EVE Search - Remove local for 0.0 !!

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Remove local for 0.0 !!

» 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 11 .. 11 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.07.24 00:45:00 - [181] Originally by: SiJira Originally by: Goumindong This is false. Since you seem too dense to get this the first time, lets go over it again. The hunter/hunted relationship is a competitive game with two players. Any instance that makes it harder for one to win, must necessarily make it easier for the other to win. You cannot make it harder for both parties at the same time when only affecting a directly competitive mechanism. It would be much easier for the hunter. Tons easier for the hunter. Now, the game is how quickly the hunted is able to leave system/cloak/log/safe. Without local the hunter still has a method with which to detect ships, but the hunted does not. This is because the hunter is targeting a specific instance and the hunted is not. you havent had much experience in hunting - have you? Clearly more than you.
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.24 02:31:00 - [182] Originally by: Shin Ra The problem is, how would you ever find anyone to kill? You would literally have to scan every bit of every system. Something like a delay before you show up in local would be nice. Probably around 90% of ppl in 0.0 space will log as soon as a new person jumps into local. Its very annoying since npcs don't give aggro (hint hint) Finding people to kill wouldn't be much of a problem. Remember that the vast majority of PvP in EVE happens on the gates. Gates are easy to check. People already have lots of tactics to scout gates. It will be harder to find farmers at belts, but this isn't the main source of PvP and those who really want to find them, will do so if they put some effort into it. All the popular player hang outs are already known. Smart people already know where to look for targets.
SiJira	Posted - 2007.07.24 02:31:00 - [183] Originally by: Ephemeron Quote: removing local would make 0.0 harder for both the hunter and hunted - thats the idea To elaborate on that idea a bit - the reason why it becomes harder for both hunter and hunted is because both of them will need to learn new methods on intelligence gathering. Things become more complex for both as they can't rely on local chat to spoon feed you information. Both types, hunter and hunted, can get advantages by doing information gathering better/faster than the other. It depends on what kind of effort or team work they put into it. and thats what a mmorpg is all about of course the ratters and miners could just prepare ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.07.24 04:20:00 - [184] Originally by: Ephemeron Quote: removing local would make 0.0 harder for both the hunter and hunted - thats the idea To elaborate on that idea a bit - the reason why it becomes harder for both hunter and hunted is because both of them will need to learn new methods on intelligence gathering. Things become more complex for both as they can't rely on local chat to spoon feed you information. Both types, hunter and hunted, can get advantages by doing information gathering better/faster than the other. It depends on what kind of effort or team work they put into it. Without modifying not competitive mechanisms within the system it is impossible to design a Zero sum game where any change can make the game more advantagous to both parties The hunter wins by inflicting loss on the prey. The hunted wins by avoiding the pray and profiting. These are conflicting goals that cannot be reconsiled. You are presenting an impossibility.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.07.24 04:22:00 - [185] Originally by: SiJira Originally by: Ephemeron Quote: removing local would make 0.0 harder for both the hunter and hunted - thats the idea To elaborate on that idea a bit - the reason why it becomes harder for both hunter and hunted is because both of them will need to learn new methods on intelligence gathering. Things become more complex for both as they can't rely on local chat to spoon feed you information. Both types, hunter and hunted, can get advantages by doing information gathering better/faster than the other. It depends on what kind of effort or team work they put into it. and thats what a mmorpg is all about of course the ratters and miners could just prepare Posting a link to "the urban dictionary" is not an arguement.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2007.07.24 04:23:00 - [186] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Ephemeron Quote: removing local would make 0.0 harder for both the hunter and hunted - thats the idea To elaborate on that idea a bit - the reason why it becomes harder for both hunter and hunted is because both of them will need to learn new methods on intelligence gathering. Things become more complex for both as they can't rely on local chat to spoon feed you information. Both types, hunter and hunted, can get advantages by doing information gathering better/faster than the other. It depends on what kind of effort or team work they put into it. Without modifying not competitive mechanisms within the system it is impossible to design a Zero sum game where any change can make the game more advantagous to both parties The hunter wins by inflicting loss on the prey. The hunted wins by avoiding the pray and profiting. These are conflicting goals that cannot be