|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Bantara
Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 16:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:It is too effective for too little risk and allows you to deter other players from playing while you yourself are not playing either. Simple fact is cloaking in a system (not travelling, but just system squatting) is a 'rock' without a corresponding 'paper'. There is no counter to it. Nothing in Eve--such a harsh game with risk-n-reward balances--should be so impenetrable. Ripard is likely getting my #1 vote even with his stance on afk cloaking, but I would like to see his opinion on this matter change.
|
Bantara
Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 23:22:00 -
[2] - Quote
Random McNally wrote:Let me describe paper. Paper is a handful of your corp mates all cloaky with you as bait. When the nasty evil smelly AFK cloaker uncloaks to make a mess of your ship, your corpies make a mess of his. Rinse. Repeat. See? Easy paper. I'm frequently accused of splitting hairs, though I believe it's more akin to undoing braids.... What you proposed is mearly a fleet which can kill a cloaked ship when he uncloaks near you(as if covert ship are all that hard to kill comparatively.) Not a counter to afk cloaking. You don't want a counter for that, that's fine. We're all entitled to our opinions, and I'm not getting in a discussion about that on Ripard's thread.
|
Bantara
Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance
24
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 20:11:00 -
[3] - Quote
Fractal Muse wrote:The highlights to me are how he became fixated on New Order people, his use of "colourful" language, and his need to be appear to speak as an "expert" even when it is clear he isn't. This type of person is dangerous in the role of CSM: if he tries to argue something with great results and ability when he is actually uninformed on the subject that puts -everyone- in the game in a bad spot. From his posts and his replies it is clear that he will do just this to the detriment of all of us.
First, CCP isn't so easily persuaded, from what I've read from CSM members. It takes facts. So even if Teg spoke eloquently on a topic he knew nothing about, that speech alone would not sway CCP. (One could argue that makes a vote for Ripard Teg 'wasted', but I don't think it would qualify as detrimental.) Secondly, NO supporters came after Ripard, not the other way around. Others are making huge waves in the CSM candidacy pool, asking everyone about hi-sec, ganking, and AFK miners. Ripard simply addressed what is probably the hottest topic in this year's election.
I could be wrong, but this is how it seems to me. |
Bantara
Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance
28
|
Posted - 2013.04.19 13:54:00 -
[4] - Quote
Ripard Teg wrote:My instinct is that a lot more null-sec voters voted a full slate of 14 candidates than non-null-sec voters did. My further instinct is that's going to be the tipping point that gives null-sec eight seats on CSM8 because more non-null-sec votes will be exhausted sooner. I found it really hard to fully use my ballot. After discarding the candidates on the blue-donut's screw-the-CSM slate and discarding candidates for normal reasons, I wasn't even left with 14.
|
|
|
|