| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jash Illian
   |
Posted - 2003.10.08 21:53:00 -
[61]
 Quote:
Actually that only convinces the intelligent people I was right. Sorry I failed in trying to educate you, better luck in prison ed.
You make an oblique comparison between a person and Adolf ****** and don't expect to get smacked around a bit?
Be glad I'm not you, else I'd gone running to CCP to ban you for such a remark.
Twit
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Chucky
|
Posted - 2003.10.08 21:58:00 -
[62]
YouÆre only mad cause I'm right (well maybe youÆre not smart enough). Some people canÆt see obvious, others chose not to. Which one are you?
... you will see more and more marketing which in turn will bring you more players to torture. |
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2003.10.08 22:02:00 -
[63]
Quote:
YouÆre only mad cause I'm right (well maybe youÆre not smart enough). Some people canÆt see obvious, others chose not to. Which one are you?
Then just explain the last part of your comment as anything except a rather pitiful attempt to run around the word filter.
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Trixxy
|
Posted - 2003.10.08 23:06:00 -
[64]
Edited by: Trixxy on 08/10/2003 23:09:23
I really shouldn't continue the Jash-baiting, but I can't help myself. He's so cute when he's angry. The many and varied ways he finds of calling me an idiot appeals to my perverted sense of masochism. Ooooh baby, keep it up.
My quote was not about ends justifying means. It was a statement clarifying exactly who is the bully. A set of cops that you can actually avoid by taking reasonable precautions are not bullies. A griefer who can kill you with impunity (for no in-game benefit) without you having defense IS, but with the additional downside that you can't avoid the latter.
In that same post I call for constructive criticism of the way Concord's policing can be made more fair instead of the rants and whines of how unfair it currently is. Does this sound like I am trying to keep Concord the way it is? (It only seems that way to someone who is selectively reading my posts with a heavy bias and no real regard for their actual content).
But nonetheless you can continue to put words in my mouth. How else can you continue to argue otherwise?
And despite repeated attempts by myself to explain my concept of griefer, you still doggedly (and somewhat conveniently for your arguments) ignore them. If you actually understood my definition of griefer you'll see I have nothing against pirates or PvP. I have explicitly said this in posts in this and other threads. Oh, I guess you just blipped over those as well - otherwise how else could you continue to portray me as a stupid and unreasonable carebear?
While it is true that Concord's punishment does not always fit the crime, that does not mean they should not exist at all (an argument you will continue to ignore). You keep conveniently ignoring/discounting any suggestion that they can be modified such that they can still offer a deterrent to grief play, but can maybe be more reasonable in their approach to policing. You'd rather still try drag up old quotes and try knit-pick them to re-inforce views of yours which are actually not-related-to-the-points-I-was-ever-trying-to-make.
Are you going to try argue against the idea of balance and the need for some sort of in-game control (the agression of which would need tweaking) or are you going to continue to argue your misunderstandings of particular areas of my posts?
Are you actually going to address the issue of anarchy vs. controlled state?
.
.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
...and remember - No pain, no pain. |
Trixxy
|
Posted - 2003.10.08 23:29:00 -
[65]
I do find it quite curious that my idea to try tone down Concord's response in the Ideas Forum here has only been read 10 or so times up till this point and with no responses yet.
Is it that people don't want to tone back the response?
.
.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
...and remember - No pain, no pain. |
Sylvius
|
Posted - 2003.10.08 23:45:00 -
[66]
The whole point of punishment is to deter bad acts. If the punishment is not consistently applied, it loses deterrent force.
So, if we all know under what circumstances CONCORD will respond, and we know what their responses are, how can we complain about them after the fact? We know full well what the consequences of our actions will be, and yet we choose to face those consequences.
Any system designed otherwise would be anarchy.
|
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2003.10.09 00:22:00 -
[67]
Quote:
The whole point of punishment is to deter bad acts. If the punishment is not consistently applied, it loses deterrent force.
So, if we all know under what circumstances CONCORD will respond, and we know what their responses are, how can we complain about them after the fact? We know full well what the consequences of our actions will be, and yet we choose to face those consequences.
Any system designed otherwise would be anarchy.
Sylvius, that's the point which Chucky and Trixxy keep missing.
What punishment is it to a griefer to lose a 100k isk ship?
Give me a Breacher and I can destroy any new player in a n00b ship anywhere. And so what if Concord destroys the Breacher? Mission accomplished, n00b is dead.
But now let's look at the other side. The people that have worked hard for their equipment and lose it in an instant over a mistake or even through normal gameplay (sentries and convoy raiding) aren't going to find solace in "Well that type of response is necessary to stop the griefers".
No, no it's not. A true griefer cannot be stopped through game mechanics short of removing their ability to inflict harm. What Trixxy and Chucky are actually saying is they don't want pirates blasting their way into empire space. Because that's the only thing the overpowered Concord actually stops:
Pirates.
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Trixxy
|
Posted - 2003.10.09 08:34:00 -
[68]
You're right Jash, I don't want pirates blasting their way into Empire space. Part of the idea of balance is that you have a more secure area, where people who want to avoid PvP can do their stuff, and less secure areas that offer more profit but has the risks. Then still other no-holds-barred areas that offer the highest rewards for the most risk. That attracts the widest spectrum of players.
You are right that I don't want Pirates in areas above a certain sec rating. You are wrong in assuming I don't want pirates at all. And that's what YOU'RE not understanding.
I believe there should be more incentive to attract people to less secure space (i.e. greater profit difference to tempt people to take the increased risk). I fully support that there SHOULD be risk in less secure space. I even think Concord should be hugely toned down in less secure space to prevent acts of self defence causing brutality on the part of the police.
But I accept that in the secure areas, police can be pretty brutal, as long as everyone knows the rules by which they respond.
There is a difference between pirates being IN a game, and pirates DOMINATING a game. It seems that you want the latter. I (and many others) do not.
Criminals will always be in the fringes of civilised society. The ones that actually live IN civilised society are the ones who are good enough at their work to still maintain an appearance of ligitimacy in order to avoid the law.
In Eve, this translates to people with hugely negative sec-ratings being pushed out of empire space and having limited options. However pirates who pick their fights carefully, maintain their sec rating, and choose to spare their victims (for purposes of sec rating) can actually still travel around high-sec space without the fear of Concord.
So I call for balancing Concord/toning them down and even getting rid of them in lower sec spaces. I'm even in favour of sensible ways to tone them down in high-sec space without removing their value as a deterrent against griefers (or even pirates for that matter). But I still believe they have a role in the game and can't be taken away entirely.
.
.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
...and remember - No pain, no pain. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |