Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 27 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vordak Kallager
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
61
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 06:13:00 -
[631] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:yeah that's why nullsec voters came out in droves to vote in representatives because they're really happy with the current sov war mechanics as is so happy that clearly they want to make lowsec a copy of the current model
I don't think you understand what my point is, but thanks for the sarcasm anyway. Hans Jagerblitzen for CSM7 |
Gallinarr
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 09:42:00 -
[632] - Quote
Cearain wrote:The Mittani wrote:It might be a cat out of a bag for your people, but my people are happier with CCP not implementing ~grand ideas~ on null without testing them elsewhere first.. The people who do null sec sov war are after completely different things in eve than people who are in low sec or doing faction war. Your suggestion that the mechanics be the same, or one be a test bed for the other, completely misses this fundamental point. I will make an attempt to spell this out for you because you clearly don't get it. Yes there currently are more people in null sec. However, if CCP spent as much time thinking about and iterating on faction war and low sec and left null sec abandoned like they have low sec and faction war then the numbers would be more than reversed. The potential playerbase that would be attracted to low sec and faction war is much larger than the playerbase who can be attracted to null sec sov warfar. Sov null sec is for people who are willing to dedicate allot of their lives to a computer game. They are willing to wait around a long time for those epic battles. The epic battles are indeed epic and when they happen its extremely high stakes for a computer game. That part is great and works out well for people like yourself who are retired or perhaps people in college who havenGÇÖt yet fully experienced the real life grind. IGÇÖm not putting this part of the game down at all. If I had allot of extra time I would probably do that myself. But the reality is I donGÇÖt have that sort of time. And I am allot more typical GÇô at least when it comes to adults who might play eve - than people like yourself who are retired and have lots of free time for computer games. You said it yourself that one of the goals in sov warfare is to make it so the other side doesnGÇÖt want to sign on anymore. Well the problem is the things you have to do to in order to make the other side not want to sign in are extremely boring to allot of people. POS bashing Camping stations and gates never really getting anything but ganks and no really good fights for hours on end. This isnGÇÖt stuff allot of players find entertaining. However, sov null sec has to be that way because the stakes are higher. The timers should be slow giving each side time to get their large fleets together. CCP canGÇÖt make it so that if you sign off for a few hours you find that when you log back on you lost your system and all your crap there. With the high stakes comes allot of boring downtime that is all there is to it. Balancing or giving more isk for doing sov null sec stuff is just rolling that turd in glitter. I can only use isk in game and if the game play primarily consists of sitting around waiting for something to happen then itGÇÖs worthless. I couldnGÇÖt care less about it. Faction war and low sec is for people who want to be entertained without committing their lives to a computer game. Think GÇ£better than tv.GÇ¥ I come home from work put the kids to bed and I have a an hour or two before bed. I can watch tv with my wife or I can go shoot some people in the face. Like hans says the mechanics need to be set up to bring about frequent fun small scale fights. The faction war plexing mechanics seem to have been geared to do that but they have sat broken for years. These plex mechanics need to be fine tuned and balanced more often than anything else in eve. If a group at ccp took it upon themselves to say it is their goal to tweak and balance the plex mechanics to make sure that there is always lots of small scale pvp happening in these plexes (and low sec general) the eve subscriber base would explode. ItGÇÖs not going to be something where they just make one change and it works. It will need allot of fine tuning to get it going right. Lots of iterating. But it will be worth it to a much larger potential playerbase than sov null sec could ever hope to capture. But instead it sits neglected. So what happens? I and many in low sec will often sign on and spend a few hours roaming around with no action at all. Sorry thatGÇÖs not even better than tv. String several nights like that together where I go to sleep thinking I should have watched a show instead of signing on and ccp loses subscribers. Moreover, the fights should have *some* significance. I mean right now the low sec fights are just barely a step up from sisi. The stakes shouldnGÇÖt be so high that it turns into sov null sec but there should be some overarching goals that somewhat accurately measure who is doing well at the parts of the game people value.(i.e., who is doing well at small gang pvp) This is important so itGÇÖs not just a constant meaningless thunderdome. I would also bet that many people who have the time to play the null sec sov stuff would like to head over to faction war and low sec if ccp actually developed it. Just for a change of pace. TLDR: Eve can work for people who have allot of time to play the game and for people who don't. But the same mechanics aren't always going to work for both sets of people.
Do you know how much scrolling I had to do just from clicking the quote button |
Ciar Meara
Virtus Vindice
517
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 09:44:00 -
[633] - Quote
The Mittani wrote: I'm pretty sure it came from CCP first, but I certainly agree with it. I'd rather new capture mechanics be tested on FW before being inflicted on nullsec.
I rather prefer CCP tests 0.0 stuff in 0.0 and not use another game feature as a testbed for your own gameplay. Since faction warfare in low sec has its own different rules (bombs, bubbles, crime, etc) and completely different makeup (empire influence, role-playing, smaller gang fights, plexes, loyalty points) and goals (not really empire building but more empire extending and faster combat) "testing" any mechanic for 0.0 will be therefore be flawed.
Not to mention the totally different desires of pirates and gankers and other professions of the 8% of people in eve who enjoy low sec. My question for you is (although it is more of a request): please don't test how you park your new car in another's man garage.
oh and PS: its not all about hate, to quote one of the best movies of all time "All that hate's gonne burn you up son"
- [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow] |
Gallinarr
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 09:48:00 -
[634] - Quote
rodyas wrote:Or George Lucas. does ccp phantom know you use him as a sig |
Jafit
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 11:12:00 -
[635] - Quote
Osabojo wrote:But hey, since botting seems to be the topic of the day, let's ask The Mittani about botting. The Mittani, what would you say is the root cause of botting?
Mindlessly repetitive PvE gameplay and tasks which automaton excel at because they require no thought or creativity.
Eve is a terrible game. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
270
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 11:16:00 -
[636] - Quote
Gallinarr wrote:rodyas wrote:Or George Lucas. does ccp phantom know you use him as a sig
He gave me this sig, and thus holds to power to treat my sig as a play thing and give me any sig he deems worthy of me having. Signature removed, CCP Phantom |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
270
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 11:19:00 -
[637] - Quote
Vordak Kallager wrote:Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:yeah that's why nullsec voters came out in droves to vote in representatives because they're really happy with the current sov war mechanics as is so happy that clearly they want to make lowsec a copy of the current model I don't think you understand what my point is, but thanks for the sarcasm anyway.
I will give it a crack finding out what ya mean.
Yeah I know what ya mean, actually alot of null sec people dont even like the Sov warfare and such. Lots of players hate the strucure bash and want that to be made easier or changed. Like destroyable stations and such. I actually forgot about their complaints about null. But remembering them and low sec people thinking those will be given to them, yeah I see now. Makes since people would be angry with null coming to low, since the problems come with it. Signature removed, CCP Phantom |
Imryn Xaran
Coherent Light Enterprises
27
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 11:29:00 -
[638] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:my furnace blew when it got down to 14 last night, got it up and running again and i'm going to chill out and play some tribes tonight; will hit up the new questions from actual humans later
i see that the roleplaying publord has been frantically trying to imitate a demagogue while i've been away and posting up a storm
heh
Sorry to hear about your domestic disaster and glad to see you are back. Now about my questionGǪ
The Mittani wrote:incidentally the publord's question was answered in the previous 30 pages, but he's too cool for school to actually read the thread rather than smearing poop on the walls and howling for validation from me
I have read it all (have you?) and no it hasnGÇÖt been answered. Various people have posted on the subject, mainly just confirming that I have got your alliance policy on this correct. You have not said one word on the subject, apart from throwing insults around. You are the guy who wants to be voted in, not these other random stooges so how about you answer the question?
Jinli mei wrote:Think about this in the way that republican candidates care about strong democratic and liberal values when they have office (hint: they don't). He got chairman because 0.0 players had enough votes for him to cater to their needs (although, in reality, he caters to the needs of the game and making it not poop)
Of course politicians make promises and say things when campaigning that they donGÇÖt really believe or intend to do GÇô thereGÇÖs even a phrase just for it. But politicians also get called on the crap they say, and get asked hard questions in the press and in debate. ItGÇÖs all part of the process. When I first asked my question I expected a paragraph or two in response and that would have been the end of it.
Jinli mei wrote:Because that's screwing over your friends and you deserved to get the boot for it. Or because it's not an alliances job to police what its member base does. Or because CCP doesn't (as of writing) care enough to deal with bots. Or because ratting is so unrealistically boring that it's easy to sympathize with people who bot. Pick an answer that makes you mad the most so you can mash words about it while I go back to ignoring these terrible forums.
I could pick an answer, but nobody cares what I think on the subject. I would like to know, (and I think a few others would too), what the Mittani thinks on the subject. I simply asked him to clarify his position on the issue in light of the apparently contradictory positions he has taken.
Jinli mei wrote:You won't hear it from him because you want to hear it from him. I hope this is obvious to you, but it probably isn't so here are the words.
I don't think he stated he was going to answer all questions. And you can jerk and preach this point as much as you want but it won't really have any value because nobody cares.
He didnGÇÖt say he would answer all questions, thatGÇÖs true, but he did say GÇ£I'm happy to clarify my positions on the issues of the day if you're wondering what I think about... whateverGÇ¥ I think botting and RMT are important issues and so do many other people.
So, Mittani, can you please clarify your position on supporting CCPGÇÖs anti-bot initiatives given that you seem to be encouraging the general EVE playerbase to report people they suspect of botting, whilst at the same time telling your alliance that they will be kicked for reporting a fellow alliance member for botting. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
270
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 11:32:00 -
[639] - Quote
Its because the goons put their bots through a rigurous training program to create an elite botting force, that should not be so easy to ban or one to quick to ban them.
Other bots found in the game are enferior bots that are lazy and never had a hard days work before. You should immediatly report those bots or shoot them on site. They lower the high quality EVE has. Signature removed, CCP Phantom |
JamesCLK
Lone Star Exploration Lone Star Partners
34
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 11:56:00 -
[640] - Quote
Vordak Kallager wrote: If you test 0.0 mechanics on FW and Lowsec, you are going to get very different results and feedback than if you test them on the player base they are designed for.
FW/Lowsec inhabitants and 0.0 inhabitants differ greatly in their expectations of the game and why they play the game. Something that might work in 0.0 might not work in FW and vice versa. Therefore, it is a waste of time to try to use one player base as a "test-bed" for the other.
To use an extremely straightforward analogy that you might be able to more clearly understand:
CCP gives their Dog a bath. The Dog loves it. Dogs and Cats are both animals. Therefore, CCP is going to give it's Cat that same bath. You can guess how that will turn out.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that using FW as a testbed is a good idea; there just seems to be a lot of rambling over validity of opinion around the subject; the CSM minutes are, for all intents and purposes, high level discussions*. Lots of things are brought to the table as suggestions and ideas - that doesn't make them good, but they certainly are cheap.
I know that faction warfare pilots fly for the blood and carnage of lowsec, not the hate and resentment of 0.0; all I was argueing is that Mittens has a valid opinion on the matter - and that he, as far as I know, hasn't pushed for it as a feature yet; only discussed it as a possibility.
It is understandable that many don't even want it to be a possibility though.
*High level discussions in design mean superficial discussions with a very broad scope and deal with things like playstyles, as opposed to low level discussions that deal with individual mechanics and tweaks; things like "what is wrong with lowsec?" are high level questions; things like "should we decrease the GCC timer to 5 minutes?" are low level questions. |
|
Osabojo
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
91
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 12:17:00 -
[641] - Quote
Jafit wrote:Osabojo wrote:But hey, since botting seems to be the topic of the day, let's ask The Mittani about botting. The Mittani, what would you say is the root cause of botting?
Mindlessly repetitive PvE gameplay and tasks which automaton excel at because they require no thought or creativity. Eve is a terrible game.
Exactly. And these are also very profitable activities. So we can either expect players, especially alliance leaders, to express some kind of moral outrage about botting and go on crusades against it, and criticize them if they seem inconsistent with that, or we can expect CCP to make botting more difficult and (more importantly) less desirable.
Making isk should be fun. This is a game. When tedium is profitable, it invites botting, and that's CCP's problem to solve.
I have to wonder if there's some kind of twisted work ethic at play here, that says you should have to suffer through tedious labor to enjoy the game that you've paid for.
|
Osabojo
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
91
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 12:24:00 -
[642] - Quote
It's not unusual for gaming organizations to have policies against their members reporting each other for suspected rules violations instead of going through the organization's leadership. Recently I read the 30plus.org charter (I'm old, lol) and it specifically states members must not make public accusations of cheating.
I guess someone could take that as support of cheating, but most people would probably see that as a rule against stupid drama. Of course, if you thrive on stupid drama then you'll probably find such a rule infuriating and launch into some kind of tirade about it on an internet forum.
