EVE Search - Black Ops 'exploit'

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Black Ops 'exploit'

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Nohl Faugh a Ballagh	Posted - 2008.01.05 16:35:00 - [121] Edited by: Nohl on 05/01/2008 16:38:39 Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: Nohl That's not game balance. Understand that and all of your post goes out the window. Sorry, chief. Ahh...I see. It's pretty clear you don't, actually. Why pretend you do? Admit you're in over your head and walk away. It'll save you a lot of trouble. Quote: So CCP just made this rule for an arbitrary reason? Does it look like I work for CCP? Is there any indication that I was a party to why the decision was made? No? So why are you asking me? You're really pretty bad at this whole argument process, you realize that, right? Whether the reason was arbitrary or simply illogical, I haven't the slightest idea. I wasn't there. If I was, and if I had a vote in it, I'd obviously be against it. Quote: They allow corp theft, spying, pirating, scamming, empire griefing and such but chose this particular rule at random because....why? Wonderful question, but again, why are you directing comments towards me that should be towards CCP? I'm not them. I don't work with them, for them, near them, or even in the same industry. So let's ask them. Dear CCP, why after allowing corp theft, spying, pirating, scamming, empire griefing, and a variety of other real-world illegalities, would you decide that running from the space-cops is absolutely against the rules and warrants banning? Let's see what they say. Quote: (Here's a hint: _ame _alance...fill in the blanks) Repetition ad nauseum is not going to make your argument suddenly worthwhile. Enlightening, isn't it?
Pennwisedom	Posted - 2008.01.05 16:43:00 - [122] I'd like to tell you a story. Once upon a time, there were some Zombies. And these zombies found out that you could remote rep a ship that was agressed by CONCORD, and didn't get blown up. At the same time, keeping the agressed player alive. So they loaded up smart bombs, and remote reps, and went to Yulai. Where they preceeded to smart bomb the hell out of everyone. During this, first a GM/Dev/Whoever, I forget, came and told them to stop, which they did not. And bannings did insue. In response, CCP stated that Remote Repping a criminal will now flag you, and CONCORD's power was buffed. Doing this, because escaping CONCORD's punishment is an exploit. In other words, this is not a new story. Most likely what is going to happen, is ships who do this, will be unable to jump using a Cyno, like they are with gates. As this was never something that would happen before, as only capitals could use gates. And for whatever reason, CCP didn't forsee this. Now, it has been corrected.
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.05 16:44:00 - [123] ^Seriously, I hate this forum. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Squirrrel Gallente Squirrrel Industries	Posted - 2008.01.05 16:54:00 - [124] Edited by: Squirrrel on 05/01/2008 16:55:16 Originally by: Arknox you disected my reply but you fail to comprehend its content Well, some of it didn't make sense and much of the rest seems to either miss the point or be blinkered. Originally by: Arknox you're also staring to annoy me Oh dear boy, you started to annoy me long ago. I just won't use it in place of a defense of my stance on this debate. You bring facts, I'll shut up. Originally by: Arknox i don't know you but i'm sure this quote is right: Originally by: An Anarchyyt Man, Squirrel might even be a worse poster than Xaen. Even he made that one useful thread. I'm honoured, and deeply touched. Still waiting for some decent proof from you other than "CCP have always said it's an exploit." The fact that both of you fail to realise, is that other people have said pretty much the same thing as I have about lack of available rules and the quality of the knowledgebase. Sure, other people have said the same as you also, I just don't resort to immature childish attacks or personal attacks with mine. Your choice though ofc. Originally by: Arknox now say what you like i don't realy care about arguing over the internet anymore Most people who know they are beaten or run out of replies don't. You've not shown this to be true so far though.
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.05 16:55:00 - [125] You're still here? yawn Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Arknox Minmatar In terrorem KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.05 16:57:00 - [126] Edited by: Arknox on 05/01/2008 17:04:57 Originally by: Squirrrel Edited by: Squirrrel on 05/01/2008 16:55:16 Originally by: Arknox you disected my reply but you fail to comprehend its content Well, some of it didn't make sense and much of the rest seems to either miss the point or be blinkered. Originally by: Arknox you're also staring to annoy me Oh dear boy, you started to annoy me long ago. I just won't use it in place of a defense of my stance on this debate. You bring facts, I'll shut up. Originally by: Arknox i don't know you but i'm sure this quote is right: Originally by: An Anarchyyt Man, Squirrel might even be a worse poster than Xaen. Even he made that one useful thread. I'm honoured, and deeply touched. Still waiting for some decent proof from you other than "CCP have always said it's an exploit." The fact that both of you fail to realise, is that other people have said pretty much the same thing as I have about lack of available rules and the quality of the knowledgebase. Sure, other people have said the same as you also, I just don't resort to immature childish attacks or personal attacks with mine. Your choice though ofc. Originally by: Arknox now say what you like i don't realy care about arguing over the internet anymore Most people who know they are beaten or run out of replies don't. You've not shown this to be true so far though. is this still about the knowledge base ? edit: i did bring facts , lots of them but your little closed mind doesn't want to get it, all it hears or says is "whaaawhaaawhaaa knowledge base is official and wrong" just stop it ---------- Originally by: JeanPierre You need to examine Minmatar ships bro. No kidding, I tried to Salvage one last night. Took me 20 cycles before the pilot convoed me and told me to stop it.
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2008.01.05 16:57:00 - [127] Originally by: Nohl Does it look like I work for CCP? Is there any indication that I was a party to why the decision was made? No? So why are you asking me? You're really pretty bad at this whole argument process, you realize that, right? You're either being deliberately obtuse or you just are obtuse and can't help it.
Glassback Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2008.01.05 17:01:00 - [128] I really lol'd when I read about this, must have been fun before the ban G. BH Kharnubis > Need more people against the MC meanies
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2008.01.05 17:08:00 - [129] Originally by: Glassback I really lol'd when I read about this, must have been fun before the ban G. There was no "before the ban". Was banned years before whoever it was even tried it.
Nohl Faugh a Ballagh	Posted - 2008.01.05 17:08:00 - [130] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: Nohl Does it look like I work for CCP? Is there any indication that I was a party to why the decision was made? No? So why are you asking me? You're really pretty bad at this whole argument process, you realize that, right? You're either being deliberately obtuse or you just are obtuse and can't help it. I'm refraining from an assumption of which I have absolutely no grounds to make. The difference between obtuseness and what I've done... I understood what you were asking, did nothing to distort it, and simply refused to speculate. You might try that sometime instead of the bogus assumptions you've been running with. ;)
Squirrrel Gallente Squirrrel Industries	Posted - 2008.01.05 17:10:00 - [131] Originally by: Arknox ............. Either read the thread again and try to grasp my point and that it's NOT whining or continue coming across as rude and ignorant. Your choice.
Squirrrel Gallente Squirrrel Industries	Posted - 2008.01.05 17:12:00 - [132] Originally by: An Anarchyyt You're still here? yawn No one is forcing you to read this forum, thread or any of my posts. Try bringing something worthwhile to the table.
Daelin Blackleaf Aliastra	Posted - 2008.01.05 17:21:00 - [133] The ability of people to argue even the most idiotic viewpoint on this forum is stunning. It's almost as if half the forum-going population think the game was created solely for their own personal amusement. Any chance we could get this locked? It had it's chance to be a constructive discussion but that chance has passed. I really can't see anything constructive coming out of it.
Arknox Minmatar In terrorem KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.05 17:22:00 - [134] Edited by: Arknox on 05/01/2008 17:25:24 Originally by: Squirrrel Originally by: Arknox ............. Either read the thread again and try to grasp my point and that it's NOT whining or continue coming across as rude and ignorant. Your choice. your point is that the knowledge base is according to you an official document that clearly says you can run from concord and that anything this document says is true. anything someone else says,including devs, doesn't get through to you. i'll send a petition to ccp asking if the knowledge base in an official rulebook ok ? reply: Hi, The knowledge base is made by CCP and as such it is official in that respect, however it is not considered a rulebook. In general regarding this though, it is an exploit to escape destruction of your ship by CONCORD. ---------- Originally by: JeanPierre You need to examine Minmatar ships bro. No kidding, I tried to Salvage one last night. Took me 20 cycles before the pilot convoed me and told me to stop it.
Squirrrel Gallente Squirrrel Industries	Posted - 2008.01.05 17:40:00 - [135] Originally by: Arknox your point is that the knowledge base is according to you an official document that clearly says you can run from concord and that anything this document says is true. anything someone else says,including devs, doesn't get through to you. Thank you for finally spelling out what you think I meant. I'll have one more ***** at this then agree from my end to let it go: The lack of any articles or sections regarding rules of the game can at times be something of a pain, since players are relying on third-hand accounts of those rules. "CCP have said so" etc. The only official looking documentation of all this appears to be the knowledgebase - and we appear to both be in agreement that something is not quite right with that section. I have never ever seen anything stating that avoiding Concord is an exploit. (Black ops, for sure - that will be buried in the news in time to come also though of course.) Same for something like the iMune idea for war. If I hadn't read the thread I would have missed GM Nova's verdict on it. Many players may well have missed it. So you see, I'm not whining about it any of these things being an exploit, posting the Black Ops one as news was half-way there, my point is that to most players, the Knowledgebase would probably represent the official rules. Especially given that the GM's themselves sometimes refer you to sections of that when answering petitions. I agree that CCP do have (and should have) the right to change their own game as they see fit, I just wish they would make the rules more available to see. That's all. <Shrug>
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2008.01.05 17:46:00 - [136] Originally by: Nohl I'm refraining from an assumption of which I have absolutely no grounds to make. The difference between obtuseness and what I've done... I understood what you were asking, did nothing to distort it, and simply refused to speculate. You might try that sometime instead of the bogus assumptions you've been running with. ;) The assumption you were were asked to make was whether CCP implements rules arbitrarily or if they have reasons for what they do. Those reasons (if they have them) invariably go to "game balance". I think it is more than safe to assume CCP is not arbitrary in their handling of EVE. They do not make up rules on a whim. Even were it not a labor of love it is their paycheck and they will take care with it. Your insistence on not being privy to their discussions misses the point entirely and is obtuse.
Nohl Faugh a Ballagh	Posted - 2008.01.05 18:00:00 - [137] Edited by: Nohl on 05/01/2008 18:00:10 Originally by: Imperator Jora'h The assumption you were were asked to make was whether CCP implements rules arbitrarily or if they have reasons for what they do. Thank you for explaining that, I had no idea. Oh, wait. No, I had an idea. I knew exactly what you were asking me. And since it didn't sink in the first couple of times, let's see if the third time really is a charm: I cannot answer that question as I am not a part of CCP and as such am not privy to internal discussions. From an outsider's view - mine, in case you're still confused - arbitrary and illogical look identical. Quote: Those reasons (if they have them) invariably go to "game balance". Clearly. Quote: I think it is more than safe to assume CCP is not arbitrary in their handling of EVE. And for balance I think there is very little doubt that they are either arbitrary or illogical. Look at their recent moves. Tell me, which ones were based around game balance? Go on. Take your time. Quote: Your insistence on not being privy to their discussions misses the point entirely and is obtuse. You do not understand what that word means, so please, for the sake of everyone else, quit trying to use it to bolster your hapless, bull**** "argument".
Rawr Cristina Caldari Cult of Rawr	Posted - 2008.01.05 18:11:00 - [138] Originally by: Ashley Sky Oops, CCP you did it again. Hi ashley another case of CCP failing to think before they act. Isn't this something the Beta testers should have been looking for instead of sitting in FD all day long testing how much DPS their HG-crystal Strong-Bluepill boosted Golem can withstand in FFA1?
Wynona Mesopotamia iMune Empire	Posted - 2008.01.05 19:08:00 - [139] Take note; put the word 'exploit' or 'cheating' in the topic and watch the malfunctioning smoke alarms squeal. I like the idea of black ops causing havoc in hi sec then jumping out to safety, it's funny as hell. Not much different than suicide ganking. The ship is expensive and very time intensive to train for, very comparible to a losing a bunch of suicide battleships over time. The pilot gets a sec hit and risks losing his BO ship, sounds about right to me. Too bad it's poo poo'd now. From the player guide Quote: Finding help Always search the Knowledge Base before contacting Customer Support. The information is frequently updated and new articles are added often. In most cases, it quickly provides our players with the answers they need. I went to Eve Support, no where does it say the knowledge base is outdated and should be used at my own risk, but it should. iMune Empire FAQ's
Karlemgne Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2008.01.05 19:36:00 - [140] Originally by: Yohanes Flame Edited by: Yohanes Flame on 04/01/2008 20:34:08 So slow boating back to the gate tanking is an exploit. Also are not low sec turrets owned by concord? You can say what you like, but CCP has made it clear that if you get criminally flagged in high security space CONCORD is supposed to kill you. No exceptions. We're LUCKY they don't turn off the ability to attack non-war targets all together. The way it is now, you've got to make the choice: Is this guy worth losing my ship over? As for slow boating it back to the gate, I think you don't really understand what you're talking about. The faction navies that patrol the gates, and spawn when an outlaw jumps into high security ARE NOT concord--they are faction police. So in this case, yes, if you can tank them and make it back to the gate then great. The second you attack someone in high-sec though, CONCORD spawns, and (again) you can't get away from them. Lastly, no sentries aren't owned my concord they're owned by factions. -Karlemgne
Kira Direll Niflhel TALIONIS ALLIANCE	Posted - 2008.01.05 19:39:00 - [141] Edited by: Kira Direll on 05/01/2008 19:40:00 Originally by: Wynona stuff just stop it. you are just bitter that CCP deemed the actions of your alliance as exploit and now you and other imunes have to jump every bandwagon in reach to bash on CCP. its getting old. --- Disclaimer: sadly, all dumbass opinions or expressions i make _do_ reflect on my corp. they might not reflect on individual members, but who am i to not take responsibility and act accoordingly?
cal nereus Hobos of War Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.01.05 20:30:00 - [142] Hi. CCP endorses suicide ganking in high-sec, as long as it really is suicide. Bye. --- Join BH-DL Skills
Victor Ivanov Minmatar The Fated Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.01.05 20:56:00 - [143] Originally by: cal nereus Hi. CCP endorses suicide ganking in high-sec, as long as it really is suicide. Bye. 'Course. I see a lot of people respond stating that Concord being omnipotent seems like an arbitrary decision, but it is clearly not. It is what defines the areas and region that you are piloting your ship in. High sec is high security, it is safe to a degree, and that degree being "The consequences to attacking things in high sec is that you will die." Being able to suicide larger ships such as freighters can be irritating for freighters, I can imagine, but it is an integral part of the very fibres of Eve: --> FREEDOM <-- Risk reward, all of that jazz. Being able to evade concord means that High Sec is no longer what it was intended to be: A safe space where death may occur if you have all of your proverbial eggs in one specific badly tanked basket. (I heard Baskets don't tank very well. ) Finally, just to clear something up: If you are an outlaw and therefore unwanted in high sec, or if you have low faction standings to say....Caldari, evading those people is not considered an exploit (Last I checked anyway) because it's not actually a Concord-okken, but rather a consequent to your dastardly ways that is supposed to deterr outlaws from being able to move around in high sec easily. So yeah. -Concordokken = death, if not= exploit -outlaw sec status, faction dislike etc = not exploit and not always death. ----------------------
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.01.05 20:56:00 - [144] WTS - One Sin. Some scratch marks on the paint. SKUNK

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] :: 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.