reconsiled. You are presenting an impossibility. well eve is an inwardly expanding game... and if they can't find any good reason for why there is a list of everyone in the system being fed to you in ANY space. they will have to alter it to work in a space sandbox setting. ----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.07.24 04:51:00 - [187] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Ephemeron Quote: removing local would make 0.0 harder for both the hunter and hunted - thats the idea To elaborate on that idea a bit - the reason why it becomes harder for both hunter and hunted is because both of them will need to learn new methods on intelligence gathering. Things become more complex for both as they can't rely on local chat to spoon feed you information. Both types, hunter and hunted, can get advantages by doing information gathering better/faster than the other. It depends on what kind of effort or team work they put into it. Without modifying not competitive mechanisms within the system it is impossible to design a Zero sum game where any change can make the game more advantagous to both parties The hunter wins by inflicting loss on the prey. The hunted wins by avoiding the pray and profiting. These are conflicting goals that cannot be reconsiled. You are presenting an impossibility. well eve is an inwardly expanding game... and if they can't find any good reason for why there is a list of everyone in the system being fed to you in ANY space. they will have to alter it to work in a space sandbox setting. "RP" reasons are very easy. 1. All stargates are owned and operated by CONCORD 2. All stargates log the identifying transceviers of incoming ships and broadcast that information to all other ships who have not left the area by any of the designated stargates. Design reasons are very easy 1. Lack of a system by which to identify people entering the system in a timely manner would result in a widly increased number of ship losses for ratters, even aginst casual or sporadic pirates. The ability of hostile forces to shut down space for production makes the space, on a whole less profitable and more dangerous that higher security space. The rewards of the system do not support such increased risk. As well, the rewards cannot easily be increased to necessitate such risk without obsoleting low and high security space and making very low true sec systems much more profitable than they ought to be. 2. The lack of local makes it impossible to defend a system, constellation, or region in any reasonable manner. Necessary to control a system would require 23/7 gate camps on all constellation choke points, and for these camps to never be busted 3. The lack of an ability to track hostiles in friendly space mean that defensive fleets once formed after taking the hit, would be unable to reasonable pursue and engage the Hostiles. 4. The presense of cloaking devices both standard and cov-ops makes the game even harder for those who wish to hold and defend space. Now not only not being able to detect the ships with the directional scanner they would be unable to detect them in any way. This is a huge boon to the player who does not need to be decloaked to achieve their goal. While the hunter can be cloaked in the execution of its goal, the prey cannot. Again, this makes following fleets impossible. A attacking fleet could make one jump, safe, cloak, wait for the defenders to pass by, and then resume the attack[since those that are running have the advantage of choosing the terrain] Enough reasons?
SiJira	Posted - 2007.07.24 05:17:00 - [188] goum is a fine example of a 0.0 carebear ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
Aldir Rundal Gallente The Order of Chivalry Nex Eternus	Posted - 2007.07.24 05:25:00 - [189] Originally by: SiJira goum is a fine example of a 0.0 carebear Haha, He presents a clear and honest argument that bests yours and you care only to insult him. Congrats goum, you win. Recruiting
SiJira	Posted - 2007.07.24 05:27:00 - [190] Originally by: Aldir Rundal Originally by: SiJira goum is a fine example of a 0.0 carebear Haha, He presents a clear and honest argument that bests yours and you care only to insult him. Congrats goum, you win. you mean where he argues with himself cause he skips all the opposing points or twists them out of context? yea he wins - and you are a successful man for sure - i hear flattery gets you far ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
Aldir Rundal Gallente The Order of Chivalry Nex Eternus	Posted - 2007.07.24 05:34:00 - [191] Originally by: SiJira Originally by: Aldir Rundal Originally by: SiJira goum is a fine example of a 0.0 carebear Haha, He presents a clear and honest argument that bests yours and you care only to insult him. Congrats goum, you win. you mean where he argues with himself cause he skips all the opposing points or twists them out of context? yea he wins - and you are a successful man for sure - i hear flattery gets you far I hear insults get you about half as far SiJira. Quit posting useless drivel please. Local has been a part of Eve for a very long time. It's not likely to change. Recruiting
SiJira	Posted - 2007.07.24 05:55:00 - [192] Originally by: Aldir Rundal Originally by: SiJira Originally by: Aldir Rundal Originally by: SiJira goum is a fine example of a 0.0 carebear Haha, He presents a clear and honest argument that bests yours and you care only to insult him. Congrats goum, you win. you mean where he argues with himself cause he skips all the opposing points or twists them out of context? yea he wins - and you are a successful man for sure - i hear flattery gets you far I hear insults get you about half as far SiJira. Quit posting useless drivel please. Local has been a part of Eve for a very long time. It's not likely to change. please stop defending someone until you read all their posts if you dont like something dont read it ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:04:00 - [193] Originally by: Goumindong ed: quite simply, the less information presented in the system, the more the advantage swings from those who do not move, to those who do. By nature, the defenders, who have to defend a point, because that is what is required for efficient mining or ratting operations, are of extreemly limited mobility. And the attackers, who are more mobile do not face these restrictions. Which is why all of the reasonable folks who are in favour of nerfing local also support concepts like sensor nets and POS scanning arrays, so that the defenders can stand a chance too. I have no problem with people being able to defend their space. I do have a problem with people being able to travel with impunity and control-q the moment they see Agony in local. I have a problem with macro ratters who abuse local for self-defence (once again, aided significantly by the logoffski). I have a problem with how easy I find it to travel through a 0.0 region that contains five alliances who have all set me to red. EVE is supposed to be harsh. 0.0 is supposed to be scary. Take away the perfect intel, and the game gets a lot scarier for everybody. I want the adrenalin hit to come back. Recruitment FAQ
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:05:00 - [194] Originally by: SiJira Originally by: Aldir Rundal I hear insults get you about half as far SiJira. Quit posting useless drivel please. Local has been a part of Eve for a very long time. It's not likely to change. please stop defending someone until you read all their posts if you dont like something dont read it SiJira, I agree with you about local. I agree with Aldir about your posts. If you have nothing worthwhile to say, don't say it. Recruitment FAQ
SiJira	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:06:00 - [195] Originally by: BluOrange EVE is supposed to be harsh. 0.0 is supposed to be scary. Take away the perfect intel, and the game gets a lot scarier for everybody. I want the adrenalin hit to come back. this is another good point ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
Steel Tigeress Gallente Silver Snake Enterprise Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.07.24 09:04:00 - [196] Originally by: SiJira Originally by: BluOrange EVE is supposed to be harsh. 0.0 is supposed to be scary. Take away the perfect intel, and the game gets a lot scarier for everybody. I want the adrenalin hit to come back. this is another good point I think its funny how you say this is a good post... Yet when people say 0.0 should be hazardous and hostile to cloakers as well its a bunch of carebears whining.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.07.24 12:09:00 - [197] Originally by: BluOrange Originally by: Goumindong ed: quite simply, the less information presented in the system, the more the advantage swings from those who do not move, to those who do. By nature, the defenders, who have to defend a point, because that is what is required for efficient mining or ratting operations, are of extreemly limited mobility. And the attackers, who are more mobile do not face these restrictions. Which is why all of the reasonable folks who are in favour of nerfing local also support concepts like sensor nets and POS scanning arrays, so that the defenders can stand a chance too. I have no problem with people being able to defend their space. I do have a problem with people being able to travel with impunity and control-q the moment they see Agony in local. I have a problem with macro ratters who abuse local for self-defence (once again, aided significantly by the logoffski). I have a problem with how easy I find it to travel through a 0.0 region that contains five alliances who have all set me to red. EVE is supposed to be harsh. 0.0 is supposed to be scary. Take away the perfect intel, and the game gets a lot scarier for everybody. I want the adrenalin hit to come back. Take away perfect intel and the game does not get scarier for everyone. It only gets scarier for defenders. The lack of perfect information is a boon to attackers, since attackers are, by their nature, able to modify their position more easily. If defenders are having to constantly move, they are sacrificing the thing which they need to produce and such the attacker is achieving their goal. This is a zero summ game, it does not operate in the way you think it operates. No local increases the ability of some ships to travel with impunity, since it decreases the ability of defense fleets to find and destroy targets. It decreases the ability of the owners of the system to travel. Any system that replaces local, must be nearly as strong as the current local mechanic. POS scanning and other player initiated options cannot function for reasons already listed. A system that only benefits defenders leaves friendlies operating in the space out in the cold as well. A system that operates like local but only for the defenders is as well simply too strong on information for the defenders. Systems that do not have a far reach present a window of opportunity to leave far less than would be necessary for any but the most alert and fast pilots to escape. So, if any system, in order to maintain a smidge of balance must be both universal, passive, and far reaching. At which point, we have a system that operates exactly like local, but isnt local. So why get rid of it if the replacement must act just like it? The main problem is that local presents too much of a time frame for which production can run. The answer then is not to scrap local, but to modify it to suit the specific balance needs. It takes about 1 minute to 2 minutes to find and lock down a target in a belt. The question is how much time ought a production character have to identify a threat and leave the area? I think between 30 seconds and a minute is a good amount of time that balances the needs of both characters. Such a delay of between 30 and 45 seconds is reasonable. But this dosnt change the mechanics of log-offski much, nor does it affect macros, nor does it affect cloakers. Those are seperate issues. Macros cannot be fixed by any system that must send data to the player before he is scrambled[since that what triggers the log/cloak]. Manual cloaking and logoffski are the same issue. I dont have as much of a problem with logging as cloaks. Since they both operate similarly, but logging dosnt allow you to know when the hostile has left the system. And both are seperate issues that cannot be fixed by changing the way that players recieve information.
SiJira	Posted - 2007.07.24 15:06:00 - [198] Originally by: Steel Tigeress Originally by: SiJira Originally by: BluOrange EVE is supposed to be harsh. 0.0 is supposed to be scary. Take away the perfect intel, and the game gets a lot scarier for everybody. I want the adrenalin hit to come back. this is another good point I think its funny how you say this is a good post... Yet when people say 0.0 should be hazardous and hostile to cloakers as well its a bunch of carebears whining. it is hazardous - every time i uncloak and for the people thinking goum makes a good post - try reading all his crap - hopefully you have 0.0 knowledge he is suggesting carebears deserve 100% of the possible profits and 0% of the possible risk in 0.0 - of course he likes to have big posts that if you notice are just the long ways of saying what i just did and trying to trick the newbs to support this by giving a lot of lies as evidence ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
Shoukei	Posted - 2007.07.24 15:30:00 - [199] Originally by: Goumindong stuff nice wall of text. well worded pack of nonsense
SiJira	Posted - 2007.07.24 15:40:00 - [200] Originally by: Shoukei Originally by: Goumindong stuff nice wall of text. well worded pack of nonsense you are a master of compacting many words into few ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.07.24 16:27:00 - [201] Originally by: SiJira Originally by: Steel Tigeress Originally by: SiJira Originally by: BluOrange EVE is supposed to be harsh. 0.0 is supposed to be scary. Take away the perfect intel, and the game gets a lot scarier for everybody. I want the adrenalin hit to come back. this is another good point I think its funny how you say this is a good post... Yet when people say 0.0 should be hazardous and hostile to cloakers as well its a bunch of carebears whining. it is hazardous - every time i uncloak and for the people thinking goum makes a good post - try reading all his crap - hopefully you have 0.0 knowledge he is suggesting carebears deserve 100% of the possible profits and 0% of the possible risk in 0.0 - of course he likes to have big posts that if you notice are just the long ways of saying what i just did and trying to trick the newbs to support this by giving a lot of lies as evidence SiJira, stop the strawman. My positions are not anything of the sort. For instance the post directly above this, and in others, i advocate moving the local broadcast to a delayed update system, giving the hunter a jump on the hunted. Why? Because currently there is too little risk involved in 0.0 ratting. But that there is too little risk in 0.0 ratting does not warrant a change to a system where there is too much risk in 0.0 ratting. And if we are to err, then we should err on the side of caution, or in this case the side of "people can make money too easily so they have more stuff to get blown up" and not "people cant make money easily enough, so they move back to empire/low-sec". When the chips fall, its better that people have too much stuff to play with than too little. I advocate methods to scan down all sorts of cloakers. Such that not only can recons be killed, but that there is a hunter/hunted relationship between recon ships and those that are attempting to destroy them. But also, so that production oriented ships cannot simply safe and cloak in order to avoid combat, that they must either be vulnerable, they must invest in a POS that can be knocked down, or they must log-off. If i had my way, the log-off timer on rat aggression/mining would be increased by 1 minute, because logging off when ratting is not a gamble like it should be. If you think that positions making it harder for production to occur in 0.0 are "suggesting zero risk and 100% profit"[what the hell does 100% profit mean anyway? Profit is measured in absolute terms, or at the margain, which would be dependant on input and this 100% profit would frankly be ****ty(104m per year for ratting in a Raven)] then you need to have your head checked.
Elmicker The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 16:32:00 - [202] Originally by: BluOrange ...and POS scanning arrays... If you've got a team of people willing to fuel at least 1 large POS in every system you might ever operate in (an area that could span several regions) then yeah, great. Though, of course there's the question of what happens when you're fighting alongside other alliances - would they have to use your POS equipment, or would you have to have conflicting POSes everywhere - giving someone a fuel bill of +25%. This "solution" is just so impractical that its not even funny.
SiJira	Posted - 2007.07.24 17:00:00 - [203] Originally by: Goumindong SiJira, stop the strawman. My positions are not anything of the sort. can the teapot stop calling the kettle black? ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.07.24 17:11:00 - [204] I am sorry, what position of yours am i misrepresenting?
SiJira	Posted - 2007.07.26 06:02:00 - [205] Originally by: Goumindong I am sorry, what position of yours am i misrepresenting? you might need to expand your definiton of a strawman argument - either way writing more does not make your non sense posts with a lot of misinformation any better - it just looks that way to people who dont bother reading it but disagree with removing local ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
SiJira	Posted - 2007.07.27 07:10:00 - [206] Originally by: Steel Tigeress Originally by: SiJira Originally by: BluOrange EVE is supposed to be harsh. 0.0 is supposed to be scary. Take away the perfect intel, and the game gets a lot scarier for everybody. I want the adrenalin hit to come back. this is another good point I think its funny how you say this is a good post... Yet when people say 0.0 should be hazardous and hostile to cloakers as well its a bunch of carebears whining. you do realize a cloaker has to uncloak to attack right? ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.07.27 07:53:00 - [207] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: BluOrange EVE is supposed to be harsh. 0.0 is supposed to be scary. Take away the perfect intel, and the game gets a lot scarier for everybody. I want the adrenalin hit to come back. Take away perfect intel and the game does not get scarier for everyone. It only gets scarier for defenders. The lack of perfect information is a boon to attackers, since attackers are, by their nature, able to modify their position more easily. If defenders are having to constantly move, they are sacrificing the thing which they need to produce and such the attacker is achieving their goal. False. As a member of an aggressive force operating in 0.0, I have lost count of the number of times our opponents have attempted to create ambushes and set traps for us. If we couldn't tell how many of them there are in local, we'd have to face the possibility that they're just out of detection range, waiting to pounce on us. Quote: This is a zero summ game, it does not operate in the way you think it operates. I don't think you have any real understanding of how and what I think, and I encourage you not to comment on that. Let's comment on the topic at hand and what is said. When I'm in the mood, I may start a thread about zero-sum games. Quote: Any system that replaces local, must be nearly as strong as the current local mechanic. POS scanning and other player initiated options cannot function for reasons already listed. A system that only benefits defenders leaves friendlies operating in the space out in the cold as well. A system that operates like local but only for the defenders is as well simply too strong on information for the defenders. As an attacker, I'm fine with the defenders in a system having something just as powerful as local, provided that the intel is provided by something outside of POS shields that can be destroyed within 10 minutes by a small force. As for the defender's allies missing out on the intel: tough. Join their alliance, put up your own sensor net, or ask them to give you updates when things happen. Quote: So, if any system, in order to maintain a smidge of balance must be both universal, passive, and far reaching. At which point, we have a system that operates exactly like local, but isnt local. So why get rid of it if the replacement must act just like it? Having expressed my disagreement with your premises, I reject the question. Quote: The main problem is that local presents too much of a time frame for which production can run. The answer then is not to scrap local, but to modify it to suit the specific balance needs. It takes about 1 minute to 2 minutes to find and lock down a target in a belt. The question is how much time ought a production character have to identify a threat and leave the area? I think between 30 seconds and a minute is a good amount of time that balances the needs of both characters. Such a delay of between 30 and 45 seconds is reasonable. That sounds like a really good idea, actually. Quote: But this dosnt change the mechanics of log-offski much, nor does it affect macros, nor does it affect cloakers. Those are seperate issues. Macros cannot be fixed by any system that must send data to the player before he is scrambled[since that what triggers the log/cloak]. Manual cloaking and logoffski are the same issue. I dont have as much of a problem with logging as cloaks. Since they both operate similarly, but logging dosnt allow you to know when the hostile has left the system. And both are seperate issues that cannot be fixed by changing the way that players recieve information. Agreed. I mention the logoffski because a proper logoffski fix would take a lot of the heat out of calls to remove local. IMO, there is a simple and effective logoffski fix available - leave the ship exactly where it was, and let it die. There are stations and outposts, if you log in space, you should expect to die. Recruitment FAQ
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.07.27 07:58:00 - [208] Originally by: Elmicker Originally by: BluOrange ...and POS scanning arrays... If you've got a team of people willing to fuel at least 1 large POS in every system you might ever operate in (an area that could span several regions) then yeah, great. Though, of course there's the question of what happens when you're fighting alongside other alliances - would they have to use your POS equipment, or would you have to have conflicting POSes everywhere - giving someone a fuel bill of +25%. This "solution" is just so impractical that its not even funny. If you require perfect intel on every system you might ever operate in, then POS scanning arrays are exactly as hopeless as you say they are. If it makes the political challenges of alliances greater, then I don't have a problem with that. -insert 'Hello Kitty' reference here- Recruitment FAQ
Steel Tigeress Gallente Silver Snake Enterprise Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.07.27 07:59:00 - [209] Edited by: Steel Tigeress on 27/07/2007 08:01:44 Edited by: Steel Tigeress on 27/07/2007 08:01:01 Originally by: SiJira Originally by: Steel Tigeress Originally by: SiJira Originally by: BluOrange EVE is supposed to be harsh. 0.0 is supposed to be scary. Take away the perfect intel, and the game gets a lot scarier for everybody. I want the adrenalin hit to come back. this is another good point I think its funny how you say this is a good post... Yet when people say 0.0 should be hazardous and hostile to cloakers as well its a bunch of carebears whining. you do relize that a cloak is the only "pause" button in eve right? And it doesnt need to be deactivated to have a negative impact on a system right? or that its the only module without a counter right? Or that while activated, a pearson is safe indefinatly in the "Harsh, dark, hostile" environment right? You fail to realize that we have been asking for the same dangers to apply to cloakers, that you are asking for ratters. Yet your for 1, and against the other because one helps you, and the other hurts you. You cant have your cake and eat it too. you do realize a cloaker has to uncloak to attack right?
SiJira	Posted - 2007.07.27 09:03:00 - [210] Originally by: Steel Tigeress Originally by: SiJira you do realize a cloaker has to uncloak to attack right? you do relize that a cloak is the only "pause" button in eve right? And it doesnt need to be deactivated to have a negative impact on a system right? or that its the only module without a counter right? Or that while activated, a pearson is safe indefinatly in the "Harsh, dark, hostile" environment right? You fail to realize that we have been asking for the same dangers to apply to cloakers, that you are asking for ratters. Yet your for 1, and against the other because one helps you, and the other hurts you. You cant have your cake and eat it too. -fixed quote for you- And no it isnt a pause button because you can get uncloaked - no you do not affect the system because there should always be a defensive person with every defenseless ship - yes it has many counters - ie you kill the ship when he tries to gank you - that is what you are scared of right? funny you say that cliche about cake when you go to 0.0 expecting to reap full high rewards with no work-risk involved you are the one asking to have your cake - the rewards - and eat it too - no risk or work now proceed to totally twist my post up and try to use a strawman like goum does in every post or ignore my post altogether because you just defeated your own unrealistic demand for breaking something that is balanced ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: 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.