| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
David Rivard
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
1
   |
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:22:00 -
[31] - Quote
ACE McFACE wrote:Pvlogiwhodidntknowwhatwashappening is not PvP
Pvrandommackgank is not PvP
Therefore, there are no PvP nerfs
Just to clarifiy, I am not some crying miner who just lost his mack
If you're undocked, you're PVPing. Anyone who thinks otherwise is playing the wrong game. |
Terminal Insanity
Convex Enterprises
The Silent One's
98
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:24:00 -
[32] - Quote
Jack All'Trade wrote:Terminal Insanity wrote:boo hoo stop bitching already and post your fail-gank loss mail so we can laugh at you.
As stated above, i didnt lose one. All the recent pvp-related nerfs or 'changes' have caused me to be paranoid, and i actually double checked this before repping my alt with my scimitar |
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
71
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:36:00 -
[33] - Quote
Terminal Insanity wrote:
Aggression timers are from stealing jetcans, or shooting a can thief. THESE ARE NOT CRIMINAL TIMERS.
YOU DON'T NEED TO SHOUT.
*Ahem*
Nor do I, for that matter.
As I stated, the GCC is linked to agressive action. I was incorrect about how a GCC is applied, but it is still applied if someone takes aggressive actions in CONCORD-controlled space.
It would be illogical to apply the new mechanics to just a GCC -- it would be two different rules for what is essentially one mechanic.
Now, I'm going to walk away from this discussion, and I hope I can go without getting dragged back into another pointless semantic argument. |
Feligast
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
365
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:41:00 -
[34] - Quote
Terminal Insanity wrote:I didnt even want to make this thread this serious, but holy ****. Ignoring the fact i'm an evil monster rapist murderer for a moment, Did CCP not slip up a little here and not clearly state the change?
So stipulated. Now the better question: so what?
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
289
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:51:00 -
[35] - Quote
The change pops up a warning if you are repping someone and they get a criminal flag while you are repping them, and your reps deactivate.
That is the only change.
To kill the enemy and break their toys!
It's not so much a mission statement,-áit's more like a family motto. |
Rico Minali
Sons Of 0din
Fatal Ascension
151
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:57:00 -
[36] - Quote
It isnt a nerf if it is a change to make a mechanic make more sense. No one is stopping a neut from RRing you, it just means that now there is real risk in doing so. Being hisec gankers you liek teher to be more risk yes? You should be happy, there is now more risk for everyone. |
Mistress Lilu
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 23:02:00 -
[37] - Quote
I do not think this messes with pvp, sorry to burst your bubble.
I think you are one of those players that engages a player than brings out your other toon with a carrier to rep. I remember you doing this in GW, and when a fleet would come you would run like a little boy..Now rep with your carrier, I hope you get it blown up.Looser. |
Vigdis Thorisdottir
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 00:45:00 -
[38] - Quote
This is a *good* change for PVP. Don't look at this as a nerf or any such thing.
This change results in more risk, and will likely result in more good fights.
Unless you're the risk-averse whiner type of pvper, who's idea of a "good fight" is to wardec a noob industrial corp and play docking games all day. |
ACE McFACE
Acetech Systems
85
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 09:30:00 -
[39] - Quote
ACE McFACE wrote:Pvlogiwhodidntknowwhatwashappening is not PvP
Pvrandommackgank is not PvP
Therefore, there are no PvP nerfs
Just to clarifiy, I am not some crying miner who just lost his mack
Idiots. Painfully predictable.
Why? Because I don't agree with you?
Real men wear goggles and a Navy shirt! |
Tian Garsk
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 09:38:00 -
[40] - Quote
Terminal Insanity wrote:AlleyKat wrote:erm...yes there was: Quote:
Game mechanics change to be applied during downtime on Thursday, November 10
A part of the next client update will feature a change to aggression mechanics in high security space.
To benefit the EVE community at large, a small change has been made to game mechanics regarding criminal flags and how they are inherited in high security space. If a pilot is remote repairing, or otherwise assisting, another pilot who commits a criminal act then the repair module will now disengage. In order to continue repairs the module will need to be restarted and a message will appear warning of the criminal flag and possible consequences.
Let me underline the important parts for you, and then let me change the notice to reflect the ACTUAL changes that occurred. You will see the difference then hopefully. WHAT IT CURRENTLY SAYS: Quote:
Game mechanics change to be applied during downtime on Thursday, November 10
A part of the next client update will feature a change to aggression mechanics in high security space.
To benefit the EVE community at large, a small change has been made to game mechanics regarding criminal flags and how they are inherited in high security space. If a pilot is remote repairing, or otherwise assisting, another pilot who commits a criminal act then the repair module will now disengage. In order to continue repairs the module will need to be restarted and a message will appear warning of the criminal flag and possible consequences.
This implys it only effects timers that would result in CONCORD actions being taken against your ship. WHAT IT SHOULD HAVE SAID: Quote:
Game mechanics change to be applied during downtime on Thursday, November 10
A part of the next client update will feature a change to aggression mechanics in high security space.
To benefit the EVE community at large, a major change has been made to game mechanics regarding aggression flags and how they are inherited in high security space. If a pilot is remote repairing, or otherwise assisting, another pilot who engages in an aggressive act then the repair module will now disengage. In order to continue repairs the module will need to be restarted and a message will appear warning of the aggression flag and possible consequences.
Note how these simple changes now accurately reflect the true rule changes.
Who gives a crap, they fixed a loophole that allowed moronic dicktards to help people lolwin at pvp with no fear of being attacked. Bloody good job. |
Poetic Stanziel
Arrakis Technology
296
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 09:44:00 -
[41] - Quote
proxwar wrote:A shoots B
C reps A
C has to stop repping,
C will be informed he'll be flagged if he reps A again
C reps A again, get flagged
If this happens in highsec, doesn't A get blown up by CONCORD some short while later?
I was under the impression that the incursion hilarity that prompted the change from CCP had no CONCORD involvement. I was curious how that could be, since all the incursion hilarity was happening in highsec.
You're allowed to freely shoot someone if they are in the same corporation/alliance, but not the same fleet, correct?
EVE Online: Incarna - New Coke
EVE Online: Winter Expansion - Coke Classic |
Donald MacRury
LankTech
Universal Paranoia Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 09:55:00 -
[42] - Quote
I could be wrong about this but I don't think the OP is talking about GCC agression. I believe he is refering to standard agression like rr'ing someone who is at war in Hi Sec, and if that is the case, that mechanic was changed a while ago. |
Mart Allini
Lead Farmers
Kill It With Fire
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 10:02:00 -
[43] - Quote
I'll grant the OP that the change message could have been worded clearer as I'm still confused as to what exactly the change is.
To help clarify, here's my understand of the current status and what it will be after the change. To do that, first lets clarify what timers there are:
- GCC, 15 minute timer you get from using agressive modules on someone in HS and LS, leading to Concord spawns in HS
- theft agression timer, 15 minute timer you get from taking from someone else's can, allowing them and their corp to shoot you
- general aggression timer, 1 minute timer for using agressive modules anywhere, preventing you from jumping through stargates and docking.
Currently:
- repping someone with a GCC in HS is not possible
- repping someone with a theft agression timer gives you that timer without any warning
- repping someone with a general agression timer has no effect on you.
After the change:
- No change for GCC
- Trying to rep someone with a theft agression timer will give you a popup warning and if someone acquires such a timer while you're repping them, your reppers will shut off
- No change on general aggression timers
Have I misunderstood the change? If I haven't, then in CCPs defense, a large part of the confusion is that we seem to use the same term "agression timer" for two completely different timers. Maybe them calling a criminal timer was a poor attempt at distinguishing the timer |
March rabbit
Ganse
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 10:23:00 -
[44] - Quote
let's speak about situation.
A and B are in WAR
C is neutral ans remote repping B
Will A have rights to blow C after fight started and C committed repairing? |
Mart Allini
Lead Farmers
Kill It With Fire
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 10:27:00 -
[45] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:let's speak about situation.
A and B are in WAR
C is neutral ans remote repping B
Will A have rights to blow C after fight started and C committed repairing?
Yes, and they always have
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |