These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Miners of The Proveldtariat Rejoice!

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Anslo
Scope Works
#261 - 2012-11-09 18:36:03 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:

When you get bumped, how long does it take before you can turn your strips back on?
When you warp, how long does it take before you can turn your strips back on?

Bet you the second one's shorter.


Depends on how long it takes you to get back to the roid. Either way, turning them ON is an irrelevant point, it's the completion of the cycle that matters. So warp all you want, you can't complete a cycle to get your ice.

Quote:

Yes, they can. Capitals have been warping 50km into 60km wide POS shields from Cynos 5km outside the shield for years.

Here's the hint I'll give you. You cannot warp to any target closer than 150km away.


So you can, say, set a 40-50km book mark, making like a cube around your roid of choice. Then you warp within whatever of those bookmarks? I still don't see how that solves it. When you warp, you break target lock. So yes they could stay near the roid, but they have even less respite from completing their cycle than if they tried to warp 150km away.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Anslo
Scope Works
#262 - 2012-11-09 18:42:00 UTC
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
That would be a good thing, if you'd do it consistently. Since you don't, it just makes you an inconsistent flip-flopper. (p.s. "just following your brilliant lead' is technically the fallacy of 'tu quoque', which is just as bad as the fallacy of 'ad hominem', you knew that right ?)


Yet you using that as another ad hominem is any better? Roll LOGIC!



Quote:
You're not for 100% safe afk mining??? From your blog:

" WE are the proletariat workers who feed and provide to ALL through the sweat of our brow. HOW we do that is irrelevant, but we do it! AFK OR NOT!"

"YOU ARE ENTITLED TO PLAY YOUR WAY"


--If miners are 'entitled' to 'play their way' without interruption, 'AFK OR NOT', then you are for safe afk mining. You are a proven liar, by your own words.


Playing their way is not the same as safe afk. Look at the anti bump section. I highlight that there's no such thing as 100% safe, but there's methods to at least help them.

Since you seem so gun ho about trying to prove me a liar, I'll break it down nice and simple for you~

" WE are the proletariat workers who feed and provide to ALL through the sweat of our brow. HOW we do that is irrelevant, but we do it! AFK OR NOT!"

How we mine is irrelevant to us. We feel if we want to mine atk or afk, that's our choice, and a counter to defend one or the other should be given. If you are atk, and with people or alts etc, web each other and voila, harder to bump. If you're afk, use the anchor, but risk getting ganked while afk. Either way, they are not enabled to play how they want without paying their hard earned isk to some extortionist.

As it stands now, there is nothing much ATK or AFK miners can do to stop bumping. There's methods to curb, but not to stop.

"YOU ARE ENTITLED TO PLAY YOUR WAY"

Yes, they are. I believe when you pay for the use of a product, you get to use the product within its constraints how you choose. Bumpers do not let miners do that. At all.

You are proven desperate to oust me as a liar, by your own accusations :)

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Bing Bangboom
DAMAG Safety Commission
#263 - 2012-11-09 18:42:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Bing Bangboom
Anslo wrote:


You...really don't read anything I say do you? Shocked Wowza!


Actually I do.

It was alright when you told the miners not to pay us, or gave them anti-bumping methods, or created a list of bumpers (which I am still NOT ON, DANGIT!). But when you started asking CCP to give you a module you went too far. It revealed your true motive which was to get CCP to fix the problem, not your movement. If you believe you can organize the miners into an effective resistance to the New Order you need to leave CCP out of it and just do it. If you believe, as I do, that the miners will not act except in their individual self interest than you must have CCP act because your attempt to get them to individually sacrifice anything to help others goes against their very nature.

All in all, your efforts are wasted. We are the ones affecting change.

Sometimes, all it takes to start a revolution is for one man to stand up and say "Enough". Or in this case, "Bump".

BBB
AotNOoHS
BU

Highsec is worth fighting for.

By choosing to mine in New Order systems, highsec miners have agreed to follow the New Halaima Code of Conduct.  www.minerbumping.com
Nathalie LaPorte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#264 - 2012-11-09 18:50:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Nathalie LaPorte
Anslo wrote:
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
That would be a good thing, if you'd do it consistently. Since you don't, it just makes you an inconsistent flip-flopper. (p.s. "just following your brilliant lead' is technically the fallacy of 'tu quoque', which is just as bad as the fallacy of 'ad hominem', you knew that right ?)


Yet you using that as another ad hominem is any better? Roll LOGIC!


Yes, since you started the ad hominem mentioning, me using ad hominems is just rhetoric, while you using it is hypocritical rhetoric ;)

"Playing their way is not the same as safe afk."

"Yes, they are. I believe when you pay for the use of a product, you get to use the product within its constraints how you choose. Bumpers do not let miners do that. At all."

Again, you contradict yourself. Bumpers ARE those constraints. You can't have it both ways. Either people are able to play the way they want, within the constraints of the EVE universe which include bumpers, and your second quote above is false, or people aren't, and your first quote is false. The contradictions are there in print, you can't wiggle out of it, although you can fool yourself into thinking you did.



Quote:

You are proven desperate to oust me as a liar, by your own accusations :)


I've proven that your statements contradict each other. If you want to claim that I was 'desperate' to do so, then that's highly ironic, as I'm not the one making websites because I'm so invested in this issue. Again, thanks for the laughs. Have you considered comedy as a career?
Anslo
Scope Works
#265 - 2012-11-09 18:51:32 UTC
Bing Bangboom wrote:
It was alright when you told the miners not to pay us, or gave them anti-bumping methods, or created a list of bumpers (which I am still NOT ON, DANGIT!). But when you started asking CCP to give you a module you went too far.


Ooh? Hit a nerve did I?

Quote:
It revealed your true motive which was to get CCP to fix the problem, not your movement.

Or I revealed my personal position in the matter. The movement isn't telling miners to mass petition CCP to make them change the game. The idea is being discussed in F&I and I brought it up to show I am not for 100% safe afk mining. That's ridiculous. I am however for some balanced way to be provided for miners to protect themselves from either bump or gank, but not both at the same time.

No, the movement is not to whine to CCP. It's to remind carebears that bears have teeth, and to show them how to use them. Admittedly, it's slow and small, but all resistance starts somewhere Smile


Quote:
If you believe you can organize the miners into an effective resistance to the order you need to leave CCP out of it and just do it.


Welp, that's what I was doing, and still am doing, but someone made a mistake on my personal beliefs, so I corrected them. See above, I'm not telling miners to demand a module. I'm telling them to adapt and fight for their rights. If they choose to adopt my stance, oh well. If not, oh well to. The point is not to mass whine. The point is to resist you lot.

Quote:
If you believe, as I do, that the miners will not act except in their individual self interest than you must have CCP act because your attempt to get them to individually sacrifice anything to help others goes against their very nature.

If the miners don't listen, it's their choice. But miners are listening, they're resisting, they're reacting. They're working together, grouping up, nestling, war deccing, moving around to avoid you.

As far as I'm concerned, I fully believe miners capable of self defense. They are showing it. The Resistance is alive and well Smile

Quote:
All in all, your efforts are wasted. We are the ones affecting change.

Sometimes, all it takes to start a revolution is for one man to stand up and say "Enough". Or in this case, "Bump".


As long as one miner is resisting you, as long as one miner refuses to pay, to move around, to use a skiff, to speak against you, and even to dec you and settle the matter, My effort is not wasted. What is wasted is your breath trying to stop me from doing this. If I am such an insignificant individual and our movement is so small, why do you feel the need to address it at every turn and speak against it? It's almost like you're threatened by the fact that some bears got together and said "nope" to your "order."

You are not the only one "affecting change." You have competition. We're small now, we can't fight you head on now. But give it time, good sir. Give it time. Like you said, all it takes to start a revolution is one man to stand up and say "Enough." Or in this case, some miners :)

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#266 - 2012-11-09 18:59:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Lin-Young Borovskova
If you don't understand the "why" just stop mining, wait until prices go up and start bumping those ships yourself.

If you didn't realised yet a lot of ganks and this "awesome" bumping thing is done by alts from large mining organisations and botters then you missed something.

CCP would never do it but I'm almost sure we'd be laughing out loud if they would give us access to those accounts names and figure out how many are on 1st/2nd offence or account ban for botting.

I once laughed when I listened to CCP Shreegs saying in some key note he got one go the most known players in the game using bots.

Now this was kinda interesting, sadly CCP haven't decided yet to put a tag "name it and shame it" on those accounts or all of the accounts related to the same person.
Probably half of those posting here would suddenly disappear.

CCP: name and shame !! DO IT NAO !!

brb
Anslo
Scope Works
#267 - 2012-11-09 19:00:53 UTC
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:


Yes, since you started the ad hominem mentioning, me using ad hominems is just rhetoric, while you using it is hypocritical rhetoric ;)


You're gonna give me carpal tunnel with your persistence Lol

As far as I can see, it's not hypocritical, you're assuming everyone would see your ad hominem as rhetoric, that's jsut a baseless assumption. Not everyone thinks liek you Blink


Quote:
"Playing their way is not the same as safe afk."

"Yes, they are. I believe when you pay for the use of a product, you get to use the product within its constraints how you choose. Bumpers do not let miners do that. At all."

Again, you contradict yourself. Bumpers ARE those constraints. You can't have it both ways. Either people are able to play the way they want, within the constraints of the EVE universe which include bumpers, and your second quote above is false, or people aren't, and your first quote is false. The contradictions are there in print, you can't wiggle out of it, although you can fool yourself into thinking you did.


No, I don't contradict myself. Bumpers are not a constraint. They are not programmed into the game. They are an anomaly (no not an ingame npc anomaly). But you seem very intent on trying to prove me a flip flopper. So once again, I'll spell it nice and slowly out for you :)

"Playing their way is not the same as safe afk."
Indeed. If someone wants to be able to play afk, they should be able to. As it stands, they cannot at all. The module would enable them to do so, but not in complete safety, as gank is possible. Therefore, it is not 100% safe afk. But it is, atleast, a counter.

"Yes, they are. I believe when you pay for the use of a product, you get to use the product within its constraints how you choose. Bumpers do not let miners do that. At all."

This echoes the above,and I'm not too sure how you don't see that. Currently, the product constraints are leaned towards the bumpers, not the miners. The miners get the short end of the stick. They bumpers are an anomaly in comparison to the constraints. Think of it this way. You don't to be ECM'd? Use ECCM. You dont wanna be neuted? Have a logi cap trans you.
Don't wanna be bumped? Welp.

Quote:

I've proven that your statements contradict each other. If you want to claim that I was 'desperate' to do so, then that's highly ironic, as I'm not the one making websites because I'm so invested in this issue. Again, thanks for the laughs. Have you considered comedy as a career?


Not really, you just seem to keep attacking with x and I keep answering x with the correct way. Then you just...change x around, yet it has the same answer. Also, making a website does not equate to desperation. Another interesting assumption though! Smile

And you're welcome for the laughs! Hope you learned something!

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Kainotomiu Ronuken
koahisquad
#268 - 2012-11-09 19:01:56 UTC
Anslo wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, I fully believe miners capable of self defense. They are showing it. The Resistance is alive and well Smile

Really?

I mean, there's been one post with actual content in, one flawed spreadsheet of people you claim are bumpers, one list of techniques for dealing with bumpers (like orbit, 'cause nobody could work that one out) and one page that promises a 'Proveldtariat Manifesto'. And I certainly haven't seen you doing anything ingame to combat the bumping.

Honestly, you're going to need to start producing more content if you want to claim that the Resistance is alive and well. At the moment, it's looking like a poorly thought out idea that has discovered that it has troubles with manpower and resources to produce the content it needs.
Bing Bangboom
DAMAG Safety Commission
#269 - 2012-11-09 19:09:01 UTC
Anslo wrote:


As long as one miner is resisting you, as long as one miner refuses to pay, to move around, to use a skiff, to speak against you, and even to dec you and settle the matter, My effort is not wasted. What is wasted is your breath trying to stop me from doing this. If I am such an insignificant individual and our movement is so small, why do you feel the need to address it at every turn and speak against it? It's almost like you're threatened by the fact that some bears got together and said "nope" to your "order."

You are not the only one "affecting change." You have competition. We're small now, we can't fight you head on now. But give it time, good sir. Give it time. Like you said, all it takes to start a revolution is one man to stand up and say "Enough." Or in this case, some miners :)



Actually, I just like arguing about it.

I do admire your sticking to your world-view on this. Last night in Tolle would have been discouraging to me if I was in your shoes. Of course you will say there was effective resistance but I successfully bumped any of the miners I chose, one repeatedly as you saw while trying to prevent me and I will do so again. I even bumped you twice while you were sitting around doing absolutely nothing.

I've been counterbumped, had 4 gank attempts on me, been wardecced, been petitioned numerous times. I've bumped orbiters, anglers, nestlers. I've been cursed in four languages. The only thing that has stopped me has been the payment of the 10,000,000 ISK and once, a better offer from my wife. So, the best weapon you have is pay up or send pleading messages to my wife (although pleading doesn't really work that well).

BBB

Highsec is worth fighting for.

By choosing to mine in New Order systems, highsec miners have agreed to follow the New Halaima Code of Conduct.  www.minerbumping.com
Nathalie LaPorte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#270 - 2012-11-09 19:14:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Nathalie LaPorte
Anslo wrote:


You're gonna give me carpal tunnel with your persistence Lol

As far as I can see, it's not hypocritical, you're assuming everyone would see your ad hominem as rhetoric, that's jsut a baseless assumption. Not everyone thinks liek you Blink


'rhetorical fallacies' is a technical term for those fallacies. It's not an assumption on my part, it's me using an accepted term for them. Sorry. Would you like a source from a Philosophy professor defining them as such?



"No, I don't contradict myself. Bumpers are not a constraint. They are not programmed into the game. They are an anomaly (no not an ingame npc anomaly). But you seem very intent on trying to prove me a flip flopper. So once again, I'll spell it nice and slowly out for you :)"

Again, you reveal your boring solo-play bias. EVE is a sandbox. This means that other players are intentionally meant to constrain your actions. Pipa Porto already quoted the devs on that subject a ton, so I won't repeat those quotes.

"Indeed. If someone wants to be able to play afk, they should be able to. As it stands, they cannot at all. " If they go afk, they instantly die? No? Then your statement that they cannot at all is obviously false.

Here's a bet. you claim that miners can't play afk, "at all", I claim that they can and commonly do, 23/7. I'll bet that I can fill up a Mackinaw with ice, while afk(not this toon, this toon isn't a miner). If I win, you'll disband your prospodtariat. If I can't, I'll give you the Mackinaw. Deal? (i'll be nice and warn you that before the new order enlightened me, I filled up many mackinaws with ice, so I already know 100% that it is possible and you will lose the bet with 100% certainty)

Quote:

Also, making a website does not equate to desperation. Another interesting assumption though! Smile


I never said making a website equates to desperation, that's just an interesting assumption you made :)

thanks for more laughs :)
Anslo
Scope Works
#271 - 2012-11-09 19:16:47 UTC
Kainotomiu Ronuken wrote:
I mean, there's been one post with actual content in, one flawed spreadsheet of people you claim are bumpers, one list of techniques for dealing with bumpers (like orbit, 'cause nobody could work that one out) and one page that promises a 'Proveldtariat Manifesto'. And I certainly haven't seen you doing anything ingame to combat the bumping.


Whether you choose to acknowledge the effectiveness or relevance of the Proveldtariat is irrelevant to me. If the miners use it, even 1, that's more than enough to satisfy me.

Quote:
Honestly, you're going to need to start producing more content if you want to claim that the Resistance is alive and well. At the moment, it's looking like a poorly thought out idea that has discovered that it has troubles with manpower and resources to produce the content it needs.


Content is good, but not for the sake of content. If I post it, it'll have a purpose. I'm new at managing or bothering with a blog, others who are used to it are either busy in RL or aren't satisfied with what was written. It's a slow learning process, but we learn! Smile

I don't think it's a bad idea, but I could definitely use help. But all in good time!

Bing Bangboom wrote:
I do admire your sticking to your world-view on this. Last night in Tolle would have been discouraging to me if I was in your shoes. Of course you will say there was effective resistance but I successfully bumped any of the miners I chose, one repeatedly as you saw while trying to prevent me and I will do so again. I even bumped you twice while you were sitting around doing absolutely nothing.


Thank you for the compliment Smile
It's all early, all new. The more I study and learn, the more I'll find ways to stop you. For now, I take my in-game defeats with grace. Getting angry will do nothing. Patience and a thirst for knowledge will ensure the Proveldtariat victorious!

Quote:
I've been counterbumped, had 4 gank attempts on me, been wardecced, been petitioned numerous times. I've bumped orbiters, anglers, nestlers. I've been cursed in four languages. The only thing that has stopped me has been the payment of the 10,000,000 ISK and once, a better offer from my wife. So, the best weapon you have is pay up or send pleading messages to my wife (although pleading doesn't really work that well).


But the fact is that people are TRYING to stop you, and to an extent it works. It won't stop you yet, but in time. For now, an existing resistance is more than enough.

And, mindless to you insulting your wife (ouch man), NEVER PAY THE FINE! Resist comrades! (click the below link~)

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Anslo
Scope Works
#272 - 2012-11-09 19:25:09 UTC
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
'rhetorical fallacies' is a technical term for those fallacies. It's not an assumption on my part, it's me using an accepted term for them. Sorry. Would you like a source from a Philosophy professor defining them as such?


No thanks, nice cover though?


Quote:
Again, you reveal your boring solo-play bias. EVE is a sandbox. This means that other players are intentionally meant to constrain your actions. Pipa Porto already quoted the devs on that subject a ton, so I won't repeat those quotes.

That has nothing to do with proving I contradict anything. Way to switch gears. Eve is a sandbox, and people don't have to play with others in a specific way in the sandbox. Again, you assume alleged afk solo miners aren't talking to others in private chat or over voice chat. And yes, they can constrain SOME gameplay, but within those constraints there have always been game mechanic backings to help. anti ecm, anti cap drain, etc. None exists for bumpers.

And just in case you misconstrue those words, that does not mean I want an IWIN button, it's a call for a balanced module.

Quote:
If they go afk, they instantly die? No? Then your statement that they cannot at all is obviously false.

Dude, what the hell are you even talking about now? Straight If they go afk now, they don't die instantly, but they are bumped, and it can't be stopped in anyway.

Quote:
Here's a bet. you claim that miners can't play afk, "at all", I claim that they can and commonly do, 23/7. I'll bet that I can fill up a Mackinaw with ice, while afk(not this toon, this toon isn't a miner). If I win, you'll disband your prospodtariat. If I can't, I'll give you the Mackinaw. Deal?

Sure they can play afk, they can sit, there. If you want to go into semantics like that...
But when I say play afk, it means sitting there and being able to mine and obtain minerals. So as it stands without your semantic play, no, they can't.
But why would I bet on that? Of course you're anti proveldtariat. You could go into a bumper system, they'd know who you are, and let you mine to prove me wrong. What a silly deal...


Quote:

I never said making a website equates to desperation, that's just an interesting assumption you made :)

thanks for more laughs :)

If you want to claim that I was 'desperate' to do so, then that's highly ironic, as I'm not the one making websites because I'm so invested in this issue.
Are those not your words? Jeesh, now I'm having a laugh at you Lol

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
#273 - 2012-11-09 19:44:50 UTC
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
Anslo wrote:
Bing Bangboom wrote:
As has been pointed out many times already, there IS a module to prevent bumping. It costs 10,000,000 ISK, is available from any Agent of the New Order of Highsec, and lasts for one full year.


Cut the pseudo RP for a second = =|| that's not a module, that's called a ransom.


which is better than a module, as you keep it even if you lose your ship :) Let's call it a "module-squared"


"Yes, there is. One is a module "take" that can keep them there, and they choose to invest in themselves so that no one else that they don't want to (i.e. extortionists) takes their money. The other, is a scam/ransom. That's like saying the mafia of old days were a "legitimate business.""

In EVE piracy, mercenary warfare, and scamming are all seen as legitimate businesses. So, if the Mafia were in EVE, they would be a legitimate business as well :) We're really getting somewhere, we agree on everything and now you just have to recognize the authority of the New Order.


"Except they shouldn't have to observe your "code" because it's not CCP sanctioned rules and basically ruin an individuals good time and recreation unless they pay some thugs off. No bueno Smile"

Si bueno, because it is CCP sanctioned as CCP encourages player generated content :)



Indeed. Piracy, scamming, etc. are all legitimate business. The game rules and game mechanics encourage them. And the game mechanics encourage, or at least don't discourage, AFK mining. If CCP wanted to, it could easily add a game mechanic that required players be constantly ATK while mining. And CCP has never said AFK mining is an exploit. So apparently CCP doesn't see any harm in AFK mining. It's a legal and legitimate way to play the game.

Secondly-- you bumpgeoisie know that Goon members have weekly mining quotas, right? You think they do all their mining ATK? You going to go bump them?
Kainotomiu Ronuken
koahisquad
#274 - 2012-11-09 19:50:56 UTC
Khergit Deserters wrote:
Secondly-- you bumpgeoisie know that Goon members have weekly mining quotas, right? You think they do all their mining ATK? You going to go bump them?

ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahahahaahahah you think?
Nathalie LaPorte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#275 - 2012-11-09 20:13:13 UTC
Anslo wrote:
a lot of words that added up to nothing


If you feel like saying something worth responding to, let me know.
Anslo
Scope Works
#276 - 2012-11-09 20:16:10 UTC
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
Anslo wrote:
a lot of words that added up to nothing


If you feel like saying something worth responding to, let me know.




Nice retort. Thanks for playing though! Smile

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Nathalie LaPorte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#277 - 2012-11-09 20:27:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Nathalie LaPorte
Anslo wrote:

Nice retort. Thanks for playing though! Smile


Nope, still not worth a substantive response. Keep trying! :)

If I provide clear evidence of you contradicting yourself, and then you spend a long post tying your already made argument into long senseless knots, that will continue to be filed in the circular cabinet by all readers, not just me :) I'm just being polite and letting you know how things stand.


Khergit Deserters wrote:
Indeed. Piracy, scamming, etc. are all legitimate business. The game rules and game mechanics encourage them. And the game mechanics encourage, or at least don't discourage, AFK mining. If CCP wanted to, it could easily add a game mechanic that required players be constantly ATK while mining. And CCP has never said AFK mining is an exploit. So apparently CCP doesn't see any harm in AFK mining. It's a legal and legitimate way to play the game.



"Our ultimate goal is that PvP and PvE fits should be the same and a lot of the thought process should be the same. That is... a long way off though."--CCP FoxFour.

So, CCP clearly wants to make AFK PVE not viable, and clearly CCP doesn't think it's a quick or easy fix. The quote above is about combat missions and plexes, not mining, but it's the closest quote I could find, and I'm going with this as their viewpoint unless you can supply a quote from CCP showing that they think mining should be different from other PVE in that respect. :)
Anslo
Scope Works
#278 - 2012-11-09 20:32:47 UTC
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
Nope, still not worth a substantive response. Keep trying! :)

Yet here you are? And you say I flip flop. I don't know who's worse, the bumpers or your need to argue What?

Quote:
If I provide clear evidence of you contradicting yourself, and then you spend a long post tying your already made argument into long senseless knots, that will continue to be filed in the circular cabinet by all readers, not just me :) I'm just being polite and letting you know how things stand.

Except that each piece of evidence was clearly explained away and your attempts to twist words were ultimately exposed, thus you stopped. They may be senseless to you, and for that I'm sorry. Can't please all of the people all of the time I suppose Smile
I'm also sorry you think it's circular. But oh well.


Quote:
So, CCP clearly wants to make AFK PVE not viable, and clearly CCP doesn't think it's a quick or easy fix. The quote above is about combat missions and plexes, not mining, but it's the closest quote I could find, and I'm going with this as their viewpoint unless you can supply a quote from CCP showing that they think mining should be different from other PVE in that respect. :)


You guys should really try not dredging up 10 year old quotes and get a modern day quote. I wonder if those sentiments are still the same? You base your assumptions on old data, i.e. old quotes. What about modern thinking of the company? So I believe the burden rests with you to provide a modern day quote to back yourself up.

hth
Smile

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
#279 - 2012-11-09 20:34:53 UTC
Kainotomiu Ronuken wrote:
Khergit Deserters wrote:
Secondly-- you bumpgeoisie know that Goon members have weekly mining quotas, right? You think they do all their mining ATK? You going to go bump them?

ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahahahaahahah you think?

ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahahahaahahah
Uh, what?
Nathalie LaPorte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#280 - 2012-11-09 20:37:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Nathalie LaPorte
Anslo wrote:

Yet here you are? And you say I flip flop. I don't know who's worse, the bumpers or your need to argue What?


here I am, dropping that line of discussion like it's hot, yes :)




Quote:

You guys should really try not dredging up 10 year old quotes and get a modern day quote. I wonder if those sentiments are still the same? You base your assumptions on old data, i.e. old quotes. What about modern thinking of the company? So I believe the burden rests with you to provide a modern day quote to back yourself up.


The quote that I already provided was from September 20, 2012. :) (About how the AI revamp will make PVE less afk-able and more like PVP fits) If I'm not mistaken, that's less then 10 years old :)