EVE Search - Decline in numbers... starting to turn into RAPID!!!

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Decline in numbers... starting to turn into RAPID!!!

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 146 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Remiel Pollard Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 7443	Posted - 2016.01.20 10:28:42 - [4231] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Something something excuses for strawmanning, unsubstantiated claims about knowing something I haven't actually demonstrated adequate knowledge of, and more defensive kneejerk reactions to objective observations Not empty quoting. I still enjoy how you cherry pick the stuff I say that you want to address, because of your personal problem with me, but ignore the stuff you just can't find an argument against. That tells me all I need to know about your capacity for critical thinking. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Remiel Pollard Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 7443	Posted - 2016.01.20 10:41:53 - [4232] - Quote As for personal attacks, going down that road would make you a hypocrite. I consider people putting words in my mouth a personal attack, if not outright slander. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7082	Posted - 2016.01.20 10:44:21 - [4233] - Quote Remiel Pollard wrote: I still enjoy how you cherry pick the stuff I say that you want to address, because of your personal problem with me I have no problems with you, and I quote the bits I bothered reading. Remiel Pollard wrote: I consider people putting words in my mouth a personal attack, if not outright slander. Well it's certainly not intended that way and I humbly apologise, however I'll continue to interpret what people say based on the words they use and the context they are in. Any time you want to get back on topic, let me know. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Remiel Pollard Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 7443	Posted - 2016.01.20 11:00:27 - [4234] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: I have no problems with you, and I quote the bits I bothered reading. The bits you bothered reading. Maybe you should bother to read it all so you can make a point worth making, and so you don't misinterpret/intentionally strawman the 'bits you bother to read' by leaving out important context because of your own admitted selective comprehension. Lucas Kell wrote: Well it's certainly not intended that way and I humbly apologise, however I'll continue to interpret what people say based on the words they use and the context they are in. Any time you want to get back on topic, let me know. How do you know what context it's in if you only bother to read part of it? Lucas, if you don't want people to call you stupid, then don't be so brazenly stupid. On purpose, no less. Yes, you do have a ******* personal problem with me. It's on display when you vindictively reinterpret my words, which you do by admission of selective reading, prefacing your reinterpretation with a pompous "translation:" as if you think you're clever. If you didn't have a personal problem, you wouldn't be constantly replying to just about everything I say with half-baked digressions that consistently and completely fail to address the actual point(s) my post makes and instead you address something you think you saw but actually wasn't there at all. Meth, not even once. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Benny Ohu Chaotic Tranquility Snuffed Out 4523	Posted - 2016.01.20 11:11:14 - [4235] - Quote Remiel Pollard wrote: As for personal attacks, going down that road would make you a hypocrite. I consider people putting words in my mouth a personal attack, if not outright slander. translation: "the minor offence you caused me excuses my terrible attitude and outright insults for the last two pages"
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7140	Posted - 2016.01.20 11:13:50 - [4236] - Quote Remiel Pollard wrote: How do you know what context it's in if you only bother to read part of it? I ensure I read enough to understand the context. Remiel Pollard wrote: Yes, you do have a ******* personal problem with me. I honestly don't. Truth be told I have absolutely no feelings towards you, or for that matter anyone on these forums. Please, less rageposts and more being back on topic though. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Remiel Pollard Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 7443	Posted - 2016.01.20 11:19:14 - [4237] - Quote Benny Ohu wrote: Remiel Pollard wrote: As for personal attacks, going down that road would make you a hypocrite. I consider people putting words in my mouth a personal attack, if not outright slander. translation: "the minor offence you caused me excuses my terrible attitude and outright insults for the last two pages" The fact that you're repeating the not-minor intellectual insult shows you're interested in little more than trolling. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Remiel Pollard Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 7443	Posted - 2016.01.20 11:21:00 - [4238] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: I ensure I read enough to understand the context. You just admitted you don't read all of it, which is what you'd have to read to get a proper understanding of the context. So stop lying. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7140	Posted - 2016.01.20 11:29:58 - [4239] - Quote Remiel Pollard wrote: You just admitted you don't read all of it, which is what you'd have to read to get a proper understanding of the context. Incorrect. Most of the posts on here cover multiple points, and if I'm only addressing one of them there's absolutely no need to read all of them. Now please, in all seriousness get back on topic. If you want to instead talk about how much of a meanie I am, it belongs in a different thread. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Benny Ohu Chaotic Tranquility Snuffed Out 4523	Posted - 2016.01.20 11:31:30 - [4240] - Quote Remiel Pollard wrote: Benny Ohu wrote: Remiel Pollard wrote: As for personal attacks, going down that road would make you a hypocrite. I consider people putting words in my mouth a personal attack, if not outright slander. translation: "the minor offence you caused me excuses my terrible attitude and outright insults for the last two pages" The fact that you're repeating the not-minor intellectual insult shows you're interested in little more than trolling. there is a hidden message about morality and true friendship
Remiel Pollard Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 7443	Posted - 2016.01.20 11:35:02 - [4241] - Quote Benny Ohu wrote: Remiel Pollard wrote: Benny Ohu wrote: Remiel Pollard wrote: As for personal attacks, going down that road would make you a hypocrite. I consider people putting words in my mouth a personal attack, if not outright slander. translation: "the minor offence you caused me excuses my terrible attitude and outright insults for the last two pages" The fact that you're repeating the not-minor intellectual insult shows you're interested in little more than trolling. there is a hidden message about morality and true friendship That's nice dear. Take your moral platitudes to an altar though, if you don't mind. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Remiel Pollard Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 7448	Posted - 2016.01.20 11:37:24 - [4242] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Remiel Pollard wrote: You just admitted you don't read all of it, which is what you'd have to read to get a proper understanding of the context. Incorrect. Most of the posts on here cover multiple points, and if I'm only addressing one of them there's absolutely no need to read all of them. Now please, in all seriousness get back on topic. If you want to instead talk about how much of a meanie I am, it belongs in a different thread. I never called you a meanie, I called you intellectually dishonest trash. I haven't observed you being a 'meanie', that would be an unsubstantiated personal attack. I have observed, and demonstrated, you being intellectually dishonest trash, however, and even if we get back 'on topic', which you derailed to begin with by proxy of your intellectual dishonesty, I have no doubt you'll continue to be intellectually dishonest, as you've been throughout your posting history here. Mate, you started this when you strawmanned me, and every time you reply to me in relation to this, I'll respond as necessary. Ending this, and getting back on topic, is up to you. So instead of parroting 'let's get back on topic', how about you just get back on topic. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7140	Posted - 2016.01.20 12:00:08 - [4243] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: I've never understood single shard in Eve to mean simply persistence. I've never seen it described as just that before either. I've always understood it to mean that every single person online is someone I can interact with if I so desire. There is no way for them to be in a different instance of the game (except Serenity). I thought Eve was fairly unique in that regard, but Lucas seems to be saying otherwise. Interested to know if that's the case for E:D, because I thought there was a limit of 32 people in the same instance, even if there are more than 32 present in the same area. If that's not the case, I might even fire it up. Being able to interact with anyone is generally something that comes with a single shard architecture as you are all in the same universe so it makes sense to be able to, but it's not the thing that makes it single shard. You can have multiple shards (like WoW battlegroups are multiple copies of the worlds) and those worlds might even have different rules (PvP and PvE servers) yet they can interact by joining battlegrounds, instances and levelling areas with people on different servers. Blizzard are moving to integrate servers more, but they will still be their own separate worlds with an interaction layer on top. Elite instances areas so that the data being processed isn't overwhelming, but the impact you have affects everyone in that area regardless of their instance. You will be limited to how many people you see at any one time, but you will be interacting with everyone to some degree and as you move between areas you've be swapping between groups of players. For the most part it really doesn't matter. As a side note, EVEs lack of instancing only really works because of it's low population count. If it had as many players as a game like WoW, there would be far too many people in game for it to properly function and they would have to instance solar systems. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Remiel Pollard Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 7450	Posted - 2016.01.20 12:04:01 - [4244] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: As a side note, EVEs lack of instancing only really works because of it's low population count. If it had as many players as a game like WoW, there would be far too many people in game for it to properly function and they would have to instance solar systems. Which is a good reason not to overinflate the player base faster than CCP can update the hardware to keep up with growth, because instancing is bad for EVE and not something that was ever intended for it. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7140	Posted - 2016.01.20 12:12:01 - [4245] - Quote Remiel Pollard wrote: Which is a good reason not to overinflate the player base faster than CCP can update the hardware to keep up with growth, because instancing is bad for EVE and not something that was ever intended for it. It's a good reason not to get millions of players, sure, but it'd be nice to log on to 80k. That said, if EVE became popular enough to need instancing in systems like Jita I'd have no issues with that as long as it remained single (or more accurately dual) shard. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
xxxTRUSTxxx Galactic Rangers EVEolution. 401	Posted - 2016.01.20 12:21:53 - [4246] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: if EVE became popular enough to need instancing in systems like Jita I'd have no issues with that as long as it remained single (or more accurately dual) shard. are you fecking joking lucas? instances are the devil and i'm not at all sure you know wtf you're talking about. you really should stop and think before you type.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 43653	Posted - 2016.01.20 12:24:43 - [4247] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Being able to interact with anyone is generally something that comes with a single shard architecture as you are all in the same universe so it makes sense to be able to, but it's not the thing that makes it single shard. You can have multiple shards (like WoW battlegroups are multiple copies of the worlds) and those worlds might even have different rules (PvP and PvE servers) yet they can interact by joining battlegrounds, instances and levelling areas with people on different servers. CCP would seem to disagree if I am reading this correctly: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/132563/infinite_space_an_argument_for_.php?print=1 However, what seems to have been clarified is that single shard isn't about persistence. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Remiel Pollard Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 7455	Posted - 2016.01.20 12:28:33 - [4248] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Remiel Pollard wrote: Which is a good reason not to overinflate the player base faster than CCP can update the hardware to keep up with growth, because instancing is bad for EVE and not something that was ever intended for it. It's a good reason not to get millions of players, sure, but it'd be nice to log on to 80k. That said, if EVE became popular enough to need instancing in systems like Jita I'd have no issues with that as long as it remained single (or more accurately dual) shard. The lack of instancing is one of the core features of EVE Online's uniqueness. It is a point of pride for the developers, as is made clear by them in this documentary. The fact that you 'wouldn't mind' it for EVE shows how little you actually care about EVE's unique nature. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
King Aires Chicks on Speed Mordus Angels 117	Posted - 2016.01.20 13:17:38 - [4249] - Quote Remiel Pollard wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: Remiel Pollard wrote: Which is a good reason not to overinflate the player base faster than CCP can update the hardware to keep up with growth, because instancing is bad for EVE and not something that was ever intended for it. It's a good reason not to get millions of players, sure, but it'd be nice to log on to 80k. That said, if EVE became popular enough to need instancing in systems like Jita I'd have no issues with that as long as it remained single (or more accurately dual) shard. The lack of instancing is one of the core features of EVE Online's uniqueness. It is a point of pride for the developers, as is made clear by them in this documentary. The fact that you 'wouldn't mind' it for EVE shows how little you actually care about EVE's unique nature. Nonsense, Eve has always had instancing. Examples include: Deadspace PI Inside station (You are in your own instance with interaction to other instances of the game) Hacking Mini-Game Technically every system is an instance in the broader sense of the word. (You can't shoot me through a gate, or see me on the other side. In fact wormholes don't even "know" their exit system until the first person jumps through. Some of those things literally separate you from other players and they cannot access or interact in any way with what you are doing. Hacking can't be done in groups at the same time, PI doesn't allow for friends to help and when in game only communication and Asset management are available for interaction.
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7140	Posted - 2016.01.20 13:19:38 - [4250] - Quote xxxTRUSTxxx wrote: are you fecking joking lucas? instances are the devil and i'm not at all sure you know wtf you're talking about. you really should stop and think before you type. You say everything's the devil mama! Why exactly are instances the devil? Scipio Artelius wrote: CCP would seem to disagree if I am reading this correctly: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/132563/infinite_space_an_argument_for_.php?print=1 However, what seems to have been clarified is that single shard isn't about persistence. I'd say you aren't reading it correctly. Sharding isn't about persistence specifically, it's about a single game world, which persistence is often a part of. A game running on one world that resets periodically is still single-shard. I imagine the part that is most confusing in the article is where they state "Most of the larger massively multiplayer online games use separate instances, or shards" acting as if the words "instance" and "shard" are interchangeable. But what is actually meant by "instance" in this context is "instance of a server" rather than an "instance of a piece of the game world" like a dungeon or a section of space. Remiel Pollard wrote: The lack of instancing is one of the core features of EVE Online's uniqueness. It is a point of pride for the developers, as is made clear by them in this documentary. The fact that you 'wouldn't mind' it for EVE shows how little you actually care about EVE's unique nature. To you, perhaps, but to me the most important core feature is the single universe. Whether or not there are instances in space has never been a core part of it to me. I really don't know why people are so against it when for the most part is has no real impact on them. Serenity is a complete second shard yet people don't go flying off the handle about how it ruins the game for them to have a copy of the entire universe, so why would I care if they reduced lag by sending people to as second copy of a packed solar trade hub that shares the same market? The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7140	Posted - 2016.01.20 13:26:50 - [4251] - Quote King Aires wrote: Nonsense, Eve has always had instancing. Examples include: Deadspace PI Inside station (You are in your own instance with interaction to other instances of the game) Hacking Mini-Game Technically every system is an instance in the broader sense of the word. (You can't shoot me through a gate, or see me on the other side. In fact wormholes don't even "know" their exit system until the first person jumps through. Some of those things literally separate you from other players and they cannot access or interact in any way with what you are doing. Hacking can't be done in groups at the same time, PI doesn't allow for friends to help and when in game only communication and Asset management are available for interaction. Those are a type of instance, but they aren't instanced content in the classical sense. Like missions are also generated on the fly for you, so they are a new instance of the same content, but people can still see it and go to it. PI is the same, and also as you have more people draining the same resource in the same area the planet depletes for all players faster. What people generally mean by instanced content is two people who are in two copies of the same location in the same position, but not able to interact. Like how in Elite if there's a huge number of players in a system you could fly right past where a friend is but wouldn't see him on your screen. EVE doesn't really have that (with the exception of perhaps stations, but that's explained away by you being in your own home). I think there's a conspiracy theory about wormholes being alternate realities of the exact same space as their doppelganger systems too. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17125	Posted - 2016.01.20 13:27:42 - [4252] - Quote Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: They were partly right, I still recall your totally ridicolous fits you posted, whereas a guy would have had to train forever and spend a lot and end up with a complete garbage fittings that would make him ineffective. In fact, the end result was CCP (over) buffed them. Said fittings cost 14 mil at the time and provided enough tank to withstand 2 arty nados. But yea, CCP messed up the barge rebalance, they needed more fitting room not a HP buff directly to the hull. That balance pass ended barge ganking as a profitable venture and made mining in highsec a much more boring activity. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Remiel Pollard Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 7456	Posted - 2016.01.20 13:29:15 - [4253] - Quote King Aires wrote: Remiel Pollard wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: Remiel Pollard wrote: Which is a good reason not to overinflate the player base faster than CCP can update the hardware to keep up with growth, because instancing is bad for EVE and not something that was ever intended for it. It's a good reason not to get millions of players, sure, but it'd be nice to log on to 80k. That said, if EVE became popular enough to need instancing in systems like Jita I'd have no issues with that as long as it remained single (or more accurately dual) shard. The lack of instancing is one of the core features of EVE Online's uniqueness. It is a point of pride for the developers, as is made clear by them in this documentary. The fact that you 'wouldn't mind' it for EVE shows how little you actually care about EVE's unique nature. Nonsense, Eve has always had instancing. Examples include: Deadspace PI Inside station (You are in your own instance with interaction to other instances of the game) Hacking Mini-Game Technically every system is an instance in the broader sense of the word. (You can't shoot me through a gate, or see me on the other side. In fact wormholes don't even "know" their exit system until the first person jumps through. Some of those things literally separate you from other players and they cannot access or interact in any way with what you are doing. Hacking can't be done in groups at the same time, PI doesn't allow for friends to help and when in game only communication and Asset management are available for interaction. Deadspace is not instanced. Anyone can probe you down and join you. PI is not instanced either. You can show all other command centres on the same planet with yours chewing through resources. Believe it or not, those resources are not infinite, and take time to regenerate. Inside station? Are you serious? Someone not being able to hack a can that you're already hacking is not instancing. You display a serious lack of understanding of what instancing is. Let me explain. SWTOR has instancing. You can go into a raid instance and only you and your group are in the same raid. There might be hundreds of people doing the same raid at the same time, but only you and your friends if you have any are in your instance of that raid. In EVE, that doesn't exist. That DED site you're running? Anyone can probe it down, or even probe you down, and come join you, whether you like it or not. And different systems are not different instances. If there were different instances per system, that would be instancing, where there might be 600 people in that system but two instances of three hundred each, and you could only see the 300 in local that you were in the same instance with. EVE doesn't have instancing. None of the things you listed are examples of instancing. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Remiel Pollard Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 7456	Posted - 2016.01.20 13:31:08 - [4254] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: I'd say you aren't reading it correctly. Well of course you would say that. Your propensity for projection notwithstanding, god forbid Lucas Kell might be wrong about something. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Remiel Pollard Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 7456	Posted - 2016.01.20 13:34:57 - [4255] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Remiel Pollard wrote: The lack of instancing is one of the core features of EVE Online's uniqueness. It is a point of pride for the developers, as is made clear by them in this documentary. The fact that you 'wouldn't mind' it for EVE shows how little you actually care about EVE's unique nature. To you, perhaps, but to me the most important core feature is the single universe. Whether or not there are instances in space has never been a core part of it to me. I really don't know why people are so against it when for the most part is has no real impact on them. Serenity is a complete second shard yet people don't go flying off the handle about how it ruins the game for them to have a copy of the entire universe, so why would I care if they reduced lag by sending people to as second copy of a packed solar trade hub that shares the same market? No, not to me, to the developers and their intentions for this game, and to the nature of the game in general as an MMO. This is not a matter of subjectivity, and what the core features of this game are 'to you' are completely irrelevant. The OBJECTIVE FACT is that EVE's lack of instancing is one of the fundamental core features of its uniqueness. How many other successful MMO's on the market right now are instancing-free? GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7140	Posted - 2016.01.20 13:35:04 - [4256] - Quote Remiel Pollard wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: I'd say you aren't reading it correctly. Well of course you would say that. Your propensity for projection notwithstanding, god forbid Lucas Kell might be wrong about something. Take that stick out fella. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Remiel Pollard Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 7459	Posted - 2016.01.20 13:38:23 - [4257] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Remiel Pollard wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: I'd say you aren't reading it correctly. Well of course you would say that. Your propensity for projection notwithstanding, god forbid Lucas Kell might be wrong about something. Take that stick out fella. I'll take your failure to address the criticism I've delivered as agreement with and acceptance of said criticism. Now that you've admitted that "you read it wrong" is not an argument, we can move on to legitimate points of discussion. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7140	Posted - 2016.01.20 13:42:46 - [4258] - Quote Remiel Pollard wrote: No, not to me, to the developers and their intentions for this game, and to the nature of the game in general as an MMO. This is not a matter of subjectivity, and what the core features of this game are 'to you' are completely irrelevant. The OBJECTIVE FACT is that EVE's lack of instancing is one of the fundamental core features of its uniqueness. I disagree. It's sandbox nature and single (or more accurately dual) shard nature are the core features. It's lack of instancing is nice to have but the game wouldn't implode if they added them. Of course it's about subjectivity. You're making a claim about what is core to EVE based on what you think is most important. Just because you say it's objective doesn't make that true. I remember a time when a core part of EVE to many people was that it didn't have microtransations. Remiel Pollard wrote: How many other successful MMO's on the market right now are instancing-free? How many other successful MMOs have a small playerbase and 1 second ticks? EVE literally could not exist at the scale of MMOs like WoW. Remiel Pollard wrote: I'll take your failure to address the criticism I've delivered as agreement with and acceptance of said criticism. Now that you've admitted that "you read it wrong" is not an argument, we can move on to legitimate points of discussion. Take it however you want, the reality is that rather than form an actual argument you chose to simply launch yet another attack. I'm aware that "you read it wrong" is not an argument which is why it was followed with an entire paragraph explaining why. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13409	Posted - 2016.01.20 13:49:44 - [4259] - Quote Remiel Pollard wrote: SWTOR has instancing. You can go into a raid instance and only you and your group are in the same raid. There might be hundreds of people doing the same raid at the same time, but only you and your friends if you have any are in your instance of that raid. In EVE, that doesn't exist. That DED site you're running? Anyone can probe it down, or even probe you down, and come join you, whether you like it or not. That's true, but for some people there is a need to minimize differences between things (like games). If all games are the same, then it's ok to suggest that one game be made to be like another. I think most people know that EVE delivers a different experience than other games do.
Remiel Pollard Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 7461	Posted - 2016.01.20 13:51:45 - [4260] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Remiel Pollard wrote: No, not to me, to the developers and their intentions for this game, and to the nature of the game in general as an MMO. This is not a matter of subjectivity, and what the core features of this game are 'to you' are completely irrelevant. The OBJECTIVE FACT is that EVE's lack of instancing is one of the fundamental core features of its uniqueness. I disagree. It's sandbox nature and single (or more accurately dual) shard nature are the core features. It's lack of instancing is nice to have but the game wouldn't implode if they added them. I'm actually just going to let you believe that. I'm done with you. Your complete lack of understanding of what EVE is, and what makes it unique, make any opinion you have on it irrelevant anyway so I can safely ignore you in the understanding that CCP is ignoring you too. Your disagreement with objective, demonstrable fact doesn't negate it as an objective demonstrable fact. And i'm not just saying it's an objective fact, it can be demonstrated, and is demonstrated daily within the game. A freighter gets ganked in high, and a nul sec alliance loses out on vital supplies resulting in lost territory. That lost territory results in someone else controlling the moons there, affecting the prices of T2 goods in Jita, and the list of effects that have real meaning with no instancing goes on. You add instancing, you get themepark, and EVE won't be EVE anymore. Add instancing, and suddenly, that freighter is on a different instance from the gankers, and the gank never happens. You and others like you who fail to understand these concepts and how chaos theory is at the very heart of EVE's core design principles are only deluding yourselves, and again, fooling nobody that actually matters. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 146 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.