|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1595
   |
Posted - 2015.09.24 21:29:40 -
[1] - Quote
So a repeat of the event has the same award? For what it lacks in creativity it makes up for in consistency at least. It does make sense that the Amarr have a "medal" of sorts tied to this specific occasion. When viewed like that different awards each time makes less sense.
Granted if we ignore the lore side of things it's just a kick in the pants to collectors, but at the same time it's that lore that opened the first opportunity to collect these items to begin with so v0v. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1595
|
Posted - 2015.09.24 22:15:22 -
[2] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Entity wrote:After the stratios ER skin bs I'm not the slightest bit surprised they pull a d-move like this, honestly. You mean the SPECIAL edition Stratios ER right...... You of all people should know the difference between limited and special.
To be fair it's just the colors. No matter how many skins you inject you won't ever have the ship itself anyways. I mean, I understand uniques being re-released making people mad, but going beyond that to say that nothing can even look like it even if it's still clearly not the same is a bit much. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1597
|
Posted - 2015.09.25 03:49:42 -
[3] - Quote
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:I'm not 100% on the origin of the ships, but from what I remember reading there was only 1 gold ever? And seeing how it exploded, I'm not horribly offended by CCP adding 4 more. that said I'm not really for the move,
there are still some silver ones left, and a re-release of those seems less wise.
The origin of the ships was the single prior occurrence of the event which we now have giving them away again. Basically the ships are being used like winner and participation medals for an event which only happens at the whims of CCP.
It would be something of an issue if it was stated, relative to that specific first instance of the event, that no other subsequent events of the same nature would happen, or that if there was the prizes would be different, or, understandably as a prize for something wholly unrelated. Thus far though, no proof of such has been offered. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1601
|
Posted - 2015.09.27 20:47:17 -
[4] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Chribba wrote:As I said in Falcon's Championship thread, they should not do this.
EVE history is very important imo, and introducing them again will make such history redundant, your loss will be neglected by new (and old) pilots as the ships are "now".
Reskin a Golden Punisher or similar instead. But leave the originals alone, it died, and that made a great addition to EVE history, CCP should keep it that way.
/c Very much agreed. CCP don't do this.
Honestly I'm feeling the opposite here. The use of a historic and storied prize elevates this event from just another mini-alliance tournament with RP elements. Changing the prize for this reason cheapens the idea of this event and the way the empire should/would consistently reward participants.
Realistically the way people felt regarding the 1st gold magnate won't be retroactively changed and in the eyes of most I'd bet history lends additional value to the return of it to the game, especially when done in this manner. Further, with that history alive the potential for it to be deepened actually exists. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1601
|
Posted - 2015.09.27 22:38:05 -
[5] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:That's some fancy words you're trying to use there, let me give you a very basic reply:
Why would you agree to a reskinned old ship as a new prize to a new tournament rather than an actual new ship?
Because it saves CCP some time or is it because you're a not-have and more than anything else you, and everyone else in this thread, is so full of jealousy that you'd rather see something taken away from folks who DO have... or had, at any cost. I'm a not-have but at the same time I'm mature enough to realise that it being out of grasp is fine. Considering I don't have a single character that is even eligible for selection the prize is still well outside of my grasp. Given where I am now there is not nor was there ever anything I could have done to predict the return of this event or the prize. There was never anything in it for me personally. I knew this when I made that post.
Further there was never anything I could take from anyone else. I can't take the history of the original gold magnate. Nor will releasing a new one, which was the point.
As for the reason for the agreement, as stated, it's because it's a prize tied to the event. That makes sense logically. It's not about time saving (more time would have been saved by foregoing a rebalance) but about creating something of an in game consistency.
I get that others may value that differently or not at all.
Gregor Parud wrote:You're all hilariously jealous, like 5 year olds. That's some delicious irony considering your tone.
You claim maturity but at the first sign of disagreement go on a rant fueled by your own delusions of other peoples intent. Hilarious indeed. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1601
|
Posted - 2015.09.27 23:05:17 -
[6] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:again, many fancy words but all we're hearing is "someone has something I can't have so lets try and make sure he can't have it either".
There is NO LOGIC whatsoever to reuse old special edition ships for a new tournament for the exact same reason that they make new prizes every tournament. Otherwise they could have used the exact same prizes every time but they didn't. You can type :words: all you want but it just makes you look more like a 5 year old that wants his cookie. We've only had one prior instance of this tournament and don't have another NPC driven selection/competition to my knowledge. So effectively they DID use the same prizes for every time this happened.
This event sets that precedent and that decision and the reasoning are CCP's not mine alone.
So is the logic now that CCP themselves are collectively a "5 year old that wants his cookie"?
What even is this "cookie"? |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1601
|
Posted - 2015.09.27 23:36:32 -
[7] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Nice try, but still just :words: Well, yes, that's what text posts are, words. But those words mean things. Maybe try actually interpreting and responding to them? Or you can just continue the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and shouting while ironically calling others 5 year olds.
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1601
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 00:02:37 -
[8] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Again backwards logic, you're trying to state that it's fine to use this old ship because there's a precedent, while it's... its own precedent. No, I never said there was a precedent for reuse, I'm saying they decided to set one. They set one because they felt it reasonable for there to be a consistent prize for this event if CCP Falcon is to be believed.
Your statement was that since other tournaments had different prizes this one should to, my reasoning was that this event was clearly being viewed distinctly for others like the alliance tournament, which is clearly true.
Quote:No but nice try for construing it that way. Why not? If the logic is indicative of a certain goal, as your collective dismissal strongly insinuates, wouldn't everyone who uses that logic have the same goal? Even if not, why do differing parties get static assignments of intent and what criteria do you use to determine them?
Quote:You wanting something that you can't have (currently), the ship. That is so obvious that it's hilarious you even have to ask. Except I still have no chance of having it so this reasoning fails.
So aside from failings in your own understanding compounded by false assumptions, it sounds like you have no real issue to argue. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1601
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 00:32:44 -
[9] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:where did they state to set one? By the declaration of the second events prizes, and more explicitly here
Quote:Again, nice try with :words: but it's not working. It's terrible this even needs explaining. The whiners in this thread want the ship, CCP doesn't want it, one of them just though it'd be ok to re use it. Difference. So basically there must be some sinister plot on behalf of any poster who thinks reuse is ok because only CCP internally could possibly think reuse is ok without an ulterior motive? Based on what?
Also, do you think it was a single person's decision? I'd lean towards it not being up to one person, but I don't really know.
And yes, again with words in a text post. That's what text posts are; it's not worthy of repeated note.
Quote:How does that change the obvious notion that said cookie is the ship?
Just say it, just be honest: "I want something that I currently can't have, and even if I can't really get it I think it'd be hilarious to introduce it anyway if only to fck over EVE's history and the people who had it once because I'm so jelly as hell. And I'll use any kind of :logic:, barrage of :words: and backwards reasoning to try and get it because I'm SO FRICKING JELLY!". It wouldn't be honest for me to say that. But I do get at this point that you very much seem incapable of fathoming that. I don't really care what others have beyond my reach, nor any appreciation or depreciation those items may have. I don't actually care about the tears that may be shed either way. I just stated an opinion, that it's ok as I think it enhances Eve's history rather than detracting.
So, yeah, the ship isn't the cookie because there is no cookie. Only a opinion that there's no issue in having. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1601
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 01:10:30 -
[10] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Alright, lets make this really simple for you...
Given that, as you yourself stated, you will never own one why are you so invested in this subject and thread that you keep replying in it with the stance that you have? Why would you prefer the current idea over, say, a new/different ship or prize?
I know of only one reason, you're jelly, but I'm sure you can explain to us WHY you have the stance that you have. Oh and please, keep it to one paragraph because your attempt at misdirection through a waterfall of :words: doesn't really work nor get you anywhere, it's just time consuming. This is the way I write, and I feel Ive been very direct to this point. Feel free to ignore the posts if it taxes or offends you in some way.
What I'm invested in at this point isn't the determination of the prize. That's already done. Even if it's not, a change won't draw any offense or objection as I have no concern as stated above. I simply see no issue with the current determination and stated as such. What I've found of interest and has actually kept me posting was your rather pointed response.
More specifically it was and is figuring out if this line of thinking had any reason to it and whether I actually stated anything deserving of it, or was just some self justifying condemnation attached to anyone of a differing opinion. That and defending my prior statements because that's a thing I do. |
|
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1601
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 01:26:36 -
[11] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:So just a lot of words and misdirection which culminate into "err none really. I'm just jelly".
See, that's just so much easier. Yes, spouting BS is apparently very easy for you.
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1601
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 01:45:43 -
[12] - Quote
Glathull wrote:Do we actually know anything yet, or is this all still based on one really interpretable tweet?
Oh yeah. All rumor-mongering crap.
There is the blog detailing the prizes. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1602
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 02:08:44 -
[13] - Quote
Glathull wrote:So it's a totally different ship. Based on that dev blog.
I fail to see the problem.
I'm curious, where did you get that impression from the blog? |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1602
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 02:27:58 -
[14] - Quote
Glathull wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Glathull wrote:So it's a totally different ship. Based on that dev blog.
I fail to see the problem. I'm curious, where did you get that impression from the blog? I got it from the part where they said the attributes have been changed. These have been rebalanced. They are not the same whined-about-Cee-U-Next-Tuesday ships that are causing so much butthurt. They are different ships with different attributes and similar names. Extremely similar names. Fascinating. I'm not sure where to begin. Maybe I need to check up on my reading comprehension, but:
They used the same name, not a similar one.
Also how does one "rebalance" a ship that supposedly has never been in game? Or are you saying the old ones will get those stats and the new ones some other stats?
Relevant quote:
Quote:In anticipation of the Tournament, both the Gold and Silver Magnate have been rebalanced. Their stats are shown below, without taking into account pilot skills: |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1605
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 04:47:00 -
[15] - Quote
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Also how does one "rebalance" a ship that supposedly has never been in game?
The original Gold Magnate was in the game. Then it got blowed up.
According to the person I replied to the one being detailed in the blog is not and has not been in game.
Hence the question. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1605
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 04:59:22 -
[16] - Quote
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:Right, that would be the new one with the new stats. It would actually make it the same item with new stats, as in the more relevant case of remaining silver magnates. There won't be old and new silver magnates, there will just be silver magnates with updates stats and more of them. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1606
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 20:50:39 -
[17] - Quote
Vollhov wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:
The history is not lost.
Read my post.
Yes, she is rewritten in the a rude manner.
Nothing about the past is being changed, thus there is no rewrite of history.
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1606
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 21:20:46 -
[18] - Quote
Vollhov wrote:It's not the same for everybody.
It does seem some people have some attachment to the concept of any aspect of eve's history becoming immutable along with any items that may have played a part in that history. That those items may return factually doesn't change eve's history though.
I'd see the extent of the issue if this prize was for something unrelated to the way they were originally obtained, but it isn't. That said they could probably make everyone happy by creating a 2nd version for the in game year of this event, even if using the same hull. Maybe label the old ones for the original IG year. It's a superficial change, but then every issue with the re-issue is equally superficial. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1606
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 21:49:18 -
[19] - Quote
Vollhov wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Vollhov wrote:It's not the same for everybody. It does seem some people have some attachment to the concept of any aspect of eve's history becoming immutable along with any items that may have played a part in that history. That those items may return factually doesn't change eve's history though. I'd see the extent of the issue if this prize was for something unrelated to the way they were originally obtained, but it isn't. That said they could probably make everyone happy by creating a 2nd version for the in game year of this event, even if using the same hull. Maybe label the old ones for the original IG year. It's a superficial change, but then every issue with the re-issue is equally superficial. Have you read the book EVE Empyrean age? Have you read the Chronicle? Read hotels books and Chronicles. Then Kiss stories alliances capsuleer on the periphery. Combine them. And Eve would be the game dreams. (which destroys)
Read the chronicle, which to my recollection doesn't even mention the magnate, much less enshrine in any lore or history any inability to be reproduced by the empire. So in this combined story, is that something actually mentioned? Or does the rerelease actually not violate any lore or history?
If it's the latter, then all you've brought up is irrelevant, if the former, you have my concession. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
1606
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 22:14:12 -
[20] - Quote
Vollhov wrote:Just history of the world it is the Eve Chronicle, books and stories, capsuleers.
Since according to chronicles and books and gave out Gold Tycoon
Since this was already in the History of EVE.
It was the succession after the death of Heideran.
Why is the "wheel of samsara"
I personally do not understand.
Oh I'm sorry you're in the game from 2014.
So it sounds like you have no evidence to support the claim and further have issues with dates.
Hint: Someone with an employment history of over 5 years in 2015 would obviously have been in the game before 2014 even before considering the possibility of other older characters.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|