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
18
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 13:25:00 -
[643] - Quote
Imryn Xaran wrote:whilst at the same time telling your alliance that they will be kicked for reporting a fellow alliance member for botting.
you've been told why like 20 times
you just want to hear it from the mittani so you can quote him out of context everywhere because that's what you do |
Imryn Xaran
Coherent Light Enterprises
27
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 14:20:00 -
[644] - Quote
Osabojo wrote:It's not unusual for gaming organizations to have policies against their members reporting each other for suspected rules violations instead of going through the organization's leadership. Recently I read the 30plus.org charter (I'm old, lol) and it specifically states members must not make public accusations of cheating.
I guess someone could take that as support of cheating, but most people would probably see that as a rule against stupid drama. Of course, if you thrive on stupid drama then you'll probably find such a rule infuriating and launch into some kind of tirade about it on an internet forum.
I completely understand that. If the Mittani was to publicly state that his alliance has an internal procedure for dealing with accusations of botting I would be happy with that. Also, if he said that he would not disclose details of that procedure I would accept that.
He hasnGÇÖt said that though, he has just refused to answer, which makes it look like he does have a contradictory position on this issue and he does operate a policy within his alliance that effectively protects players who run bots.
Richard Desturned wrote:Imryn Xaran wrote:whilst at the same time telling your alliance that they will be kicked for reporting a fellow alliance member for botting. you've been told why like 20 times you just want to hear it from the mittani so you can quote him out of context everywhere because that's what you do
Yes, I want to hear it from the Mittani. As for quoting it out of context GÇô IGÇÖve never done it before so why would I start now? I have made maybe 50 posts on these forums total (a significant percentage of those 50 in this thread) and this is the only character I have ever posted on. I read the forums for entertainment and news; I occasionally post a comment or opinion. I donGÇÖt troll (not intentionally anyway), I donGÇÖt take part in any GÇ£meta gamingGÇ¥ activities. My motives for asking him this question are entirely straight forward GÇô I would like him to clarify his position.
I am an entirely unremarkable casual EVE player, who has seen the sort of mess that can occur when a game developer doesnGÇÖt listen to feedback, and I have seen the good work the CSM can do to help the EVE players. I give the Mittani his share of the credit for the good work he and the other CSM members have done for us during their term, and I fully expect him to be elected for another term.
That said, just because he has done a good job does not mean he is above scrutiny. Many have accused him of having an agenda that promotes the interests of his alliance over the best interests of the game. From my position in the game I donGÇÖt really see that, so I donGÇÖt have an opinion one way or the other. I do see a problem with bots in the game. I am not sure that the measures that CCP have taken are sufficient to eliminate bots, and agree with many others who have said that the best way to eliminate bots is to re-vamp the activities that are susceptible to botting such as mining, ratting and missioning.
I do believe that if progress is to be made against bots and RMT CCP will require the full support of the playerbase and especially the full support of the CSM. This issue, for me, will be a factor in where I decide to cast my votes, and at the moment I am unsure where the Mittani stands, so can you please clarify your position for me |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
18
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 14:25:00 -
[645] - Quote
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=512342#post512342
mystery solved move on to your next "casual" peeve that you will "casually" go on about for pages in another thread |
Imryn Xaran
Coherent Light Enterprises
27
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 14:30:00 -
[646] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=512342#post512342
mystery solved move on to your next "casual" peeve that you will "casually" go on about for pages in another thread
If you think that comes anywhere close to answering my question then you need to re take that infants school level reading comprehension course that you evidently failed. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
18
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 14:58:00 -
[647] - Quote
Imryn Xaran wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=512342#post512342
mystery solved move on to your next "casual" peeve that you will "casually" go on about for pages in another thread If you think that comes anywhere close to answering my question then you need to re take that infants school level reading comprehension course that you evidently failed.
please tell me more about reading comprehension, mister "i cannot understand that the mittani is not going to answer my question" |
The Mittani
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3192
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 15:37:00 -
[648] - Quote
this isn't a candidacy thread btw, it's for Q&As, but thanks for all the free likes ^_^ The Office of the Chairman: A Thread for Constituent Issues |
Jafit
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 15:42:00 -
[649] - Quote
Osabojo wrote:Jafit wrote:Osabojo wrote:But hey, since botting seems to be the topic of the day, let's ask The Mittani about botting. The Mittani, what would you say is the root cause of botting?
Mindlessly repetitive PvE gameplay and tasks which automaton excel at because they require no thought or creativity. Eve is a terrible game. Exactly. And these are also very profitable activities. So we can either expect players, especially alliance leaders, to express some kind of moral outrage about botting and go on crusades against it, and criticize them if they seem inconsistent with that, or we can expect CCP to make botting more difficult and (more importantly) less desirable. Making isk should be fun. This is a game. When tedium is profitable, it invites botting, and that's CCP's problem to solve. I have to wonder if there's some kind of twisted work ethic at play here, that says you should have to suffer through tedious labor to enjoy the game that you've paid for.
Bots pay subscriptions or consume PLEX, which is the same thing. Why would CCP want to ban these sources of income? From what I've learned from the bot hunters that I've spoken to CCP only ban the bots that they receive complaints about, and even then it's temp bans on a three strikes system. Bot hunters have no incentive to report bots because then they'd get less killmails and less loot.
Also I agree, I can't stand trying to earn money in this game via conventional means. I pay for PLEX because I get better isk/h reading forums at work than I do shooting red crosses in Eve, and it's safer. Also I get paid by alliance mates to make forum signatures for them. |
The Mittani
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3192
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 15:42:00 -
[650] - Quote
Sullivar N wrote:Dear Mittani:
I'm having somewhat conflicting feelings at this point. I've worked my way up to the KV, gotten the derp gun, can penetrate the better tanks, yet I don't feel like I've ~arrived~; I'm still trying to grind my way up to the KV-3 and through other trees. This wasn't supposed to happen! I want to have fun with the KV! Any tips on how to play well with it and to enjoy the experience to boot?
So far my "strategy" has been to snuggle up against the higher-teir heavy tanks and use them as protection, ducking out to fire, and generally just react to what they do. This generally ends up for worse than for the better, since if they do stupid things my choices are to follow and be useless too or to go out on my own and still be generally ineffective/die. Am I playing too passively? Is this just an indication of a lack of skill on my part?
The KV suffered heavily from the recent HE nerf. The Derp gun still works, but it's not the death machine it once was. The real question is if you're in the wrong tree; you may prefer more accurate and mobile sniping platforms to a slow brick house like the KV. Since you're only tier 5, it might be worthwhile to hop over to the German armor side and see if you like the Pz4. I personally went mostly RUS armor - KV-3 is a whole different world than the KV - but I enjoyed the German stuff more in the end.
Also, get the 107mm on the KV if you haven't already, it's superior in the post-HE-nerf environment. You can also snipe with it and thus don't need to get in the faces of higher tier tanks. The Office of the Chairman: A Thread for Constituent Issues |
|
The Mittani
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3192
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 15:47:00 -
[651] - Quote
Sofia Wolf wrote:What is your position on following issues of high sec warfare: A) Neutral orcas in high sec wars http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Neutral_orcas_in_high_sec_wars_%28CSM%29B) Neutral remote repers not getting aggression timer when remote repairing targets engaged in combat making them near invulnerable when positioned near stations. Do you think those are problems CCP should address? If yes what changes to mechanic would you advocate and what level of priority would you put on those changes?
I use a neutral orca to tote my Brutixes around when I go on a hisec ganking spree, I think they're grand. The Orca was a huge boost to peaceful activity in hisec; it is only fair that it also be a vehicle of grief in the right hands.
I think neutral remote repping should make you target-able, however. 'healing a bad guy' is engaging in actual combat, where 'carting a bad guy's stack of Brutixes around through space' isn't.
I suspect the neutral remote rep issue will be addressed in the upcoming war mechanic revamp, and we discussed a simplification of it at the December summit. The Office of the Chairman: A Thread for Constituent Issues |
The Mittani
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3192
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 15:48:00 -
[652] - Quote
Cearain wrote: Ignoring your bad/pointless distinction, his suggestion is still horrible.
Your opinion is meaningless, Cearain; fwiw I don't read your walls of text.
The Office of the Chairman: A Thread for Constituent Issues |
Imryn Xaran
Coherent Light Enterprises
27
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 15:52:00 -
[653] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Imryn Xaran wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=512342#post512342
mystery solved move on to your next "casual" peeve that you will "casually" go on about for pages in another thread If you think that comes anywhere close to answering my question then you need to re take that infants school level reading comprehension course that you evidently failed. please tell me more about reading comprehension, mister "i cannot understand that the mittani is not going to answer my question"
No, I am getting that vibe loud and clear. The fact that he won't answer my question is an answer in itself though so I will keep on going and hopefully anyone who browses this thread will pick up on that. |
The Mittani
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3192
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 15:54:00 -
[654] - Quote
Zordon wrote:Sir Mitten's
About the nullsec miner, for us that 'wish' to support large construction methods, would you toss around the idea of Random-roids in the grav site?
To explain this, the small grav site has a ginormous Spodumain rock that the site is anchored around... It's roughly 4 mil m3 in size or 250,000 units. Even if this rock would shift as the site respawns with different ores, totaling in the same (average) value based on the market. (IE with 16 base types of ore, shift based off how common in new-eden they are)
This would have a minimal effect on the actual isk value of the site, but lead to self-sustainability for 0.0 alliances with a strong industrial side. And also lead to a change in need for the mineral compression from high-sec. The compressions would still be needed because building a titan still needs loads of minerals and I know nobody that would mine that in an efficient manner.
I know this is a fail post, and definatly troll worthy, but I hope it comes across as understandable and you could possibly lay out an answer.
Zordon Monkey 4 Life
This is pretty weird, because I haven't mined since 2006, but I actually know about 'the spod'. 0.0 mining in general needs a huge reworking, the first step of which is removing alloy drops from drone rats. After that, nitty-gritty tweaks to grav site compositions are somewhat beyond my capacity, though the usual ideas - superveld, etc - have been tossed around. Making mining in null worthwhile once more is a high priority for the CSM, however, as most of us miss blowing up mining barges, and in order to find exhumers to kill you have to make the sites profitable enough to make it worth mining in the first place. The Office of the Chairman: A Thread for Constituent Issues |
The Mittani
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3192
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 15:56:00 -
[655] - Quote
Imryn Xaran wrote: No, I am getting that vibe loud and clear. The fact that he won't answer my question is an answer in itself though so I will keep on going and hopefully anyone who browses this thread will pick up on that.
this isn't 'mr xaran goes to washington' where you're the star and fighting against corruption and making a noble stand for principles, you're just a sad badposter wailing and flailing on something asked and answered previously
hint: get a goon or someone not cerain itt to ask the question and i'll be delighted to answer it~ The Office of the Chairman: A Thread for Constituent Issues |
None ofthe Above
27
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 16:06:00 -
[656] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:Imryn Xaran wrote: No, I am getting that vibe loud and clear. The fact that he won't answer my question is an answer in itself though so I will keep on going and hopefully anyone who browses this thread will pick up on that.
this isn't 'mr xaran goes to washington' where you're the star and fighting against corruption and making a noble stand for principles, you're just a sad badposter wailing and flailing on something asked and answered previously hint: get a goon or someone not cerain itt to ask the question and i'll be delighted to answer it~
The Office of the Chairman: A Threat to Constituent Issues
So your answer Mr. Xaran is: yes, he's as bad as you think he is, and probably worse.
Tired of the current CSM? Vote for me, I am None ofthe Above!
|
The Mittani
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3192
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 16:08:00 -
[657] - Quote
I'm delighted to have hysterical roleplayers flailing at me impotently on the forums. If someone like Xaran didn't exist, I'd have to invent him - the essence of politics is the distinction between friend and enemy, after all. The Office of the Chairman: A Thread for Constituent Issues |
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
44
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 16:10:00 -
[658] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:Imryn Xaran wrote: No, I am getting that vibe loud and clear. The fact that he won't answer my question is an answer in itself though so I will keep on going and hopefully anyone who browses this thread will pick up on that.
this isn't 'mr xaran goes to washington' where you're the star and fighting against corruption and making a noble stand for principles, you're just a sad badposter wailing and flailing on something asked and answered previously hint: get a goon or someone not cerain itt to ask the question and i'll be delighted to answer it~ Could you please release your long-form birth certificate? |
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
44
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 16:16:00 -
[659] - Quote
there are allegations that you were actually born in a russian coder's computer and therefore are a Manchurianbot candidate |
Tsubutai
The Tuskers
60
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 16:33:00 -
[660] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:I think neutral remote repping should make you target-able, however. 'healing a bad guy' is engaging in actual combat, where 'carting a bad guy's stack of Brutixes around through space' isn't. FYI, you can already shoot neutral RR alts once they rep your target; the problem is that they don't inherit the target's aggression timer, so if you switch damage onto them, they can instantly dock up or jump through the gate. The argument (such as it is) is about whether neutral alts should inherit aggression timers and how it should be handled if they were to do so. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 27 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |