit they are wrong, while giving the impression their lives are far too interesting to waste time arguing on forums.
The 'I know I've lost but I'm taking you down with me' coping mechanism - When someone loses an argument and knows they've lost but decides to sling as much mud at you as possible as a way to soften their own humiliation by trying to bring you down to their level.
The 'I refuse to admit I've lost so I'm going to stubbornly continue my argument' coping mechanism - This is when someone loses an argument, knows they've lost, but refuses to believe it. They will continue to argue vehemently, search for any scrap of bad evidence that will support their argument and resort to any available tactic that allows them to convince themselves they haven't lost yet. This person will usually argue until everyone gets bored and then they can tell themselves they won, but they're only lying to themselves.
The last one is the one I like best, which is just when someone acts in a civil manner, admits when they are wrong or apologises for their own lack of understanding and they lose the argument gracefully. They keep their dignity intact and earn the respect of those they are arguing with.
Right now, I'm guessing you're going to be the 'I refuse to admit I've lost so I'm going to stubbornly continue my argument' guy.
Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
142
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 10:44:00 -
[320] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:I have this kind of thing where I like to destroy people's arguments and see what kind of reaction I get from them.
Usually, people respond with immature coping mechanisms.
The 'I'm too important to waste time on the forums' coping mechanism - When you win an argument and the other person ignores your post and abandons the thread. This method is popular with people who don;t want to admit they are wrong, while giving the impression their lives are far too interesting to waste time arguing on forums.
The 'I know I've lost but I'm taking you down with me' coping mechanism - When someone loses an argument and knows they've lost but decides to sling as much mud at you as possible as a way to soften their own humiliation by trying to bring you down to their level.
The 'I refuse to admit I've lost so I'm going to stubbornly continue my argument' coping mechanism - This is when someone loses an argument, knows they've lost, but refuses to believe it. They will continue to argue vehemently, search for any scrap of bad evidence that will support their argument and resort to any available tactic that allows them to convince themselves they haven't lost yet. This person will usually argue until everyone gets bored and then they can tell themselves they won, but they're only lying to themselves.
The last one is the one I like best, which is just when someone acts in a civil manner, admits when they are wrong or apologises for their own lack of understanding and they lose the argument gracefully. They keep their dignity intact and earn the respect of those they are arguing with.
Right now, I'm guessing you're going to be the 'I refuse to admit I've lost so I'm going to stubbornly continue my argument' guy.
You are really very funny. |
|
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2519
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 10:48:00 -
[321] - Quote
Yeah that was just a reply to your comment about keeping your thread bumped. I thought it would be nice to explain to you why I don't care about that. Oh god. |
Archibald Thistlewaite III
387
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 11:43:00 -
[322] - Quote
You seem to be basing the rationale behind your idea on the fact the Missioner owns the space and anyone who enters is trespassing and therefore should be suspect.
This is wrong.
The space you run the mission in is always there. That mission you are just about to accept? The space it takes place in is already there. The owner of that space is the NPC who owns the system.
What is spawned for the player are the mission structures, acceleration gates and npc rats. So if you wish to claim ownership that is what you 'own'.
Now before you claim 'ownership' of the acceleration gates and say anyone who uses it without my permission (being in fleet with me) should go suspect for using 'my' acceleration gate, please be aware that the acceleration gates for hisec annoms are only spawned the first time someone warps to them. So if you own the mission acceleration gates, then I own all annom acceleration gates I was the first to warp to.
Anyone one who warps there afterward would go suspect for using 'my' acceleration gate.
I also believe wormholes don't spawn until someone firsts warps to them? If that is true then all users of wormhole should also go suspect if they aren't the owners.
See how silly it would get. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
144
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 11:44:00 -
[323] - Quote
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:You seem to be basing the rationale behind your idea on the fact the Missioner owns the space and anyone who enters is trespassing and therefore should be suspect.
This is wrong.
The space you run the mission in is always there. That mission you are just about to accept? The space it takes place in is already there. The owner of that space is the NPC who owns the system.
Read the original post all the proofs are there. |
Archibald Thistlewaite III
387
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 11:45:00 -
[324] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:You seem to be basing the rationale behind your idea on the fact the Missioner owns the space and anyone who enters is trespassing and therefore should be suspect.
This is wrong.
The space you run the mission in is always there. That mission you are just about to accept? The space it takes place in is already there. The owner of that space is the NPC who owns the system.
Read the original post all the proofs are there.
I have and you are wrong.
The mission space is not created. The mission items are. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
144
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 11:46:00 -
[325] - Quote
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:You seem to be basing the rationale behind your idea on the fact the Missioner owns the space and anyone who enters is trespassing and therefore should be suspect.
This is wrong.
The space you run the mission in is always there. That mission you are just about to accept? The space it takes place in is already there. The owner of that space is the NPC who owns the system.
Read the original post all the proofs are there. I have and you are wrong.
Many others disagree with you but thanks for your opinion. |
Archibald Thistlewaite III
387
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 11:52:00 -
[326] - Quote
That would be the first time anyone has explained it to you like that. So only you disagree with me.
When you make a bookmark whilst running a mission and then finish the mission you can return to the space and see that all the mission structures have despawned. Yet the space the mission took place in is still there.
Your whole presumption of 'ownership' is flawed. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
144
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 11:55:00 -
[327] - Quote
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Your whole presumption of 'ownership' is flawed.
Yeah, thanks for your opinion. But, you're wrong as Diachi Yamato helps to prove.
This has already been discussed and proven.
If you have any new counters to the proofs listed in the original post, feel free to post them. |
Archibald Thistlewaite III
387
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 11:55:00 -
[328] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:Here's one proof: Abdul 'aleem wrote:Daichi Yamato wrote:
if anything makes a mission belong to the mission acceptor its the fact that no matter who kills the NPC's the wrecks belong to the mission acceptor and his fleet. THAT god awful mechanic is the strongest argument that mission space is owned.
Thanks for helping prove my point that the missioner owns the mission pocket. Thanks again Daichi Yamato (known ganker/griefer/"pirate" and/or thief)!
Yes, NPC's are owned and if someone steals from a wreck they go suspect.
Whats that got to do with the space the mission is run in. It exists before the rat was spawned for you and it exists after the rat has died and been salvaged and looted.
|
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
144
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 11:57:00 -
[329] - Quote
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:Here's one proof: Abdul 'aleem wrote:Daichi Yamato wrote:
if anything makes a mission belong to the mission acceptor its the fact that no matter who kills the NPC's the wrecks belong to the mission acceptor and his fleet. THAT god awful mechanic is the strongest argument that mission space is owned.
Thanks for helping prove my point that the missioner owns the mission pocket. Thanks again Daichi Yamato (known ganker/griefer/"pirate" and/or thief)! Yes, NPC's are owned and if someone steals from a wreck they go suspect. Whats that got to do with the space the mission is run in. It exists before the rat was spawned for you and it exists after the rat has died and been salvaged and looted.
If you cannot understand what has already been posted, I don't think that you ever will. |
Archibald Thistlewaite III
387
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 11:57:00 -
[330] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Your whole presumption of 'ownership' is flawed.
Yeah, thanks for your opinion. But, you're wrong as Diachi Yamato helps to prove. This has already been discussed and proven. If you have any new counters to the proofs listed in the original post, feel free to post them.
If you read the whole post, you'll see I've just disproved it.
You are wrong. Sorry you don't like that.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |