These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#301 - 2012-11-10 16:51:09 UTC
Some Rando wrote:
I was reading minerbumping.com today and noticed that our protagonist here, Anslo, is getting into the bumping business himself.


This was always invevitable. He's horribly ineffective at "counter-bumping", often bumping miners himself (which he considers acceptable collaterol damage) and seldom getting a hit on a bumper unless one of us stops dead for him. His ranting in local often leaves his fellow miners facepalming at his behaviour and, for all his talk, I've seen him go to "rescue" bumped AFK/bot miners, only to give up almost immediately when he realises that it'll take :time: and :effort: to push them back 100km or more back to the ice.

Given the constant support he gives us, Anslo must surely be a covert agent of the new order. If not, he was Abbott or Costello in a previous life. I urge him to openly pledge his loyalty to James 315.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#302 - 2012-11-10 17:00:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Fabulous Rod
Benny Ohu wrote:
Fabulous Rod wrote:
EVE is a SANDBOX which is why I support removing emergent gameplay

Straight


when emergent game play becomes game breaking, then it needs fixing. Its a simple concept and it happens in many games. Try harder.


I know all the losers with nothing better to do with their money after having dedicated so much time to EVE just LOVE any opportunity to "pvp" with essentially zero risk, but to the rest of us who actually like good gameplay and risk vs reward, ridiculous mechanics that are getting fixed were exactly why EVE has been considered to be such a joke within the competitive gamer community.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#303 - 2012-11-10 17:08:00 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:
when emergent game play becomes game breaking, then it needs fixing.


So fix it. Come back at us with in-game actions that make us react, rather than the same, tired whining that we see every single day on the forum. It seems to be all some people know how to do, aside from AFK mining.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#304 - 2012-11-10 17:18:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Fabulous Rod
admiral root wrote:
Fabulous Rod wrote:
when emergent game play becomes game breaking, then it needs fixing.


So fix it. Come back at us with in-game actions that make us react, rather than the same, tired whining that we see every single day on the forum. It seems to be all some people know how to do, aside from AFK mining.


the thing about EVE, its one of those games where ppl aren't supposed to be able to **** with you without any risk. I know that concept is difficult to understand for a lot of EVE denizens, given all the stupid mechanics that have existed for so long that ****** players have come to rely on. sad that so many low-lifes like pipa porto actually try and defend it all day long.

If you are going to have a high-sec, why do it half-assed? Why don't you high-sec "pvpers" find a game that is actually has no safety zones and see how well you do without concord protecting your cowardly self. If I want a fix for a player skill based, full loot pvp game with excellent clanwarfare, I play Darkfall.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#305 - 2012-11-10 17:19:49 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:
when emergent game play becomes game breaking, then it needs fixing. Its a simple concept and it happens in many games. Try harder.

I know all the losers with nothing better to do with their money after having dedicated so much time to EVE just LOVE any opportunity to "pvp" with essentially zero risk, but to the rest of us who actually like good gameplay and risk vs reward, ridiculous mechanics that are getting fixed were exactly why EVE has been considered to be such a joke within the competitive gamer community.

I don't think my eyebrow can go any higher
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#306 - 2012-11-10 17:21:33 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:
admiral root wrote:
Fabulous Rod wrote:
when emergent game play becomes game breaking, then it needs fixing.


So fix it. Come back at us with in-game actions that make us react, rather than the same, tired whining that we see every single day on the forum. It seems to be all some people know how to do, aside from AFK mining.


the thing about EVE, its one of those games where ppl aren't supposed to be able to **** with you without any risk. I know that concept is difficult to understand, given all the stupid mechanics that have existed for so long that ****** players have come to rely on. sad that so many low-lifes like pipa porto actually try and defend it all day long.


You talk about players relying on "stupid" mechanics, but you seem to be relying on CCP to solve your "problem". So, how about we try again? You have something you deem to be a problem arising from players using in-game and EULA-compliant methods. Why don't you quit your whining and do something about it in-game?

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Some Rando
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#307 - 2012-11-10 17:22:46 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:
the thing about EVE, its one of those games where ppl aren't supposed to be able to **** with you without any risk.

Other players provide that risk. If you don't understand that, you don't understand EVE.

Or you're just a terrible troll.

CCP has no sense of humour.
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#308 - 2012-11-10 17:23:56 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Fabulous Rod wrote:
admiral root wrote:
Fabulous Rod wrote:
when emergent game play becomes game breaking, then it needs fixing.


So fix it. Come back at us with in-game actions that make us react, rather than the same, tired whining that we see every single day on the forum. It seems to be all some people know how to do, aside from AFK mining.


the thing about EVE, its one of those games where ppl aren't supposed to be able to **** with you without any risk. I know that concept is difficult to understand, given all the stupid mechanics that have existed for so long that ****** players have come to rely on. sad that so many low-lifes like pipa porto actually try and defend it all day long.


You talk about players relying on "stupid" mechanics, but you seem to be relying on CCP to solve your "problem". So, how about we try again? You have something you deem to be a problem arising from players using in-game and EULA-compliant methods. Why don't you quit your whining and do something about it in-game?


I actually don't have a problem with it, I just realize its a stupid mechanic where you can act as an agressor and **** with people with zero risk. It is unbelievable to me that anyone would even bother to do it. It really goes to show you how no-life some of these EVE players are.
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#309 - 2012-11-10 17:24:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Fabulous Rod
Some Rando wrote:
Fabulous Rod wrote:
the thing about EVE, its one of those games where ppl aren't supposed to be able to **** with you without any risk.

Other players provide that risk. If you don't understand that, you don't understand EVE.

Or you're just a terrible troll.



not in high-sec, derp. Try again.

Fortunately Crimewatch is fixing this joke of a pvp game.
Some Rando
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#310 - 2012-11-10 17:26:14 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:
I actually don't have a problem with it

Has a problem with it, claims he doesn't have a problem with it.

CCP has no sense of humour.
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#311 - 2012-11-10 17:28:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Fabulous Rod
Some Rando wrote:
Fabulous Rod wrote:
I actually don't have a problem with it

Has a problem with it, claims he doesn't have a problem with it.


I should clarify, I don't have a personal problem with it in-game. technically you are right, its a stupid mechanic. Any mechanic that allows you to **** with people while under the protection of the police is totally stupid and lame. A joke.

Why do you care if someone makes money afk? There are loads of doing it in other ways. The difference is, you are unable to **** with those people while they are doing it. You jokers will take anything you can get. Grow a sack and don't complain when this dumb thing gets changed.
Some Rando
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#312 - 2012-11-10 17:28:56 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:
not in high-sec, derp. Try again.

You're right, CONCORD should be removed so we can have true emergent gameplay.

Fabulous Rod wrote:
Fortunately Crimewatch is fixing this joke of a pvp game.

Please explain. No mechanic I've read about in CW 2 will be "fixing this joke of a pvp game".

CCP has no sense of humour.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#313 - 2012-11-10 17:30:08 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:
I actually don't have a problem with it, I just realize its a stupid mechanic where you can act as an agressor and **** with people with zero risk. It is unbelievable to me that anyone would even bother to do it. It really goes to show you how no-life some of these EVE players are.


It wasn't zero risk when some aggrieved miner came at me with a suicide maller the other day. Lucky for me, he's worse at fitting ships than I am. Another agent was attacked viciously with a talos a short while later.

It sounds to me like you just have a problem with people interacting and having fun in a multiplayer game, which, by the way, some miners get as much enjoyment out of as bumpers - there are some great sports among them.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#314 - 2012-11-10 17:34:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Fabulous Rod
admiral root wrote:
Fabulous Rod wrote:
I actually don't have a problem with it, I just realize its a stupid mechanic where you can act as an agressor and **** with people with zero risk. It is unbelievable to me that anyone would even bother to do it. It really goes to show you how no-life some of these EVE players are.


It wasn't zero risk when some aggrieved miner came at me with a suicide maller the other day. Lucky for me, he's worse at fitting ships than I am. Another agent was attacked viciously with a talos a short while later.

It sounds to me like you just have a problem with people interacting and having fun in a multiplayer game, which, by the way, some miners get as much enjoyment out of as bumpers - there are some great sports among them.


So I guess we are all supposed to have have suicide mallers at our disposal just because some annoying shitwits are afraid of real pvp, right?

high-sec "pvp" is part of why this game is considered to be such a joke. Crimewatch says its time for cowards to grow a sac.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#315 - 2012-11-10 17:37:43 UTC
Having dispelled your myth about zero-risk you're now moving the goalposts and demanding that the current risk level be raised? Ok, how about you come be part of the risk? Do something, other than forum whining, please.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#316 - 2012-11-10 17:39:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Fabulous Rod
admiral root wrote:
Having dispelled your myth about zero-risk you're now moving the goalposts and demanding that the current risk level be raised? Ok, how about you come be part of the risk? Do something, other than forum whining, please.


hah, youre argument was a joke. Do you really expect everyone to pack around suicide gank ships with them all the time just to deal with the some random cowards who are afraid of real pvp? Lol

anyone can be suicide ganked at any time in high-sec space. It doesn't matter what you are doing.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#317 - 2012-11-10 17:41:20 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:
admiral root wrote:
Having dispelled your myth about zero-risk you're now moving the goalposts and demanding that the current risk level be raised? Ok, how about you come be part of the risk? Do something, other than forum whining, please.


hah, youre argument was a joke. Do you really expect everyone to have suicide gank ships just to deal with some cowards who are afraid of real pvp? Lol


So, just to clarify, you're full of hot air and have no interest in being part of the solution to your perceived problem? Got it. Who's next?

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#318 - 2012-11-10 17:50:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Fabulous Rod
admiral root wrote:
Fabulous Rod wrote:
admiral root wrote:
Having dispelled your myth about zero-risk you're now moving the goalposts and demanding that the current risk level be raised? Ok, how about you come be part of the risk? Do something, other than forum whining, please.


hah, youre argument was a joke. Do you really expect everyone to have suicide gank ships just to deal with some cowards who are afraid of real pvp? Lol


So, just to clarify, you're full of hot air and have no interest in being part of the solution to your perceived problem? Got it. Who's next?


funny that you claim to have won the argument while trying to defend your ability to annoy people with essentially zero risk.

How typical of someone like you. If you weren't an awful player you would have been able to escape from that maller easily. I know your type. A cowardly "pvper" who somehow thinks you are entitled to annoy people while under the protection of the police. Pathetic.

unfortunate for you that dumb mechanics like t his are obviously going to get fixed. Complaining about dumb mechanics is only natural. Deal with it and stop crying about ppl complaining about dumb mechanics that obviously need fixing.
Some Rando
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#319 - 2012-11-10 17:54:51 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:
funny that you claim to have won the argument while trying to defend your ability to annoy people with essentially zero risk.

If you weren't an awful player you would have been able to escape from that maller easily. I know your type. A cowardly "pvper" who somehow thinks you are entitled to annoy people while under the protection of the police. Pathetic.

unfortunate for you that dumb mechanics like t his are obviously going to get fixed. Complaining about dumb mechanics is only natural. Deal with it and stop crying about ppl complaining about dumb mechanics that obviously need fixing.

1/10

Also, you still haven't told me how CW 2 is going to fix this game or, for that matter, help people stop bumpers.

CCP has no sense of humour.
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#320 - 2012-11-10 17:57:25 UTC
Some Rando wrote:
Fabulous Rod wrote:
funny that you claim to have won the argument while trying to defend your ability to annoy people with essentially zero risk.

If you weren't an awful player you would have been able to escape from that maller easily. I know your type. A cowardly "pvper" who somehow thinks you are entitled to annoy people while under the protection of the police. Pathetic.

unfortunate for you that dumb mechanics like t his are obviously going to get fixed. Complaining about dumb mechanics is only natural. Deal with it and stop crying about ppl complaining about dumb mechanics that obviously need fixing.

1/10

Also, you still haven't told me how CW 2 is going to fix this game or, for that matter, help people stop bumpers.


cimewatch, and i'm sure CCP will eventually figure out something to deal with the cowards who have the ability annoy others without any real risk of loss to themselves in high-sec.