EVE Search - One step towards land of carebears

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

One step towards land of carebears

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kuolematon Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United	Posted - 2008.05.23 12:41:00 - [1] Edited by: Kuolematon on 23/05/2008 12:41:07 Gang Support for Missions Some changes to the Agent Mission system to implement proper support for groups of players completing missions together, including reward distribution and anti-griefing measures. Seems like Motsu-people won over lofty-people. Sad day to PvP oriented game like EVE. "The Amarr are the tanking and ganking floating rods of ~~gold~~crap"
Martin Mckenna D00M.	Posted - 2008.05.23 12:47:00 - [2] Originally by: Kuolematon Edited by: Kuolematon on 23/05/2008 12:41:07 Gang Support for Missions Some changes to the Agent Mission system to implement proper support for groups of players completing missions together, including reward distribution and anti-griefing measures. Seems like Motsu-people won over lofty-people. Sad day to PvP oriented game like EVE. Since when was warping in to kill a mission runner considered PVP. ---------------------------------------------
baltec1 Antares Shipyards	Posted - 2008.05.23 12:49:00 - [3] Originally by: Martin Mckenna Originally by: Kuolematon Edited by: Kuolematon on 23/05/2008 12:41:07 Gang Support for Missions Some changes to the Agent Mission system to implement proper support for groups of players completing missions together, including reward distribution and anti-griefing measures. Seems like Motsu-people won over lofty-people. Sad day to PvP oriented game like EVE. Since when was warping in to kill a mission runner considered PVP. when they are at war with you?
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2008.05.23 12:51:00 - [4] For all we know, it might just some exploit fixes like can-flipping. SHould can-flipping be fixed, I'm sure there would be someone to scream that CCP caters to carebears, too. ------------------------------------------
VinkNut Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.05.23 12:54:00 - [5] die bears
Quelque Chose New Eden Roller Disco Supply	Posted - 2008.05.23 12:57:00 - [6] Shooting people isn't griefing. It's probably related to people who blow up the can that has the damsel in it or whatever. But it's too late now; since you've gone and had a knee jerk reaction already that means the sky really is gonna fall. Nice goin man. ___________________________________________
Karanth Eve's Brothers of Destiny FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:02:00 - [7] Edited by: Karanth on 23/05/2008 13:03:39 Even though I've only been on the receiving side of such tomfoolery, I respect the rights of those who do it. If people fail at learning who to trust when doing missions, either suck it up and kill them for their acts, or cry harder, but in silence. -1 CCP. EDIT: Receiving the "can asploded" thing, not the "gangmate pulls a Lofty" thing.
Karando Random Goods	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:03:00 - [8] Originally by: Shadowsword SHould can-flipping be fixed There's nothing to be fixed. If carebears decide to drop their oh-so-valuable ore in a jetcan instead of an anchored secure can, there is no problem. And don't tell me mining into secure cans isn't possible.
Mashie Saldana Hooligans Of War	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:11:00 - [9] Originally by: Shadowsword For all we know, it might just some exploit fixes like can-flipping. SHould can-flipping be fixed, I'm sure there would be someone to scream that CCP caters to carebears, too. No it's about wardecs no longer shared within gangs.
Rastigan Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:27:00 - [10] Edited by: Rastigan on 23/05/2008 13:27:25 Originally by: Karando Originally by: Shadowsword SHould can-flipping be fixed There's nothing to be fixed. If carebears decide to drop their oh-so-valuable ore in a jetcan instead of an anchored secure can, there is no problem. And don't tell me mining into secure cans isn't possible. 3,900m3 secure vs 27,000m3 jetcan try mining into a can that you can fill in one full mining cycle.. The annoyance of can flipping is worth it, and nothing should change.
eeevans Four Rings Souls of Vengeance	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:37:00 - [11] Originally by: Kuolematon Seems like Motsu-people won over lofty-people. Sad day to PvP oriented game like EVE. uh-oh... a little bit of sick just came up in my mouth. are you seriously calling lofty-tactics pvp? FUNNNEEEEEEEEE.
Roshan longshot Ordos Humanitas Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:40:00 - [12] Bet you think Eve is like it is because of PvPers...that CCP has managed to expand and buyout other companies on just the revenue from the PvP crowd. Sad fact is PvPer are out numbered 10-1 by the carebears...who enjoy the game mechanics as much as you enjoy killing them. This is such a sad thread.... I though these threads would have died out long ago.... Damn you CCP! Why did you have to make such a good game?? Yes you drew me back AGAIN! Oh well wheres the Omber?
Tippia School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:49:00 - [13] ITT: We make assumptions about changes that we know nothing about.
Shirley Serious Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:50:00 - [14] Originally by: Kuolematon Gang Support for Missions Some changes to the Agent Mission system to implement proper support for groups of players completing missions together, including reward distribution and anti-griefing measures. where is this from? patch notes?
Matrix Skye	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:50:00 - [15] Some say carebear tears are good. But I think 'carebear pirate' tears are sweeter and exquisitely delicious. I get the feeling I am going to feast off this thread alone today .
Tippia School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:57:00 - [16] Edited by: Tippia on 23/05/2008 13:58:17 Originally by: Martin Mckenna [Since when was warping in to kill a mission runner considered PVP. It's certainly PvP, but it is just as certainly not griefing, so chances are that this is not what they're talking about. To use the PvP:ers standard phrase: PvP isn't griefing, and unlike PvP, griefing people will get you banned. So, seeing as how the OP doesn't seem to like these changes, the only conclusion I can reach is that he isn't a PvP:er. Rather, he must be a griefer, and the sooner the devs manage to drive him away from the game, the better the game will be.
Tippia School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:57:00 - [17] Edited by: Tippia on 23/05/2008 13:56:50 edit: double post
Quelque Chose New Eden Roller Disco Supply	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:57:00 - [18] Originally by: Shirley Serious Originally by: Kuolematon Gang Support for Missions Some changes to the Agent Mission system to implement proper support for groups of players completing missions together, including reward distribution and anti-griefing measures. where is this from? patch notes? It's from the same page as vague, tentative plans for the Interbus. ___________________________________________
Stakhanov Metafarmers	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:58:00 - [19] It's not even in the patch notes , it's in the drawing board. Chill. That means there is a vague possibility it could be implemented... at the time we get a new bounty system If the worst comes to the worst... we still have heavy dictors and suicide torp ravens.
Marcus Xavier Xavier Institute for Higher Learning	Posted - 2008.05.23 14:01:00 - [20] Originally by: Shirley Serious Originally by: Kuolematon Gang Support for Missions Some changes to the Agent Mission system to implement proper support for groups of players completing missions together, including reward distribution and anti-griefing measures. where is this from? patch notes? On the Drawingboard ... which is another way of saying, at the watercooler. http://myeve.eve-online.com/updates/plannedfeat.asp ---------------- Mutatis Mutandis
Deviana Sevidon Panta-Rhei Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.05.23 14:03:00 - [21] Originally by: VinkNut die bears Give Lofty a hug, will you
Stakhanov Metafarmers	Posted - 2008.05.23 14:06:00 - [22] It's a carebear idea , a change suggested by CCP on the drawing board. I heard nerfs don't go by the player base very well.
Zaknussem The Ironbreakers	Posted - 2008.05.23 14:21:00 - [23] SAD PVP'ER IS SAD. (Anyone that knows of a PVP ship that looks pouty has just been handed to him all the ingredients to make one of those "Motivational" posters.)
Meissa Anunthiel	Posted - 2008.05.23 14:46:00 - [24] Destroying mission objectives or otherwise ruining the mission by ganging with someone is griefing, period, which is what the line being discussed seems to be pertaining to. Other than that, you "Elite" PvP guys are funny. When one of the participants is unwilling, it's called bullying and, stricto sensu, griefing. Picking a fight against PvEers doesn't reveal any valor on the part of the attacker and neither is it, by any measure, a show of competence or skills. The only thing is shows about you is that you're not [wo]man enough to pick up a fight with people who are able to stand up to you. In other words, you suck. [this doesn't apply to low-sec/nullsec as people are implicitly agreeing to PvP in these zones]
Wu Jiun State War Academy	Posted - 2008.05.23 14:50:00 - [25] Edited by: Wu Jiun on 23/05/2008 14:53:52 Edited by: Wu Jiun on 23/05/2008 14:53:38 Originally by: Martin Mckenna Since when was warping in to kill a mission runner considered PVP. Since both the guy warping in and the mission runner were players? Edit: But yeah ganking some pve guy 20vs1 in 0.0 is nothing short of heroism...
Ezekiel Sulastin Central Research Nexus	Posted - 2008.05.23 15:32:00 - [26] Edited by: Ezekiel Sulastin on 23/05/2008 15:32:34 If it's a change to let people trust making gangs again, sweet! Circumventing the war warning can hardly be considered elite PVP. Ya wanna bait him? Fine. Social engineering? Works for me. Playing with the gang war aggression tactics so that the guy in question has no warning other than "people suck?" Screw that crap. ---- WTB Armor Nerf Hardener II, 10^100 isk OBO
Saloris Nighthawke Ryche's Aggressors Asylum	Posted - 2008.05.23 15:53:00 - [27] So, I am sitting here reading this thread and the way it is going back and forth. I chewed this fat for a bit and I have some thoughts I would like to share. The situation as I see it is this: Eve is mainly a PvP game w/ limited PvE elements. Eve is a game that suggests having friends for more fun and capability. There is a huge dissparity in the playerbase IE: players 5 years old and 1 day old all thrown into one sandbox.(What this encompasses is for another discussion.) Newish (noobs) players are told to "Get a friend to help" or "Getting ganked? Make friends and get them back!" by people on the forums. This is a viable and welcome thing as it helps Eve grow and form new friendships, Corps, Alliances etc. Now, You have a bunch of players that may only know a few other players or none at all. They ask for help and someone takes advantage of this and does a "lofty" on them. This can be devastating to someone who REALLY is new and is trying to make friends in a new game (to them). Eve has gotten to the point that you cannot trust anyone you don't already know and half of the ones you DO know you can't trust either. This is bad business. This could eventually cause a drop in new subs as new players w/out an established set of friends have virtually no chance to get ahead. CCP wants people to start playing this game and continue to do so, they also want the people that have been playing 5 years to stay as well. I am just thinking that whatever these changes entail, they will be implimented in such a way as to maximize the games growth, as CCP sees it, not you or me. - sig was here
Setana Manoro Firefly Inc.	Posted - 2008.05.23 15:56:00 - [28] Edited by: Setana Manoro on 23/05/2008 16:00:39 Edited by: Setana Manoro on 23/05/2008 15:58:07 Originally by: Martin Mckenna Originally by: Kuolematon Edited by: Kuolematon on 23/05/2008 12:41:07 Gang Support for Missions Some changes to the Agent Mission system to implement proper support for groups of players completing missions together, including reward distribution and anti-griefing measures. Seems like Motsu-people won over lofty-people. Sad day to PvP oriented game like EVE. Since when was warping in to kill a mission runner considered PVP. Long before you started posting your cnr ganked kills in hi-sec on Tri killboard. Good enough for ya ? However if they improve the security of the mission runners, like they have done with the wreck ownership change, they really need to reduce the ammount of ISK you make / mission. Otherwise it's just another CCP screw-up that totally will imbalance the game. Originally by: Wu Jiun Edited by: Wu Jiun on 23/05/2008 14:53:52 Edited by: Wu Jiun on 23/05/2008 14:53:38 Originally by: Martin Mckenna Since when was warping in to kill a mission runner considered PVP. Since both the guy warping in and the mission runner were players? Edit: But yeah ganking some pve guy 20vs1 in 0.0 is nothing short of heroism... Nope, that's killboard padding but in a different form. Remember how proud Tri were with their 92-95% efficiency ?
Meissa Anunthiel	Posted - 2008.05.23 16:21:00 - [29] Originally by: Saloris Nighthawke The situation as I see it is this: Eve is mainly a PvP game w/ limited PvE elements. Eve is a game that suggests having friends for more fun and capability. There is a huge dissparity in the playerbase IE: players 5 years old and 1 day old all thrown into one sandbox.(What this encompasses is for another discussion.) That's a falacious statement. Case in point, I haven't participated in any PvP activity in the first 8 months of play. By "any", I mean I hadn't even targetted a player except fellow corpmates. Most of the people I know are the same. Further, the majority of the players seem to be dwelling in high-sec empire according to the devblog reports, not 0.0 or lowsec. As such, defining eve as "mainly PvP" is wrong. Everyone has, at every time, the ability to participate in PvP but, for the majority of players, it seems to be against their will (or they wouldn't live in highsec). I would also agree that the ""endgame"" content is in PvP areas, but that doesn't mean that Eve as a whole is mainly PvP. I agree with the rest of your post about trust though.
Valan The Fated Odyssey.	Posted - 2008.05.23 16:50:00 - [30] Originally by: Saloris Nighthawke Eve has gotten to the point that you cannot trust anyone you don't already know and half of the ones you DO know you can't trust either. Guiding principle of EVE it's always been that way. /start sig I love old characters that post 'I've beeen playing the game four years' when I know their account has been sold on. /end sig
Euriti Caritas.	Posted - 2008.05.23 16:57:00 - [31] Originally by: Shadowsword For all we know, it might just some exploit fixes like can-flipping. SHould can-flipping be fixed, I'm sure there would be someone to scream that CCP caters to carebears, too. Can flipping an exploit? LOL!
Saloris Nighthawke Ryche's Aggressors Asylum	Posted - 2008.05.23 17:01:00 - [32] Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel That's a falacious statement. Case in point, I haven't participated in any PvP activity in the first 8 months of play. By "any", I mean I hadn't even targetted a player except fellow corpmates. Most of the people I know are the same. Further, the majority of the players seem to be dwelling in high-sec empire according to the devblog reports, not 0.0 or lowsec. As such, defining eve as "mainly PvP" is wrong. Everyone has, at every time, the ability to participate in PvP but, for the majority of players, it seems to be against their will (or they wouldn't live in highsec). I would also agree that the ""endgame"" content is in PvP areas, but that doesn't mean that Eve as a whole is mainly PvP. I agree with the rest of your post about trust though. I see what you are saying and while I do not disagree with you, there are those that will point out that everytime you undock you are consenting to PvP. Therefore my statement is not falacious it was just not quantified properly. - sig was here
Danton Marcellus Nebula Rasa Holdings	Posted - 2008.05.23 17:08:00 - [33] What's so great about Lofty people? The guy's an ass. Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav! Also Known As
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2008.05.23 17:18:00 - [34] Originally by: Saloris Nighthawke Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel That's a falacious statement. Case in point, I haven't participated in any PvP activity in the first 8 months of play. By "any", I mean I hadn't even targetted a player except fellow corpmates. Most of the people I know are the same. Further, the majority of the players seem to be dwelling in high-sec empire according to the devblog reports, not 0.0 or lowsec. As such, defining eve as "mainly PvP" is wrong. Everyone has, at every time, the ability to participate in PvP but, for the majority of players, it seems to be against their will (or they wouldn't live in highsec). I would also agree that the ""endgame"" content is in PvP areas, but that doesn't mean that Eve as a whole is mainly PvP. I agree with the rest of your post about trust though. I see what you are saying and while I do not disagree with you, there are those that will point out that everytime you undock you are consenting to PvP. Therefore my statement is not falacious it was just not quantified properly. I think that it would be more accurate to say that EVE is a sandbox game, of which PvP is a large part. ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.81 (Updated 4/8)
Lurana Lay	Posted - 2008.05.23 18:10:00 - [35] Originally by: eeevans Originally by: Kuolematon Seems like Motsu-people won over lofty-people. Sad day to PvP oriented game like EVE. uh-oh... a little bit of sick just came up in my mouth. are you seriously calling lofty-tactics pvp? FUNNNEEEEEEEEE. This. If you call a lofty pvp, then you need to man up and go find a real fight.
clone 1 Laughing Leprechauns Corporation	Posted - 2008.05.23 18:27:00 - [36] Does the OP ever not post crap? -------------------------------------------------- The Angels Have the Phone Box
Tippia School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2008.05.23 18:29:00 - [37] Originally by: clone 1 Does the OP ever not post crap? Seeing as how he apparently thinks PvPers are griefers… no.
Dadack Dycsel	Posted - 2008.05.23 18:54:00 - [38] That's a falacious statement. Case in point, I haven't participated in any PvP activity in the first 8 months of play. By "any", I mean I hadn't even targetted a player except fellow corpmates. Most of the people I know are the same. Further, the majority of the players seem to be dwelling in high-sec empire according to the devblog reports, not 0.0 or lowsec. As such, defining eve as "mainly PvP" is wrong. Everyone has, at every time, the ability to participate in PvP but, for the majority of players, it seems to be against their will (or they wouldn't live in highsec). I would also agree that the ""endgame"" content is in PvP areas, but that doesn't mean that Eve as a whole is mainly PvP. I agree with the rest of your post about trust though. ^^the problem with eve atm. EVE is a pvp game. no reason anyone should be able too make a 100mill a day doing combat missions in secure space no wonder lagg is so bad in empire :(( put level 3 missions in low-sec and level 4's in 0.0 Kick the cowards out of empire make them earn their way.
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2008.05.23 19:02:00 - [39] Originally by: Dadack Dycsel EVE is a pvp game. no reason anyone should be able too make a 100mill a day doing combat missions in secure space no wonder lagg is so bad in empire :(( put level 3 missions in low-sec and level 4's in 0.0 Kick the cowards out of empire make them earn their way. Do you have any idea how terrible that idea is? Any at all? ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.81 (Updated 4/8)
Saloris Nighthawke Ryche's Aggressors Asylum	Posted - 2008.05.23 19:23:00 - [40] Edited by: Saloris Nighthawke on 23/05/2008 19:23:39 Originally by: Tarminic I think that it would be more accurate to say that EVE is a sandbox game, of which PvP is a large part. Aye, that it is and I said as much in my original post, just not on the same line as Meissa replied to. edit: grammar - sig was here
Shirley Serious Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.05.23 19:48:00 - [41] Originally by: Stakhanov it's in the drawing board. Chill. wait a minute... Quote: Gang Support for Missions Some changes to the Agent Mission system to implement proper support for groups of players completing missions together, including reward distribution and anti-griefing measures. Hmm, the "my fleet and I have completed the mission" option which shares the rewards between them by a game mechanic, rather than the players doing it themselves, sounds like proper support for groups... And the warning popup on joining gangs warning about wars and things, sounds like an "anti-griefing measure"... Means that... Omg, It's already implemented!!! everyone wear your tinfoil hats to shield yourselves from the falling sky!!!
JamnOne	Posted - 2008.05.23 20:01:00 - [42] Edited by: JamnOne on 23/05/2008 20:05:55 As mentioned before - it is in the drawing board and according to the paragraph intro to the drawing board it is basically a napkin idea. The sad thing is - if I am not mistaken this part: "Some changes to the Agent Mission system to implement proper support for groups of players completing missions together, including reward distribution" has already been implemented so I am thinking that the Drawing Board needs to be updated. ________________________ Originally by: CCP Wrangler So, it's all my fault. Originally by: CCP Prism X Hah! Vengeance is sweet!
Victor Valka Kissaki Corporation	Posted - 2008.05.23 20:09:00 - [43] It's not even in the patch notes and people already whine. Wankers. Originally by: Roxanna Kell You are insane.
Amateratsu Terra Incognita Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.05.23 22:27:00 - [44] That is an old item from the drawing board that has already been implemented years ago, it refers to the sharing of mission rewards with gang members which as started is already part of the game. Take what you see on the drawing board with a pinch of salt as it very very rarely gets updated
Pooka United Space Aillance USA	Posted - 2008.05.23 22:57:00 - [45] Though this was a game where you can choice what you want to do. My Corp is not intertested in PVP. so we LIKE the ANTI-GRIFING measures. bye the bye I personally talked to Oveur and he promised me there would always be a place for my kind in EVE, solo and care bear high sec corp. Talked during the first and last Vegas gathering. PROMISES MADE PROMISES KEPT BRING THE BRIGHT STAR BACK!!!
Ashina Sito Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2008.05.23 23:02:00 - [46] Originally by: Shadowsword For all we know, it might just some exploit fixes like can-flipping. NOOO!!! I am 5/1 with my Anti-flipper miner for the first week at it. Need more kills. There just doesn't seem to be enough of them out there though.
Avaricia The Accursed	Posted - 2008.05.24 00:44:00 - [47] Originally by: Martin Mckenna Since when was warping in to kill a mission runner considered PVP. this is a good point, actually. i will demonstrate below: pvp is player vs player players are inherently real people carebears are not real people reign of terror griefmatic
Havohej The Defias Brotherhood DEFI4NT	Posted - 2008.05.24 03:01:00 - [48] Originally by: Tippia ITT: We make assumptions about changes that we know nothing about. Which one are you making, so I can make the opposite assumption, then we can like, argue or something and hopefully make this thread more entertaining (at least for me)? Nah, you're right... I should prolly just leave well enough alone. Originally by: techzer0 I'm invincible until proven wrong
Kuolematon Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United	Posted - 2008.05.24 08:30:00 - [49] Originally by: JamnOne .. has already been implemented so I am thinking that the Drawing Board needs to be updated. Ah, you spotted it! "The Amarr are the tanking and ganking floating rods of ~~gold~~crap"
Jinx Barker GFB Scientific	Posted - 2008.05.24 08:59:00 - [50] Originally by: Quelque Chose It's from the same page as vague, tentative plans for the Interbus. Which means exactly SQUAT from CCP... I agree with the above quote: - will believe it when I see it. Till then, it is just fluff, and has no bearing on the game whatsoever.
Lyra Blazing	Posted - 2008.05.24 10:55:00 - [51] Edited by: Lyra Blazing on 24/05/2008 11:02:49 Edited by: Lyra Blazing on 24/05/2008 10:56:41 Edited by: Lyra Blazing on 24/05/2008 10:55:51 Hihi i love you pvp types. This is about the lofty scam btw. The reason its implemented now is fw. So its not about Carebears at all they have long since adapted. Its because all you pvp types feared that you will be killed by your fw gang mates before you even reach the objective. So ccp ended lofty because pirates and pvpers whined about it. Linkage Realy have to love them for it :)
Jalmari Huitsikko Karjala Inc.	Posted - 2008.05.24 11:38:00 - [52] Greatest flaw of EvE is that there is any high sec space at all. If low sec was as secure it could get all mechanics could be adjusted to support traveling and doing missions in really low security space instead of all these silly "exploits" of different kind of rules to suicide gank or can flip etc. lameness which doesn't make any sense at all TBH.
Brachis Eve Liberation Force	Posted - 2008.05.24 11:50:00 - [53] This is so ridiculous. Leave it the the EVE community to be outspoken against Anti-Griefing measures. The whole point of Griefing is that it's done to make life hard for other players for no other reason than to laugh to yourself and your buddies about it, which detracts from the game. Griefing is a practice which is universally damaging to a game's community. Anti-griefing measures aren't just there to make it hard for pirates, they're there to make it hard for griefers. Pirates have the unique position of performing their actions as a means to profit, and griefers and pirates are often mistaken for one another, but they are not necessarily the same thing. I guarantee you that there will still be ways to scan out mission runners, loot the wrecks they leave, and attack them if they're in insecure space or if they're a war target. The EVE community as a whole, especially the anti-carebears, really needs to get a grip and realize that forcing and encouraging space to be less safe is NOT an improvement. Low-sec and null-sec are great boons and wonderful gameplay mechanics, but the entire universe being insecure for players of any kind leaves the casual community living in fear, and would likely cause them to leave the game entirely. CCP knows this. Intelligent players who understand game design know this. Why can't the rest of you figure it out? "I do this with but one small ship and I am called a terrorist... you do it with an entire fleet and are called an Emperor."
Fanjita	Posted - 2008.05.24 11:52:00 - [54] Originally by: Shadowsword For all we know, it might just some exploit fixes like can-flipping. SHould can-flipping be fixed, I'm sure there would be someone to scream that CCP caters to carebears, too. Care to provide a link that says can flipping is an exploit?
Avon Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.05.24 12:08:00 - [55] Originally by: Brachis CCP knows this. Intelligent players who understand game design know this. Why can't the rest of you figure it out? Good job us stupid meatheads kept playing an Eve of fear and risk, an exciting Eve, long enough for casual gamers to join and soften it up, amirite? Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Brachis Eve Liberation Force	Posted - 2008.05.24 12:15:00 - [56] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Brachis CCP knows this. Intelligent players who understand game design know this. Why can't the rest of you figure it out? Good job us stupid meatheads kept playing an Eve of fear and risk, an exciting Eve, long enough for casual gamers to join and soften it up, amirite? I'm not trying to say that anyone who is anti-carebear is stupid, and I'm sorry I typed that last part poorly. I shall edit it to better convey my intent. But I'd also argue that the economy of EVE is built around the sum of its parts, which includes the carebear mission runners and newbie miners. I think it's stilly to say that EVE would be better off as entirely insecure space, because the number of people playing and supporting the game would drop dramatically. And I mean both economically in game and lining CCP's pockets. Do we need to make EVE into carebear land? No, not at all. But adding in anti-grief measures for the players who play in highsec (Which, as some corporations have proven, isn't all that secure really) isn't going to do that. "I do this with but one small ship and I am called a terrorist... you do it with an entire fleet and are called an Emperor."
Wild Rho GoonFleet	Posted - 2008.05.24 12:17:00 - [57] Originally by: Avon Good job us stupid meatheads kept playing an Eve of fear and risk, an exciting Eve, long enough for casual gamers to join and soften it up, amirite? Hear hear, now that the intelligent player base has finally arrived the rest of us should all just go away and stop being the evil griefers that we so obviously are. While we're at it we should totally add consensual pvp flags and all weapons should be changed to some sort of device that gives the target a big hug and makes them feel happy.
Taua Roqa Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2008.05.24 12:27:00 - [58] /pvp gets blown up :¦( /pvp -------------------------------------------- [IMAGE REMOVED] Threads are stacking-nerfed; the more posts you add the less effective those posts are. My I/Q Ration!!!11
Wild Rho GoonFleet	Posted - 2008.05.24 12:35:00 - [59] /pvp gets blown up :¦( *gets another ship /pvp
slothe	Posted - 2008.05.24 13:00:00 - [60] tactic was always a bit lame tbh.
VLAD DRACU gandacul rau	Posted - 2008.05.24 13:10:00 - [61] Originally by: Pooka Though this was a game where you can choice what you want to do. My Corp is not intertested in PVP. so we LIKE the ANTI-GRIFING measures. bye the bye I personally talked to Oveur and he promised me there would always be a place for my kind in EVE, solo and care bear high sec corp. Talked during the first and last Vegas gathering. /signed
000Hunter000 Missiles 'R' Us	Posted - 2008.05.24 13:59:00 - [62] I just chuckled! funny how people abuse the term pvp to justify lamer griefing tactics like logoffski, canflipping and noobbaiting _______________________________________________________ CCP, let us pay the online shop with Direct Debit!!!

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.