| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Qvar Dar'Zanar
EVE University
Ivy League
26
   |
Posted - 2012.04.01 20:39:00 -
[121] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:Richard Aiel wrote:So Im curious, does the OP get banned given he showed knowledge of using that exploit and knowledge that it is an exploit? Only if you think a person should go to jail for committing a crime BEFORE it was a crime.
I think he confesed to have done it like 600 times in the OP, but maybe we are reading a different thread? |
Etheon Teknesch
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
9
|
Posted - 2012.04.01 20:39:00 -
[122] - Quote
Page 6 and he's still frantically trying to defend this point by wielding a dictionary and getting his E-Lawyer up.
I trust the irony of whining and moaning about how he can't gank with impunity or without risk is lost on no one.
At the end of the day, CCP can change their EULA/definitions of exploits as often and as drastically as they please. You know, since they own this game and stuff. If you don't like it, you and everyone that agrees with you - which, as you have observed correctly, seems to be the minority - is free to quit the game at any time 
edit: A little too slow, but what can you do. |
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
273
|
Posted - 2012.04.01 21:42:00 -
[123] - Quote
Etheon Teknesch wrote:Page 6 and he's still frantically trying to defend this point by wielding a dictionary and getting his E-Lawyer up. I trust the irony of whining and moaning about how he can't gank with impunity or without risk is lost on no one. At the end of the day, CCP can change their EULA/definitions of exploits as often and as drastically as they please. You know, since they own this game and stuff. If you don't like it, you and everyone that agrees with you - which, as you have observed correctly, seems to be the minority - is free to quit the game at any time edit: A little too slow, but what can you do.
Nah, learn to read.
Instead of quitting, its better to just specifically target younger carebears until they quit EVE permanently.
Even if ganking at a loss now, they can't match your wallet or income.
And yes, you do seem slow. Sadly, you can't fix stupid.
Good thing I don't share your problem. |
Nick Bison
Bison Industrial Inc
Thundering Herd
109
|
Posted - 2012.04.01 21:51:00 -
[124] - Quote
Nick Bison wrote:TOS Number 23:
You may not exploit any bug in EVE Online to gain an unfair advantage over other players. You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum. Bugs should be reported through the bug reporting tool on our website.
So, did the OP just screw himself?
Quoting myself as it seems some folk haven't had the chance to read the whole thread.
Just reading the OP then jump to the last page and pick up the whining part.
As I see this, OP did this deliberately and is now trying to e-lawyer his upcoming punishment down.
Nothing clever at this time. |
stoicfaux
903
|
Posted - 2012.04.01 22:04:00 -
[125] - Quote
Nick Bison wrote:Nick Bison wrote:TOS Number 23:
You may not exploit any bug in EVE Online to gain an unfair advantage over other players. You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum. Bugs should be reported through the bug reporting tool on our website.
So, did the OP just screw himself? Quoting myself as it seems some folk haven't had the chance to read the whole thread. Just reading the OP then jump to the last page and pick up the whining part. As I see this, OP did this deliberately and is now trying to e-lawyer his upcoming punishment down.
/facepalm
What the OP did was "legal" at the time. However, it was a technique that CCP hadn't realized was possible and more importantly, they have decided that it is detrimental to the game. Thus CCP has officially declared it an exploit until they can patch it.
What you really should be arguing over is the OP's implicit assertion that Eve is catering too much to carebears in a PvP game, and whether his crusade of killing newbie miners to encourage botting to keep ship prices down is a good idea or not.
Dammit, if CCP hadn't nerfed the Comet's blinking light, I could now be flying around in Jita in my "Whaaaaaambulance!"
Goon Tears: -á25% Alcohol by Volume |
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
274
|
Posted - 2012.04.01 22:17:00 -
[126] - Quote
Nick Bison wrote:Nick Bison wrote:TOS Number 23:
You may not exploit any bug in EVE Online to gain an unfair advantage over other players. You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum. Bugs should be reported through the bug reporting tool on our website.
So, did the OP just screw himself? Quoting myself as it seems some folk haven't had the chance to read the whole thread. Just reading the OP then jump to the last page and pick up the whining part. As I see this, OP did this deliberately and is now trying to e-lawyer his upcoming punishment down.
So, lets do some e-lawyering.
I 'exploited' for three months solid.
I openly tutored other people how to 'exploit'.
I blatantly used these 'exploits' to kill 120 Billion worth of Exhumers.
I laugh because they won't see a single reimbursement.
By looting their wrecks and threatening them, I made around 12 Billion ISK in profit.
And I'm still 'exploiting' - because I still unload my mods into the Orca.
This thread has a detailed primer on how to 'exploit' and 'evade concord' by saving your mods.
Its strange how I'm not the slightest bit worried about getting banned. Or even warned.
Maybe its because YOU have no idea what you are talking about.
Carebears call anything they don't like an exploit.
FREE PROTIP: You should only quote yourself when you say something smart. Not when you say something stupid.
|
Richard Aiel
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
90
|
Posted - 2012.04.01 22:33:00 -
[127] - Quote
Qvar Dar'Zanar wrote:FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:Richard Aiel wrote:So Im curious, does the OP get banned given he showed knowledge of using that exploit and knowledge that it is an exploit? Only if you think a person should go to jail for committing a crime BEFORE it was a crime. I think he confesed to have done it like 600 times in the OP, but maybe we are reading a different thread?
kinda the point I was going at
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1052586#post1052586-á thats why "EVE is dying" and you only have yourself to blame -á |
ShipToaster
154
|
Posted - 2012.04.01 23:37:00 -
[128] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:This about CCP changing the rules to satisfy the whines of one group of players, at the expense of another group. This is about the GMs being "too busy" to enforce long-held rules on exploits, yet them adding more rules and then stating that they would make judgement calls based on "the spirit of the law" which puts a chilling effect on emergent gameplay.
I noticed this on the eve university wardec exploit when I petitioned it prior to the public reversal of the position on this as a known exploit.
Simply put the response was that this was an exploit, they would look into it but I was asked who was involved, told them eve university and the petition was closed and I was told it was not an exploit, asked for an explanation of how and why this known exploit had changed with no one being told about it, then a month later the rules were removed completely in public. This was six months after the exploit by eve university had begun.
Was never told why the rules were changed and eve university was given explicit permission to do so and why was not informed why no one else in the wider EVE community was told. Nearly a year later I still have no idea when or why this exploit was changed beyond an interpreted comment that GM's were too busy to enforce the games rules.
Too busy to enforce the games rules. :ccp:
M I T T E N S |
ChYph3r
Multiplex Gaming
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
45
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 00:15:00 -
[129] - Quote
Totally TL; DR
FREE THE MITTANI ---- 10058
AMP - Angry Monkey Podcast |
Lelob
ElitistOps
Pandemic Legion
29
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 00:40:00 -
[130] - Quote
Rock on mate!
And you're completely right about mining bots being good for the game. Cheaper minerals means less miners, cheaper ships, cheaper mods ala more missioners/ratters, and potentially more pvpers. Trying to make mining a good profession again is a mistake on CCP's part and tbqh, if they changed all bounties ->alloys right now it would benefit the game immeasurably.
In any case thanks! |
|
|
Kyshonuba
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 14:36:00 -
[131] - Quote
Lelob wrote:Rock on mate!
And you're completely right about mining bots being good for the game. Cheaper minerals means less miners, cheaper ships, cheaper mods ala more missioners/ratters, and potentially more pvpers. Trying to make mining a good profession again is a mistake on CCP's part and tbqh, if they changed all bounties ->alloys right now it would benefit the game immeasurably.
In any case thanks!
Yes ....... thats is the very heart of the orginal poster.
Ore/Mine production should be done by mining-bots (or item reprocessing) and not by real players.So anybody who shoots "real" miners (not bots) does the game a favour.
The holy knight isnt the concord rescue ship .... its the suicide ganker who is cleaning Eve from lazy playing style.
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1380
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 15:12:00 -
[132] - Quote
Kazacy wrote:Herr Wilkus wrote:Asuri Kinnes wrote:Herr Wilkus wrote:Eh, whats the point of arguing.
CCP GMs want to coddle carebears - even if they have to rewrite their own rules to do it. Avoiding Concord has always been an exploit. Kind of understood was that the "ganker" would lose his/her stuff. Avoiding loosing stuff is an exploit. whine more. Well, for instance this statement. Avoiding Concord has always been an exploit. But warping away from the site of a gank was never considered 'avoiding Concord.' And it still isn't. (now you just can't shoot after warping) Further, warping away doesn't save your ship - Concord ALWAYS catches you and destroys you. You just shoot as much as you can before that inevitably happens. Interesting that you use the term 'stuff' very clever - CCP's policy is that you must lose your 'ship'. Not 'stuff'. You are allowed to keep your mods. Did you know that they often survive Concord death? Amazing. People need to learn to read. Oh, and for the other fellow saying that 'saving a freighter from the Boomerang/bump combination was 'impossible'. Answer: Tornados are GCC - anyone can engage them. Your solution: A single excorting Rifter with a point or two and a MWD. Tornados turn red, you point them, Concord showed up and the attack is thwarted. Easy as that. Care to revise your statement? Kind of a shame, as it could have been a new business opportunity for bored pilots: High-sec Freighter escorts. Cost of shipping goes up, but thats not a bad thing. Further, there might have been opportunities to 'bribe' the guards to look the other way. Interesting stuff that will never happen, because now we are back to the same old 'brute force' gank. To which there is NO countermeasure except cargo risk management and economics. Kind sad. There was a lot of potential for everyone, not just pirates. i am srry to say that but for your solution for freighter gank you need to play in team, after all it's a multiplayer game. aparently for carebear population anything involving more than 1 player it's bad and need to be nerfed; funny thing they say the griefers are sociopaths and without social life blah blah blah. i wonder who are the really sociopaths here?
The real sociopaths are not the gankers who log on with the intention to gank, destroy, etc. The sociopaths are the ones who want to drive people to suicide (at best) and ganking is merely a way to do it. You can tell a sociopath by how they never admit to what they do while trying to make their victim appear to be entirely at fault.
People who state plainly (like the OP) that their goal is to log on and kill stuff, gank, spank, and other shenanigans as the way of their game, are not sociopaths. I give credit to Tears, Goons (who hide real game-related goals behind griefing), Skunk and others credit for actually being honest. You don't have to like them. If a politician outright says to me "I want to take your freedom and your money and use the state to do it" I would credit him for honesty but I still would not cast a vote for him.
One thing to point out here. Most players here are Americans. Americans do not adapt to survive, or change to improve their chances to survive. The political climate of EvE comes from this influence and you can take that from the RL politics as a template: if you can't survive or adapt, then.... COMPLAIN. And ask for more laws that are basically centered around squashing or taking money from people you don't like socially or financially and giving yourself more freedom and money on the expense of others. So it should not be a surprise if carebears, their first order to being ganked, is to complain about it and ask for changes to rules and game mechanics.
The worst part is, and I hoped this topic in the original threads would not go this way, is that way too many people exist in RL with a "it can't happen to me" mentality. You'd think that, in human history where people got gassed by the millions while thinking they were only getting a shower, the human race would have learned. The only thing we can learn from history is that nobody ever learned from it. And a lot of this is from the "it can't happen to ME" mentality. Most of the problems in the world come from that mindset. When people get ganked, for whatever reason, there is a chance that a neural pathway could open up in their heads that is counter to the "can't happen to me" pattern they live under, and hence the simulation of that experience in a game might open up a chance to wake them from their RL sleepwalking. This has been one of the greatest reasons to promote EvE online.
|
Ch3244
Azule Dragoons
Sspectre
7
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 15:23:00 -
[133] - Quote
i support this |
Written Word
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
262
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 15:30:00 -
[134] - Quote
Gee Whiz my last thread about my special tactics got ruled an exploit, I should make more threads about my special tactics!
|
Hamshoe
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 15:44:00 -
[135] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:[ Americans do not adapt to survive, or change to improve their chances to survive. The political climate of EvE comes from this influence and you can take that from the RL politics as a template: if you can't survive or adapt, then.... COMPLAIN.
Your grasp of history, psychology, and sociology are suspect, and your sweeping generalization is beyond ridiculous.
A couple things you might want to consider:
During the period of 1939 -1945, what percentage of the European population moved out of the way of an active freaking war?. You'll find similar examples in almost any conflict you care to study. The inertia you ascribe to "Americans" is much more a human condition than a specifically cultural one. But it makes a nice bumper-sticker if you don't actually think about it.
Given that human success has largely been a result of social adaptation (our claws certainly haven't gotten any stronger), why in the world would you think that the ability to influence the social environment (i.e. effectively "complain") isn't adaptive? Though I suppose meta-complaining(?) is somehow exempt from your derision?
|
Shukuzen Kiraa
47-Ronin
Outer Ring Excavations Syndicate
79
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 16:07:00 -
[136] - Quote
For the TL;DR crowd.
OP is whining that he can't use an exploit anymore.
Kinda wondering why he just didn't say that and save everyone time. |
Jastra
Black Thorne Corporation
Black Thorne Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 16:21:00 -
[137] - Quote
Herr Wilkus wrote:Eh, whats the point of arguing.
reducing carebear influence over EVE - simply by reducing their numbers.
Concord provides consequences not safety, works both ways dude
|
Richard Hammond II
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
137
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 16:27:00 -
[138] - Quote
Richard Aiel wrote:Qvar Dar'Zanar wrote:FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:Richard Aiel wrote:So Im curious, does the OP get banned given he showed knowledge of using that exploit and knowledge that it is an exploit? Only if you think a person should go to jail for committing a crime BEFORE it was a crime. I think he confesed to have done it like 600 times in the OP, but maybe we are reading a different thread? kinda the point I was going at dealing with ConcordSo is that an exploit too then? The "dealing wit CONCORD" part I mean
Good question Id like to see answered by a blue
We have nt seen one of those in a while in this thread
Goons; infiltration at its best - first bob... now ccp itself. They dont realize you guys dot take this as "just a game". Bring it down guys, we're rooting for you. |
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
283
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 16:40:00 -
[139] - Quote
Written Word wrote:Gee Whiz my last thread about my special tactics got ruled an exploit, I should make more threads about my special tactics!
Gee whiz, GM's already know about this trick from my earlier posts.
The horse has left the barn, so to speak.
I understand that complaining about nerfs accomplishes nothing. (unless you are a carebear, apparently)
Which is why I feel there is little point in doing it - better to attack the carebears instead.
Which is why the purpose of this thread..... is actually to spread useful information to gankers.
My goal is to insure as many carebears get ganked as possible - as cheaply as possible.
So this primer was created to give step-by-step instructions on how to do it properly - saving gankers the trouble of guesswork and fumbling through it the first couple times.
Result:
More gankers save their mods properly....
and are able to gank more cheaply, and thus more often...
which causes more collective pain and anguish to the miner/carebear community....
and that makes me happy!!
And its sooo much more productive than complaining to CCP, don't you think? |
Kyshonuba
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 16:51:00 -
[140] - Quote
Richard Hammond II wrote:
So is that an exploit too then? The "dealing wit CONCORD" part I mean
Good question Id like to see answered by a blue
We have nt seen one of those in a while in this thread
There is an actual thread with GM answers here https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=89092 |
|
|
Smodab Ongalot
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
86
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 16:55:00 -
[141] - Quote
Herr Wilkus wrote:
I developed the 'Tornado Boomerang' technique shortly after the 'nado was released and I knew it was good - but challenging to do properly and NOT broken. The technique, done right, effectively reversed the effects of the simultaneous 'insurance nerf' that I was seeking to overcome. Used it to my benefit for 3 solid months, killing 635 Exhumers and 1 Orca, solo.
The usual rule of "You are never the first" applies here. If you "developed this 3 months ago", that 'd put you at around the beginning of January as your "discovery date".
We were doing this back in December: http://eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&view=kills&plt_id=374927&m=12&y=2011
Look at the time between kills.
At the time, it was not publicly called an exploit. Once I recieved the "you need to stop doing this or get banned" email from a GM, I quit.
IIRC total count from 2 months of kills was something like 700 mackinaws and 4 orcas?
So, sorry to knock you off your high-horse, but you are not original.
And most likely, neither was I.
Furthermore, quit whining about it and find a new method. When CCP "broke my game" I just went a found different targets to gank, tengus: http://eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&view=kills&plt_id=374927&m=2&y=2012&scl_id=40
So, HTFU and find a new bag, eh?
ps. Did you ever figure out the part about CONCORD response times being linked to a fixed warp speed? Such that you could put 3x warp speed rigs on a ship and have 30seconds to gank on each landing (even with GCC)? This has been fixed and is not possible since Cruicible 1.5 or something (https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=731097) |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3626
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 17:10:00 -
[142] - Quote
I give this guy the fool of the forum award because CCP is reading these forums more than ever and throwing this in front of thier eyes would only draw attention.
Its like let me do something almost illegal in front of cops and lawmakers.
Chances are if it wasnt exactly illegal, it is now.
I vote to keep this guy unbanned.
And let him continue to post every single exploit he finds.
Because this guy is only going to lead the devs on more and more holes to fix behind him.
|
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
285
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 19:06:00 -
[143] - Quote
Smodab Ongalot wrote:Herr Wilkus wrote:
I developed the 'Tornado Boomerang' technique shortly after the 'nado was released and I knew it was good - but challenging to do properly and NOT broken. The technique, done right, effectively reversed the effects of the simultaneous 'insurance nerf' that I was seeking to overcome. Used it to my benefit for 3 solid months, killing 635 Exhumers and 1 Orca, solo.
The usual rule of "You are never the first" applies here. If you "developed this 3 months ago", that 'd put you at around the beginning of January as your "discovery date". We were doing this back in December: http://eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&view=kills&plt_id=374927&m=12&y=2011Look at the time between kills. At the time, it was not publicly called an exploit. Once I recieved the "you need to stop doing this or get banned" email from a GM, I quit. IIRC total count from 2 months of kills was something like 700 mackinaws and 4 orcas? So, sorry to knock you off your high-horse, but you are not original. And most likely, neither was I. Furthermore, quit whining about it and find a new method. When CCP "broke my game" I just went a found different targets to gank, tengus: http://eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&view=kills&plt_id=374927&m=2&y=2012&scl_id=40So, HTFU and find a new bag, eh?
Hey Smodab, I respect your work, so I will respond.
Try reading.
You quote me and make me out as an ******* - but you cropped the quote right before this little bit:
Herr Wilkus wrote:
(Disclaimer: Its quite possible that others figured it out independently, but I saw no evidence of that anywhere.)
Not interested in getting into a credit-claiming contest, because that wasn't the point of any of this. But if you must know, the idea dawned on Christmas Eve, and the first actual attacks were a few days later.
I've stated MANY times - in almost every thread - that others may have done the same. I've stated, multiple times, that Goonswarm posted videos of themselves doing this years ago (with destroyers). Most of my forum posts between December and March were fishing for information from others - to see what was generally known about the technique without spelling it out explicitly. (What did I discover? Not much). But I give credit where it is due.
Oh, and no, didn't know about the other trick involving warp-times and Concord response, nice trick though.
As far as 'whining' is concerned:
First, as the person who popularized it - I should at least comment on its removal. (Though I think the Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns amazing solo-freighter ganking deserve the credit for the rapid-fire exploit ruling.) Watching Red Frog turn all emo was priceless. "WHAT? We have to escort our freighters now? Screw that, we quit unless CCP acts NOW."
Second, the thread's TLDR wasn't:
"CCP - you suck and I quit!"
Quite the opposite. TLDR;
"Gankers, CCP sucks because they listen to Carebears. To clear up confusion - here is what is legal, and what is not legal. Instead of complaining, I plan to use predatory ganking tactics to make Carebears quit. BTW, here is a primer so that YOU can gank more cheaply too."
@Nova Fox
As far as other tricks go, I learned my lesson. Next time I figure something out, the GMs will have to 'consult the logs' because I won't be telling them anything. Sad - but that is the way it has to be.
BTW, you are really brave posting with a name like that. Did you know that in some countries people are KILLED for that?
|
Ban Bindy
Bindy Brothers Pottery Association
88
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 19:42:00 -
[144] - Quote
Kyshonuba wrote:[quote=Lelob]Rock on mate!
Ore/Mine production should be done by mining-bots (or item reprocessing) and not by real players.So anybody who shoots "real" miners (not bots) does the game a favour.
The holy knight isnt the concord rescue ship .... its the suicide ganker who is cleaning Eve from lazy playing style.
Who are you to decide what playing style is right and what playing style is wrong? I don't really care whether there are gankers or not, that's beside the point. There's no right style or wrong style, isn't that what a sandbox is supposed to mean? |
Lone Gunman
Forhotea Corporation
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 19:56:00 -
[145] - Quote
Patch notes for EVE Online: Crucible 1.6.3
Released on Tuesday, April 3, 2012.
Fixes
Localization
GÇóPilots with a Global Criminal Countdown in high security space will be prevented from warping (if they are in any ship other than a capsule). This is to prevent a tactic declared to be an exploit recently.
I LOL'd |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3627
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 19:59:00 -
[146] - Quote
HAHAHAHA.
|
Richard Hammond II
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
137
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 20:01:00 -
[147] - Quote
Herr Wilkus wrote:
Stupid carebears, answer me this:
You claim that the 'Boomerang' was an 'exploit'.
You claim that GCC-unfitting gankships is an 'exploit'.
COULD be wrong but its CCP thats claiming there was an exploit and it was ruled AS an exploit so whats the question?
Goons; infiltration at its best - first bob... now ccp itself. They dont realize you guys dot take this as "just a game". Bring it down guys, we're rooting for you. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3628
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 20:05:00 -
[148] - Quote
I never claimed anything was an exploit, CCP did.
|
Richard Hammond II
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
137
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 20:06:00 -
[149] - Quote
Ban Bindy wrote:Kyshonuba wrote:Lelob wrote:Rock on mate!
Ore/Mine production should be done by mining-bots (or item reprocessing) and not by real players.So anybody who shoots "real" miners (not bots) does the game a favour.
The holy knight isnt the concord rescue ship .... its the suicide ganker who is cleaning Eve from lazy playing style.
Who are you to decide what playing style is right and what playing style is wrong? I don't really care whether there are gankers or not, that's beside the point. There's no right style or wrong style, isn't that what a sandbox is supposed to mean?
Ya but
The gankers' playstyle is right too then
See, its like the idea of freedom of religion. Yeah great idea but then youre gonna have all those ones YOU (the theorectical moral standard here not the poster) think are bad that advocate killing small furry animals and doing "evil" and you have to live with them too because to do otherwise is to strip the freedom you put in place beforehand
Nova Fox wrote:I never claimed anything was an exploit, CCP did.
youre Herr's alt? I was quoting him not you lol
as to the rule... WOW that deserves its own thread to best collect the tears
If there is one PLEASE link it
Goons; infiltration at its best - first bob... now ccp itself. They dont realize you guys dot take this as "just a game". Bring it down guys, we're rooting for you. |
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
287
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 20:23:00 -
[150] - Quote
Richard Hammond II wrote:Herr Wilkus wrote:
Stupid carebears, answer me this:
You claim that the 'Boomerang' was an 'exploit'.
You claim that GCC-unfitting gankships is an 'exploit'.
COULD be wrong but its CCP thats claiming there was an exploit and it was ruled AS an exploit so whats the question?
Your selective quoting missed the point of that post.
I wrote that because people were stupidly speculating on 'when I was going to be banned from the game' for 'exploiting' and spreading information about 'exploits'. Yes, really. 
That post was my way of explaining to these low-IQ individuals that I wasn't going to be banned.
Because, it simply wasn't an exploit - until the GMs met and rewrote their definition of a Concord evasion to better protect them.
They say that I was 'exploiting'.
But if you exploit - CCP's policy is that you get banned or at least warned.
Yet, I've not been banned or warned.
Carebears overuse the term to describe anything they don't like that puts their ISK printing at risk. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |