Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Mag's
the united SCUM.
16705
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 15:57:00 -
[481] - Quote
Cathy Mikakka wrote:I am not angry, but I kinda hate when people do not see things my way :D sorry about that.. The only way that matters is CCPs and their GMs on this subject and they have ruled.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Llyona
sleep Deprivation INC. LLC Brothers of Tangra
44
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 16:03:00 -
[482] - Quote
Cassie Helio wrote:
No it doesn't work that way, we've tried it (My friends and I). The issue isn't speed it's alignment. The freighter takes about 45 seconds to align and so the bumper (usually a Machariel) can bump you again before you can get into alignment. This is also why the webs do not work after it has bumped the first time.
Man, these must be some bad ass bumpers if they can not only get to your freighter, but also bump it, in the 3 seconds it takes to lock and web a freighter.
That is, unless you're a scrub and single webbing. Then that would explain why you think anything can be done to a freighter before he's webbed off field. EVE is an illness, for which there is no cure. |
Cathy Mikakka
Schroedingers Fluffy Kitty Asylum Ravens Misfits
3
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 16:05:00 -
[483] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Cathy Mikakka wrote:I am not angry, but I kinda hate when people do not see things my way :D sorry about that.. The only way that matters is CCPs and their GMs on this subject and they have ruled. That link you said does not have anything from Eve devs in it on this, has a GM ruling on a case of someone being bumped for 60 minutes. Those posts are removed from these forums, for obvious reasons.
I have read those. Those could be all lies, but I am inclined to believe them. But that still leaves you with https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority. And moreso, what is not exploit now can become one if sufficient number of people dislike the mechanics and only few people like them.... There are 26 pages of people arguing about this very thing, so CCP can change their mind quite easily...
Kenrailae: What if someone is in NPC corp? AFAIK Red Frog haulers are not in RF, dunno if they can be in other corps, but still, not every corp has people who can do PVP/logistics etc. |
Kenrailae
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
208
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 16:11:00 -
[484] - Quote
Cathy Mikakka wrote:Mag's wrote:Cathy Mikakka wrote:I am not angry, but I kinda hate when people do not see things my way :D sorry about that.. The only way that matters is CCPs and their GMs on this subject and they have ruled. That link you said does not have anything from Eve devs in it on this, has a GM ruling on a case of someone being bumped for 60 minutes. Those posts are removed from these forums, for obvious reasons. I have read those. Those could be all lies, but I am inclined to believe them. But that still leaves you with https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority. And moreso, what is not exploit now can become one if sufficient number of people dislike the mechanics and only few people like them.... There are 26 pages of people arguing about this very thing, so CCP can change their mind quite easily... Kenrailae: What if someone is in NPC corp? AFAIK Red Frog haulers are not in RF, dunno if they can be in other corps, but still, not every corp has people who can do PVP/logistics etc.
Red Frog tends to operate within the 'not gankeable' limits in terms of cost and procedure. People choose to be in NPC corps. That is their choice.
The Law is a point of View |
Cathy Mikakka
Schroedingers Fluffy Kitty Asylum Ravens Misfits
3
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 16:12:00 -
[485] - Quote
Kenrailae wrote:Cathy Mikakka wrote:Mag's wrote:Cathy Mikakka wrote:I am not angry, but I kinda hate when people do not see things my way :D sorry about that.. The only way that matters is CCPs and their GMs on this subject and they have ruled. That link you said does not have anything from Eve devs in it on this, has a GM ruling on a case of someone being bumped for 60 minutes. Those posts are removed from these forums, for obvious reasons. I have read those. Those could be all lies, but I am inclined to believe them. But that still leaves you with https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority. And moreso, what is not exploit now can become one if sufficient number of people dislike the mechanics and only few people like them.... There are 26 pages of people arguing about this very thing, so CCP can change their mind quite easily... Kenrailae: What if someone is in NPC corp? AFAIK Red Frog haulers are not in RF, dunno if they can be in other corps, but still, not every corp has people who can do PVP/logistics etc. Red Frog tends to operate within the 'not gankeable' limits in terms of cost and procedure. People choose to be in NPC corps. That is their choice.
But being in non gankable limits (1b) still can result in the gank for the lulz OR just bumping for the lulz (for couple of hours... why not?). |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1066
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 16:13:00 -
[486] - Quote
Cathy Mikakka wrote:
Kenrailae: What if someone is in NPC corp? AFAIK Red Frog haulers are not in RF, dunno if they can be in other corps, but still, not every corp has people who can do PVP/logistics etc.
well u dnt have to be in corp to provide logi. but this is why it is an advantage to know ppl who can do such things. With T1 logi cruisers, providing logi is damn easy to skill for, and so is T1 e-war.
those who reach out to such ppl or train it for themselves have an advantage over those who refuse to reach out to other players or otherwise adapt. and that is why i love eve. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |
Kenrailae
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
209
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 16:24:00 -
[487] - Quote
Cathy Mikakka wrote:Kenrailae wrote:Cathy Mikakka wrote:Mag's wrote:Cathy Mikakka wrote:I am not angry, but I kinda hate when people do not see things my way :D sorry about that.. The only way that matters is CCPs and their GMs on this subject and they have ruled. That link you said does not have anything from Eve devs in it on this, has a GM ruling on a case of someone being bumped for 60 minutes. Those posts are removed from these forums, for obvious reasons. I have read those. Those could be all lies, but I am inclined to believe them. But that still leaves you with https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority. And moreso, what is not exploit now can become one if sufficient number of people dislike the mechanics and only few people like them.... There are 26 pages of people arguing about this very thing, so CCP can change their mind quite easily... Kenrailae: What if someone is in NPC corp? AFAIK Red Frog haulers are not in RF, dunno if they can be in other corps, but still, not every corp has people who can do PVP/logistics etc. Red Frog tends to operate within the 'not gankeable' limits in terms of cost and procedure. People choose to be in NPC corps. That is their choice. But being in non gankable limits (1b) still can result in the gank for the lulz OR just bumping for the lulz (for couple of hours... why not?).
Goes right into that 'Yep, crap is still gonna happen from time to time category.' There should never be a 100% outcome in Eve. I could log in today fleet today and we could whelp a 50B isk + fleet. Yup.... crap happens. It'd suck... but crap still happens. The Law is a point of View |
Mag's
the united SCUM.
16705
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 16:31:00 -
[488] - Quote
Cathy Mikakka wrote:I have read those. Those could be all lies, but I am inclined to believe them. But that still leaves you with https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority. And moreso, what is not exploit now can become one if sufficient number of people dislike the mechanics and only few people like them.... There are 26 pages of people arguing about this very thing, so CCP can change their mind quite easily... Your fallacy argument would hold some water, if it wasn't for the fact that it's CCP ruling on their own game.
You'll see that thread I linked ran on for many more pages than this and it ended the same way.
You should also note that they did not instantly rule on this, they discussed it first. The first thread on the subject by a Dev, was started on November 28th 2012. Even then, the rule was it was not an exploit. But CCP Falcon said "In this thread I will be gathering questions, comments, feedback and opinions regarding bumping."
They finally ruled at the end of January 2013 and made their stance known.
So yes, I do appeal to authority. I appeal to the only authority that matters in this regard. CCP. That's not fallacy, but fact.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Llyona
sleep Deprivation INC. LLC Brothers of Tangra
44
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 16:54:00 -
[489] - Quote
Cathy Mikakka wrote:[quote=Mag's] I have read those. Those could be all lies, but I am inclined to believe them. But that still leaves you with https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority. And moreso, what is not exploit now can become one if sufficient number of people dislike the mechanics and only few people like them.... There are 26 pages of people arguing about this very thing, so CCP can change their mind quite easily... Kenrailae: What if someone is in NPC corp? AFAIK Red Frog haulers are not in RF, dunno if they can be in other corps, but still, not every corp has people who can do PVP/logistics etc. The very definition of "exploit" requires it to be deemed so by the developers of the game, in that they must make it known that the mechanics were utilized in a way they had not intended. As such, it is not fallacious to state that developers are the sole authority on what is or is not an exploit. EVE is an illness, for which there is no cure. |
Jta Grl
2 Pingeons Incorporated
11
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 02:15:00 -
[490] - Quote
I'd like to add my 2 cents to the discussion. No member of CCP ever said that bumping as an agressive maneuver is allowed under any circumstances. What they said was that miner bumping was not an exploit. And they said under the context of a controversy provoked by a game institution dedicated to do push afk miners away from their juice: http://www.minerbumping.com/p/the-code.html Another completly different kind of bumping got an exploit notification from CCP: http://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/eve-online-news/exploit-notification-forcefield-access/ An then there's the freighter bumping that is completly different from these two and and didn't got an official statement yet. So stop linking decontextualized declarations from devs. |
|
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2764
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 03:55:00 -
[491] - Quote
Jta Grl wrote:No member of CCP ever said that bumping as an agressive maneuver is allowed under any circumstances. What they said was that miner bumping was not an exploit. So it's allowed... and it's aggressive
Oh god. |
Paul Tsukaya
Tsukaya Light Industries
70
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 04:30:00 -
[492] - Quote
I kinda agree with this. Bump tackling really circumvents the crimewatch system.
In lowsec/nullsec/wspace harassing another person means risking your ship (except for some niche cases which are bullshit like permabubbling an undock with a dictor).
In highsec harassing another person is supposed to mean the automatic loss of your ship. However bumping allows you to harass people without having to risk anything.
I think hostile actions should always involve risking something. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2764
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 04:34:00 -
[493] - Quote
Quote:In highsec harassing another person is supposed to mean the automatic loss of your ship. No it isn't.
Oh god. |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
938
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 05:20:00 -
[494] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Quote:In highsec harassing another person is supposed to mean the automatic loss of your ship. No it isn't. Yes it should. (Constructive comment of the year)
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
2764
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 06:20:00 -
[495] - Quote
In your opinion, which isn't shared by CCP. Oh god. |
Cathy Mikakka
Schroedingers Fluffy Kitty Asylum Ravens Misfits
3
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 06:22:00 -
[496] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Quote:In highsec harassing another person is supposed to mean the automatic loss of your ship. No it isn't. This forum needs a dislike button. |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
940
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 06:26:00 -
[497] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:In your opinion, which isn't shared by CCP. A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill
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
2764
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 06:29:00 -
[498] - Quote
Cathy Mikakka wrote:Riot Girl wrote:Quote:In highsec harassing another person is supposed to mean the automatic loss of your ship. No it isn't. This forum needs a dislike button. Would that satisfy your frustration at not being able to formulate a comprehensive argument? There are more meaningful ways to deal with that, like actually doing some research on the subject you are arguing about.
Goldiiee wrote:A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill So which one is the fanatic? Oh god. |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
940
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 06:42:00 -
[499] - Quote
Paul Tsukaya wrote:I kinda agree with this. Bump tackling really circumvents the crimewatch system.
In lowsec/nullsec/wspace harassing another person means risking your ship (except for some niche cases which are bullshit like permabubbling an undock with a dictor).
In highsec harassing another person is supposed to mean the automatic loss of your ship. However bumping allows you to harass people without having to risk anything.
I think hostile actions should always involve risking or losing something.
Riot Girl wrote:No it isn't. So you agree with statement A, B, but find fault in the logic of 'If A is true' and 'B is true' then 'C should be true'
Or do you disagree that the current mechanic of 'Concord relieves you of your ship' for criminal acts is true. Bumping to prevent a ship from going into warp and escaping is a workaround for the aggression mechanic in High sec, no suspect flag, no criminal flag but the same effect as a Warp scram, and should be classified as an act of aggression, or at least suspect.
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
2764
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 06:50:00 -
[500] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:So you agree with statement A, B, but find fault in the logic of 'If A is true' and 'B is true' then 'C should be true' Maybe if you marked statements A, B and C, I'd know what you are talking about.
Quote:Do you disagree that the current mechanic of 'Concord relieves you of your ship' for criminal acts is true. Nope.
Quote:Bumping to prevent a ship from going into warp and escaping is a workaround for the aggression mechanic in High sec Yep, a workaround which doesn't break the rules and doesn't cause any game-breaking complications. It's a creative use of game tools.
Quote:the same effect as a Warp scram Nope. Oh god. |
|
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
941
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 07:01:00 -
[501] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Yep, a workaround which doesn't break the rules and doesn't cause any game-breaking complications. It's a creative use of game tools.
That's where we differ, as most workarounds I have seen and used are eventually classified as Exploits, and since this workaround is allowing someone to hit an 'I WIN' button while bypassing standard High Sec aggression mechanics and profiting from it ... Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, sounds like a duck... Exploit.
I do agree that it is not a 'Current' exploit but it sure seems like it needs to be visited by more official minds than a JAFS, (Just Another F*****g Subscriber).
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
2764
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 07:14:00 -
[502] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:most workarounds I have seen and used are eventually classified as Exploits Only the ones which break the game.
Quote:since this workaround is allowing someone to hit an 'I WIN' button while bypassing standard High Sec aggression mechanics and profiting from it ... Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, sounds like a duck... Exploit. Except bumping does none of those things.
Oh god. |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
941
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 07:39:00 -
[503] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Goldiiee wrote:most workarounds I have seen and used are eventually classified as Exploits Only the ones which break the game. Quote:since this workaround is allowing someone to hit an 'I WIN' button while bypassing standard High Sec aggression mechanics and profiting from it ... Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, sounds like a duck... Exploit. Except bumping does none of those things. Hence my quote from Sir Winston Churchill, It doesn't matter how many times the argument is given and how many ways it is described you still refuse to see the valid points given by your opposition.
If someone is forcibly stopping you from leaving they are essentially aggressing you. And no matter how many times you post 'No it isn't' with your fingers in your ears screaming 'nananananana' the statement is still true.
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
2765
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 08:41:00 -
[504] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:Hence my quote from Sir Winston Churchill, It doesn't matter how many times the argument is given and how many ways it is described you still refuse to see the valid points given by your opposition. I feel it's more appropriately applied to yourself.
Quote:If someone is forcibly stopping you from leaving they are essentially aggressing you. No one is stopping you from leaving, they're just preventing you from travelling in the direction you want to go in. Take a detour.
Oh god. |
DSpite Culhach
Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance
272
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 08:49:00 -
[505] - Quote
WARNING: Purely as a food for thought experiment - its a wall of text. I put it in F&ID : Sorry, I was a bit bored, and just dumped brain to paper.
A different take on bumping, deep space, and CONCORD
If you do read it and you're a freighter pilot, what problem would you see in such a system? What about if you like ganking stuff? Also, do you think such a system could be exploited either way in other cases?
I suddenly woke up thinking I had a nightmare, then remembered I can't even fly Amarr Battleships. I add bits to this when I'm bored https://www.dropbox.com/s/foijsawsqolarom/EVE_Online.html |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
941
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 09:53:00 -
[506] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Goldiiee wrote:Hence my quote from Sir Winston Churchill, It doesn't matter how many times the argument is given and how many ways it is described you still refuse to see the valid points given by your opposition. I feel it's more appropriately applied to yourself. Quote:If someone is forcibly stopping you from leaving they are essentially aggressing you. No one is stopping you from leaving, they're just preventing you from travelling in the direction you want to go in. Take a detour. So now you are down to troll responses, adding nothing to the discussion. This is why we can't have nice things.
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. |
Paul Tsukaya
Tsukaya Light Industries
71
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 10:59:00 -
[507] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Quote:In highsec harassing another person is supposed to mean the automatic loss of your ship. No it isn't. Here's my point. Tackling a mission running battleship in highsec involves less risk than tackling a mission running battleship in lowsec.
I think that's nonsensical. |
Kenrailae
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
213
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 11:45:00 -
[508] - Quote
Paul Tsukaya wrote:Riot Girl wrote:Quote:In highsec harassing another person is supposed to mean the automatic loss of your ship. No it isn't. Here's my point. Tackling a mission running battleship in highsec involves less risk than tackling a mission running battleship in lowsec. I think that's nonsensical.
I thought we closed this debate?
So because someone says 'we're taking things out of context' suddenly it's open season again?
You're grossly assuming with this statement here alone.
Also assuming CCP have not considered freighter ganking with their bumping statement. Bumping is still a valid strategy. Against what it doesn't matter, Supers, Miners, Freighters, battleships, bumping targets off gate or station, it's a valid tactic. Just because You're in a Freighter doesn't make it a special case.
Further, Harassing someone in high sec does NOT mean the automatic loss of your ship. Bump them, war dec the, hire mercs on them, hang around in all their missions, steal their loot, shoot their tractor units... all of these are valid forms of 'harassment' that are allowed in high sec and do not automatically warrant ship loss. The only time you 'automatically lose your ship' is when you go criminal.
Targeted, extended harassment is something else entirely. I once had a complete idiot of a player get kicked out of my alt's old corporation. He then spent the next two months or so off and on war deccing the corporation. This guy would then take a cerberus and siege the modules on one of our POS's from outside their range for HOURS a night. We'd log in next day and rep them back. He further failed twice to gank my alt's barge. After bout a month and half, I petitioned CCP about whether this was harassment or not and their ruling was no, it was acceptable game play. That it might suck, but he's not breaking rules. You feel special cause someone bothers you for a couple hours? Pffft. Dock up, contract me your stuff, then log off and uninstall.
Goldiiee, you're "So now you are down to troll responses, adding nothing to the discussion. This is why we can't have nice things." Is far more a troll 'I have nothing valid left to stay' response than the sensible response provided by Riot of 'take a Detour.' If YOU can't contribute to the conversation, go back to your room and let the adults talk. YOU are the one refusing to listen, with not only your fingers but the entirety of your arms shoved in your ears screaming 'nananananana' at the top of your lungs. Further, Bumping has been around FOREVER. CCP have had time to class it as an exploit if they chose to(as they did *To Ewarp tackling* only days after a Low Sec Pirate corp ganked a titan by catching it before it could initiate it's log in Ewarp) but have chosen not to.... Why, you might ask?
Because it's NOT an exploit.
*Inserting explanatory statement* The Law is a point of View |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
941
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 12:27:00 -
[509] - Quote
You do know we are discussing High Sec mechanics right?
Further, Harassing someone in high sec does NOT mean the automatic loss of your ship. Bump them, war dec the, hire mercs on them, hang around in all their missions, steal their loot, shoot their tractor units... all of these are valid forms of 'harassment' that are allowed in high sec and do not automatically warrant ship loss. The only time you 'automatically lose your ship' is when you go criminal.
All of these things require the harasser to go suspect or have made a War dec and paid the appropriate fees or some other means of agreeing to be shot at for their actions, nothing about Bumping Freighters is in line with this paragraph so we can delete it and move on.
'take a Detour.'
Really? We all play this game, or at least I am assuming we do. Once the Freighter is bumped in any direction without a 'warp to' directly in line of travel he will not be able to warp till his direction of travel is corrected. Any attempt to say the pilot is in control and just needs to pick a different destination (Detour) is a troll response or just ignorant.
Bumping has been around FOREVER. CCP have had time to class it as an exploit if they chose to(as they did *To Ewarp tackling* only days after a Low Sec Pirate corp ganked a titan by catching it before it could initiate it's log in Ewarp) but have chosen not to.... Why, you might ask?
Because it's NOT an exploit.
Yep, It was not an exploit till someone pointed out to CCP that there was no way to avoid this and possibly save their ship after the bumping starts, Hmmm sounds familiar. The added benefit of this argument is they made it an Exploit in Low/Nul sec; So in a sector of space where you can shoot the crap out of anyone you like for whatever reason feels good at the time they saw fit to make a change. Now consider High Sec where you don't get that 'kill them with impunity' privilege (Not that you could from a Freighter anyways) and it looks like a fair case for a discussion about 'Exploit'.
If this conversation disturbs you that much, log into the game, Contract your stuff to the guy in the top of the local list, then log off and uninstall EVE, then Windows.
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. |
Kenrailae
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
213
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 12:51:00 -
[510] - Quote
Goldiiee... I suggest First grade again bro... your reading ability is on par with Pre-K. Further, I suggest Eve uni so you can learn some basic Eve. You are choosing to 'delete' everything that you can't be assed to read or think about, so of course you can't learn. You are the poster child for unteachable Carebear.
You go ahead and shoot the proteus in your mission who's taking your can. He'll point you, his logi will warp in, stay out of your range and he'll pick you apart.
You don't need to go suspect or agree to be shot to Hire mercs. And half the time people are HOPING you shoot them so they can point you and kill you.
I'm also really tired of having to explain that once your bumped isn't the time to start crying 'exploit.' If you've allowed yourself to get there cause you can't take the basic precautions listed over and over in this thread, that is your fault, not CCP's, not anyone elses. Yours. Man up and accept responsibility for your lack of preparation or care. Once you've allowed yourself to be bumped because you can't be bothered to take care of your crap is WAY past the point of being able to cry foul. That's just careless and asking to be ganked.
You are also woefully uninformed, ignorant, and foolish. Thread after thread after thread after thread after thread after hundreds, maybe even thousands of freighters lost to being careless and getting bumped. CCP is still okay with this. 1 Titan was destroyed and CCP ruled. Why do you think the opinion will change? What makes you think anything is different? Bumping is an acceptable and allowed mechanic. You assume because Tackling a Titan Ewarping in from Log in was called an Exploit that it is REMOTELY the same case as careless Freighter pilots? Lol. In the case of the Titan, he did everything correctly. He had no timers, did nothing to endanger himself, as far as a Titan is concerned, he stayed Docked, the only time in Eve you should be 100% safe. But Even though you log off safely, the game still spawns you in space, and forces you to warp back to your tower. There is nothing a player can do to avoid this if they own a super, as supers cannot dock. Your freighter has a huge list of things it can do to avoid being bumped in the first place, and an even larger one for how to deal with a bumper and gank. You just fail to acknowledge it, and what's worse, fail to adapt. This is where every 'Halp I've been bumped!' thread will fail. You fail to adapt, you fail to learn, and you fail to take precaution. Uninstall. 'Nuff Said.
Uninstall.
What bothers me is how ignorant and unteachable people like you are. Eve is a complex game, its learning curve harsh. MOST people learn though. Then there are special snow flakes like you..... Go back to WoW. I hear you'll fit right in. Eve is not the game for you.
The Law is a point of View |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |