| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 157 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 25 post(s) |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space
The ROC
8911
   |
Posted - 2014.08.19 07:39:00 -
[3361] - Quote
Gavin Dax wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:No, it was always the shut up. If you quite literally don't know what you're talking about, it's best to just not talk at all. Nexus Day wrote:
And again...no. There is already a cause-effect relationship from bumping. That is why the ship moves when bumped. That is the physics part which would not have to change. You would just add a damage component. This game has a damage component and it could be adapted to bumping. That does not require an entire recoding of the game as we already have collision effects (projectile weapons hitting other ships).
If you aren't aware that that's not how it works, you shouldn't speak at all. Do you actually know what a physics engine is? What it does, what it's supposed to do? Collision detection is a major part of any physics engine...
Duh. Your point?
Or are you saying that they can wave the magic wand of computer code at it, and shoehorn a damage component in there, too?
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Gavin Dax
Repercussus
RAZOR Alliance
76
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 07:45:00 -
[3362] - Quote
The problem with bump damage is that it's too easy to accidentally bump ships right now - you would have to make it so that every bump is intentional for it to work (although that would make EVE better IMO, it would be a far off change).
Bumping mechanics right now though are silly - not just because of realism but also because of game/ship balance. Larger ships are at too much of a disadvantage in EVE right now IMO anyway, And yeah, HS aggression mechanics are pretty broken wrt. bumps and pretty much everything else. |
Gavin Dax
Repercussus
RAZOR Alliance
76
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 07:46:00 -
[3363] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Or are you saying that they can wave the magic wand of computer code at it, and shoehorn a damage component in there, too?
If the code is good not ********, it should be fairly easy to do, yes. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space
The ROC
8911
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 07:55:00 -
[3364] - Quote
Gavin Dax wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Or are you saying that they can wave the magic wand of computer code at it, and shoehorn a damage component in there, too?
If the code is good not ********, it should be fairly easy to do, yes.
It's long since been established that EVE's code is not only pretty well pants, but also largely undocumented.
Nevermind that, even if it weren't functionally impossible, it's also a hilariously bad idea.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
332
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 08:02:00 -
[3365] - Quote
While we're modifying the bumping mechanics, why don't we also add a 'Ram & Board' button as well?
That way my cargo of light marines can board and extract the precious in the hold of whatever vessel is locked into place in this fashion. It could even be another handy use for the Anchoring skill.
Or we could just leave the mechanic alone and adapt to it, just sayin.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space
The ROC
8914
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 08:10:00 -
[3366] - Quote
Omar Alharazaad wrote:While we're modifying the bumping mechanics, why don't we also add a 'Ram & Board' button as well?
That way my cargo of light marines can board and extract the precious in the hold of whatever vessel is locked into place in this fashion. It could even be another handy use for the Anchoring skill.
Or we could just leave the mechanic alone and adapt to it, just sayin.
They need to bring back Battlefleet Gothic.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4025
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 08:14:00 -
[3367] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:admiral root wrote:NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:I agree with everything you've said but it seems better to me if they make it so smaller vessels cannot bump larger ones or do away with bumping entirely. Its just ridiculous that this "emergent gameplay" has been accepted by CCP as a means to prevent other players from warping without using warp disruptors and irrespective of warp core stabilizers. It looks ridiculous too, and is not fair gameplay, but CCP still apparently doesn't think its a problem enough to do anything about it. It just goes to show you how separated they are from the concept of fair gameplay. There are so many things like that that are only not considered a problem only because not a lot of people were doing it. There are counters to being bumped that have been posted many times on the forum. Ignore him. It's Fabulous Rod's latest troll alt.
Been meaning to mention, he's been sending me fan mail \o/.
It's vial (hilarious but vial) and so wide of the mark it's not even wrong.
=][= |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
12732
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 08:24:00 -
[3368] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Omar Alharazaad wrote:While we're modifying the bumping mechanics, why don't we also add a 'Ram & Board' button as well?
That way my cargo of light marines can board and extract the precious in the hold of whatever vessel is locked into place in this fashion. It could even be another handy use for the Anchoring skill.
Or we could just leave the mechanic alone and adapt to it, just sayin.
They need to bring back Battlefleet Gothic.
Still wondering why they havent based a game on that.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space
The ROC
8915
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 08:28:00 -
[3369] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Omar Alharazaad wrote:While we're modifying the bumping mechanics, why don't we also add a 'Ram & Board' button as well?
That way my cargo of light marines can board and extract the precious in the hold of whatever vessel is locked into place in this fashion. It could even be another handy use for the Anchoring skill.
Or we could just leave the mechanic alone and adapt to it, just sayin.
They need to bring back Battlefleet Gothic. Still wondering why they havent based a game on that.
Because GW only lets people use the 40k license for Company of Heroes clones, halfassed third person shooters, and ****ty mobile games.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4028
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 08:30:00 -
[3370] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Omar Alharazaad wrote:While we're modifying the bumping mechanics, why don't we also add a 'Ram & Board' button as well?
That way my cargo of light marines can board and extract the precious in the hold of whatever vessel is locked into place in this fashion. It could even be another handy use for the Anchoring skill.
Or we could just leave the mechanic alone and adapt to it, just sayin.
They need to bring back Battlefleet Gothic. Still wondering why they havent based a game on that.
Gw/citadel miniatures are notoriously difficult to work with about anything even vaguely relevant to one of there ip's, it's why there hasn't been a good 40k movie yet.
=][= |
|
|
Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
333
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 08:42:00 -
[3371] - Quote
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultramarines:_A_Warhammer_40,000_Movie
A fun watch.
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4029
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 08:57:00 -
[3372] - Quote
I said a good one Omar.
=][= |
Billy McCandless
The McCandless Clan
435
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 09:02:00 -
[3373] - Quote
bettlefeet go thick is riped orf frum Stair Treck Feet Bottles
yoo shewd plai feddyration cummandurr
its liek the sayme butt eezee to plai
i liek to plai ass cling on droen fleat
butt ramona plais as ther lie rans and they cheet
"Thread locked for being deemed a total loss." - ISD Ezwal |
Matius Udan
State War Academy
Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 09:07:00 -
[3374] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Gavin Dax wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:No, it was always the shut up. If you quite literally don't know what you're talking about, it's best to just not talk at all. Nexus Day wrote:
And again...no. There is already a cause-effect relationship from bumping. That is why the ship moves when bumped. That is the physics part which would not have to change. You would just add a damage component. This game has a damage component and it could be adapted to bumping. That does not require an entire recoding of the game as we already have collision effects (projectile weapons hitting other ships).
If you aren't aware that that's not how it works, you shouldn't speak at all. Do you actually know what a physics engine is? What it does, what it's supposed to do? Collision detection is a major part of any physics engine... Duh. Your point? Or are you saying that they can wave the magic wand of computer code at it, and shoehorn a damage component in there, too?
The code to add a damage component wouldn't be that difficult, its all the other bits that go with it, like how much? (I guess based on mass and speed) how the flag system responds (if at all - new ganking mechanic, split a freighter in half in a armour tanked frig while screaming "RAMMING SPEED!!!" and no one pays attention)
I think you should be able to attempt to do something a bit sciency - like match sheild frequency - so you the ships end up hull to hull, with the risk of speedy frigs getting smeared all over the side of a freighter or, if they are carefull, can try boarding.
That way both sides in the argument get a bit more involved in the bumping, freighters can try and ram their way out, adding an element of danger, and frigs, providing they slow down a bit, can take advantage and try to board.
Of course a freighter can hold more marines so it could backfire badly for the frig... |
Talas Dir
Super Happy Fun Corp
46
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 09:24:00 -
[3375] - Quote
Suicide ganking isn't a problem. For some people, violencing boats is just a way of saying hello. CODE is, after all, an alliance specialized in greeting people to make sure that they're actually there. They're just being friendly in their Catalysts and Taloses of which are the only two boats out of all existing ships in the entire expansive armory of steel-plated force in the world of Eve: Online that they are skilled in. But a victory's still a victory, and 2 is a very good number.
No, suicide ganking is not a problem. They're just saying hello. Killing is, of course, just a means of communication. |
Lady Areola Fappington
2147
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 09:30:00 -
[3376] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Omar Alharazaad wrote:While we're modifying the bumping mechanics, why don't we also add a 'Ram & Board' button as well?
That way my cargo of light marines can board and extract the precious in the hold of whatever vessel is locked into place in this fashion. It could even be another handy use for the Anchoring skill.
Or we could just leave the mechanic alone and adapt to it, just sayin.
They need to bring back Battlefleet Gothic.
Man, I would give ********* I no longer own for a good Battlefleet Gothic computer game.
Hell, I'd give em for a tabletop accurate version of 40K. I mean, I know it'll never happen coz OMG figs mean profit!, but damn that'd be cool.
I'd even play it if they did some BS like "Each unit is a chunk of DLC you must buy to use".
Kentucky Derby losers are not turned into Ikea meatballs.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev did not accidentally blow up vowels in his own name.
The chupacabra does not deliver presents on Cinco De Mayo.
Anytime minutes donGÇÖt let you call the future. |
Billy McCandless
The McCandless Clan
435
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 09:32:00 -
[3377] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Omar Alharazaad wrote:While we're modifying the bumping mechanics, why don't we also add a 'Ram & Board' button as well?
That way my cargo of light marines can board and extract the precious in the hold of whatever vessel is locked into place in this fashion. It could even be another handy use for the Anchoring skill.
Or we could just leave the mechanic alone and adapt to it, just sayin.
They need to bring back Battlefleet Gothic. Man, I would give ********* I no longer own for a good Battlefleet Gothic computer game. Hell, I'd give em for a tabletop accurate version of 40K. I mean, I know it'll never happen coz OMG figs mean profit!, but damn that'd be cool. I'd even play it if they did some BS like "Each unit is a chunk of DLC you must buy to use".
aye yam disappointe
"Thread locked for being deemed a total loss." - ISD Ezwal |
Lady Areola Fappington
2147
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 09:34:00 -
[3378] - Quote
Billy McCandless wrote:[
aye yam disappointe
So am I Billy, so am I.
I'll be in your sister's basement.
Kentucky Derby losers are not turned into Ikea meatballs.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev did not accidentally blow up vowels in his own name.
The chupacabra does not deliver presents on Cinco De Mayo.
Anytime minutes donGÇÖt let you call the future. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space
The ROC
8916
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 09:38:00 -
[3379] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Omar Alharazaad wrote:While we're modifying the bumping mechanics, why don't we also add a 'Ram & Board' button as well?
That way my cargo of light marines can board and extract the precious in the hold of whatever vessel is locked into place in this fashion. It could even be another handy use for the Anchoring skill.
Or we could just leave the mechanic alone and adapt to it, just sayin.
They need to bring back Battlefleet Gothic. Man, I would give ********* I no longer own for a good Battlefleet Gothic computer game. Hell, I'd give em for a tabletop accurate version of 40K. I mean, I know it'll never happen coz OMG figs mean profit!, but damn that'd be cool. I'd even play it if they did some BS like "Each unit is a chunk of DLC you must buy to use". Edit Ohh C'mon, you block the actual, not-offensive medical term for them? Fine then, I said balls up there. Yaknow, nuts. Bollocks. Goolies. Nards. Clangers. *******. Huevos. Take that you GD filter.....
I'd be happy if they sold a barebones core rulebook with no faction stats, and each individual ship had it's own stat card, like War Machine.
That'd be the bomb. My Styx class cruisers could once again rule the skies.
But sadly I fear that since the Specialist Games guy died a while back, most of those lines are doomed to die in obscurity. (wait, gotta stay on topic somehow!)
... just like EVE?
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Solecist Project
Mew Age Outpaws
5284
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 11:15:00 -
[3380] - Quote
So many failures in this thread.
http://residentoutlaw.tumblr.com - CODE, RvB, the AT, and what DJEntropy said .... :)
The Mew Age Calender is in need of models! Plus payment!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4908292#post4908292 |
|
|
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
1117
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 13:02:00 -
[3381] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:baltec1 wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Omar Alharazaad wrote:While we're modifying the bumping mechanics, why don't we also add a 'Ram & Board' button as well?
That way my cargo of light marines can board and extract the precious in the hold of whatever vessel is locked into place in this fashion. It could even be another handy use for the Anchoring skill.
Or we could just leave the mechanic alone and adapt to it, just sayin.
They need to bring back Battlefleet Gothic. Still wondering why they havent based a game on that. Because GW only lets people use the 40k license for Company of Heroes clones, halfassed third person shooters, and ****ty mobile games.
It was also unplayable unless you banned or severely limited those damn torpedoes if you had more than 3 or 4 thousand points a side. . It took like 4 hours a turn once you got enough torps happening. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space
The ROC
8918
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 13:05:00 -
[3382] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:
It was also unplayable unless you banned or severely limited those damn torpedoes if you had more than 3 or 4 thousand points a side. . It took like 4 hours a turn once you got enough torps happening.
I always played fairly low point games, myself. Four or five cruisers and some escorts worth. Easier to play four person games with lower points values, makes losses count, etc.
But the torps, I never had that much issues with. That prow armor for ramming? **** that, *** that wholesale.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 15:50:00 -
[3383] - Quote
Try to keep it on topic, kids. I know you undoubtedly have nothing going on in your lives and that is why you are constantly posting in every thread, but you need to respect forum rules if you are going to make the EVE forums your social life. |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
12734
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 15:58:00 -
[3384] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:Try to keep it on topic, kids. I know you undoubtedly have nothing going on in your lives and that is why you are constantly posting in every thread, but you need to respect forum rules if you are going to make the EVE forums your social life.
Try to address this question: Why should suicide ganking be the only high profit, low cost, zero risk activity in the game?
EVE is supposed to have risk vs reward. Currently, suicide gankers aren't playing the same game as the rest of us with regards to that.
Ramming a frigate through a cruiser is much like suicide ganking in EVE. Funny, effective and man did they rage.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
347
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 16:05:00 -
[3385] - Quote
my cohabitant / GM is a former EVE player who left due to [reasons]. However, he's a great lover of the 40k universe... and after one unsuccessful campaign of 'Deathwatch'... and watching 'Space Pirate Captain Harlock' is seriously considering a campaign of 'Rogue Trader'.
Ultimately the GW miniature games are for those who have quite a bit of money and spare time on their hands for the acquisition and painting of their armies. The tabletop games offer an alternative, even though at times it pales in comparison to the real thing.
While i do love EVE the way she is (that redheaded psychobitch **** that she is), there are times I really do wish I could lock down and board an enemy ship, plunder their loot and fly away. Especially after him making me watch that movie.
More than bumping, more than ganking... I want to board and pillage and run off with all the booze and hookers and call it a glorious day. Even more than that I want my targets to laugh along with me at what just happened and message me with 'Dude, that was f'ning awesome!' so i know that we're all having fun.
People taking this game too seriously is just bad, we're all trying to have fun here. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20215
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 16:05:00 -
[3386] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:Try to keep it on topic, kids. I know you undoubtedly have nothing going on in your lives and that is why you are constantly posting in every thread, but you need to respect forum rules if you are going to make the EVE forums your social life. Speak for yourself, what people do with their time or for fun is no concern of yours.
Quote:Try to address this question: Why should suicide ganking be the only high profit, low cost, zero risk activity in the game? It's not.
Quote:EVE is supposed to have risk vs reward. Currently, suicide gankers aren't playing the same game as the rest of us with regards to that. What game are they playing then?
Never hold your farts in. They travel up your spine and into the brain, where they ferment. They then migrate to your keyboard via your fingers. That's where shiptoasts come from.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 16:06:00 -
[3387] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:Try to keep it on topic, kids. I know you undoubtedly have nothing going on in your lives and that is why you are constantly posting in every thread, but you need to respect forum rules if you are going to make the EVE forums your social life.
Try to address this question: Why should suicide ganking be the only high profit, low cost, zero risk activity in the game?
EVE is supposed to have risk vs reward. Currently, suicide gankers aren't playing the same game as the rest of us with regards to that. Ramming a frigate through a cruiser is much like suicide ganking in EVE. Funny, effective and man did they rage.
It doesn't ram through it. Tthey bounce off each other as if they were made of indestructible featherweight rubber bands. It looks ridiculous and is totally ridiculous in a physical sense. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
5897
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 16:06:00 -
[3388] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:EVE is supposed to have risk vs reward. Currently, suicide gankers aren't playing the same game as the rest of us with regards to that.
The victims could change this by not making themselves profitable to gank, but that's asking too much, better just nerf ganking again.
This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee & Grammar Gestapo. |
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 16:12:00 -
[3389] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:EVE is supposed to have risk vs reward. Currently, suicide gankers aren't playing the same game as the rest of us with regards to that. The victims could change this by not making themselves profitable to gank, but that's asking too much, better just nerf ganking again.
Wrong. It is still a high profit, low cost, zero risk activity. Gankers have the luxury of picking their targets to ensure that it is worthwhile for them. |
Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
347
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 16:14:00 -
[3390] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:Try to keep it on topic, kids. I know you undoubtedly have nothing going on in your lives and that is why you are constantly posting in every thread, but you need to respect forum rules if you are going to make the EVE forums your social life.
Try to address this question: Why should suicide ganking be the only high profit, low cost, zero risk activity in the game?
EVE is supposed to have risk vs reward. Currently, suicide gankers aren't playing the same game as the rest of us with regards to that.
I don't gank. The last cruiser I successfully managed to get to aggress me dropped 250mil in loot for me. My risk? A 13.5mil incursus. Your point, sir, is invalid. I didn't even lose that frigate, while every ganker who plies their trade is absolutely guaranteed to lose the ship they are flying. A t1 frigate can take out billions of isk worth of ship and modules if they play their cards right. It HAS happened, and it will happen again. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 157 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |