These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What happened to wormholes?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
78 alpha
Doomheim
#1 - 2017-01-01 04:38:47 UTC
I checked 12 WH a day for 5 days and none of them had any sign of ore, but they did have 2 to 3 times the number of gas sites. Did an Eve update replace the spawn algorithm of Ore with Gas? I know gas is worth more but I want the Ore more and can't find it as often as it normally would spawn... do the vast majority of WH actually not have Ore... lastly, did CCP mess with something again? Or kill the hamster that mans Ore generation?
78 alpha
Doomheim
#2 - 2017-01-01 04:42:11 UTC
well... F me with a can of cheese wizz... the other guy that uses this turned off.... THE MOther FinG AnoMolies!!!! my apologies...
Memphis Baas
#3 - 2017-01-01 04:44:48 UTC
Dunno if they actually changed anything or if the wormholes just spawn whatever is consumed the most, but, basically, Alphas can get into the free Venture that the tutorial gives them, put on some gas harvesters, and ninja some gas in a wormhole. And there have been A LOT of Alphas, recently.
Tuttomenui II
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2017-01-01 06:31:51 UTC
78 alpha wrote:
the other guy that uses this.


Say what now? What THIS? Hope you don't mean that particular character and thus that account. That is ban-able unless the other person is your child or spouse or something like that.
Sameli Adelora
Celestial Industrial Supplies
Templis Strategic Division
#5 - 2017-01-01 06:46:19 UTC
Tuttomenui II wrote:
78 alpha wrote:
the other guy that uses this.


Say what now? What THIS? Hope you don't mean that particular character and thus that account. That is ban-able unless the other person is your child or spouse or something like that.





My brother in law used my (one of ...s) account once, got a Charon blown up because he wanted to move ice. I banned him.
Joia Crenca
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#6 - 2017-01-01 19:07:59 UTC
Tuttomenui II wrote:
78 alpha wrote:
the other guy that uses this.


Say what now? What THIS? Hope you don't mean that particular character and thus that account. That is ban-able unless the other person is your child or spouse or something like that.





Maybe a roommate or friend that comes over... and changes your settings?
Memphis Baas
#7 - 2017-01-01 20:10:08 UTC
Tuttomenui II wrote:
78 alpha wrote:
the other guy that uses this.


Say what now? What THIS? Hope you don't mean that particular character and thus that account. That is ban-able unless the other person is your child or spouse or something like that.




Yeah she's sharing the account/character with someone, and he turned off the ring around her HUD in-space.
Maekchu
Doomheim
#8 - 2017-01-01 20:45:22 UTC
Well, time to ban that account!
Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#9 - 2017-01-01 20:52:11 UTC
Are you sure that the almighty Bob is not displeased with you? Have you left any sacrifices to him on your trips to WH space? If not he may be messing with your UI to keep you searching the wormholes until your trial...

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.
Vortexo VonBrenner
Doomheim
#10 - 2017-01-01 23:19:16 UTC
Tuttomenui II wrote:
78 alpha wrote:
the other guy that uses this.


Say what now? What THIS? Hope you don't mean that particular character and thus that account. That is ban-able unless the other person is your child or spouse or something like that.



I thought it was technically a EULA violation to share your account with anyone?



EvE security zones in pictures

EvE quick reference pdf

EvE links
Marcus Binchiette
Federal Vanguard
#11 - 2017-01-02 00:12:58 UTC
Vortexo VonBrenner wrote:

I thought it was technically a EULA violation to share your account with anyone?


It is a violation of the EULA to allow anyone else to use your account. Though, it is technically possible that someone could have used the account without being allowed by the account holder, and that therefore means that there is no concrete evidence that the EULA was breached. For there to be grounds for claiming that the EULA was breached it would not only be necessary to prove that the account was used by another person, but also prove that such usage was sanctioned by the account holder.

The OP was not specific in relation to this, and so that statement cannot be construed as evidence of breach of the EULA. All we know is that some other person used the account, and now they are banned from using it... No one at any point identified that the original usage was allowed by the OP.
Soel Reit
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2017-01-02 01:34:54 UTC
EULA is 2k17 LUL

you guys are so outdated LolLol
Charley Varrick
State War Academy
Caldari State
#13 - 2017-01-02 01:43:58 UTC
Yea OP Id check your wording. They are like a cop writing a ticket for doing 56 in a 55 around here and there are no shortage of players who will point it out!
Marcus Binchiette
Federal Vanguard
#14 - 2017-01-02 11:59:59 UTC
Charley Varrick wrote:
Yea OP Id check your wording. They are like a cop writing a ticket for doing 56 in a 55 around here and there are no shortage of players who will point it out!


Unlikely. CCP is a business and their aim is to make money. They would likely exercise some discretion so as not to upset an otherwise legitimate and EULA abiding customer - and especially not when said customer has already taken steps to prevent such usage contrary to the EULA from happening in future.

I would however suggest that the OP express themselves more carefully so as not to implicate themselves.
Kenneth Endashi
Kor-Azor Slave Holdings
#15 - 2017-01-03 03:38:45 UTC
op don't sweat these hall monitors trying to derail the conversation with their rule crazy jabbering.

glad you got your wormhole crisis straightened out.
d0cTeR9
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#16 - 2017-01-03 18:39:22 UTC
Marcus Binchiette wrote:
Charley Varrick wrote:
Yea OP Id check your wording. They are like a cop writing a ticket for doing 56 in a 55 around here and there are no shortage of players who will point it out!


Unlikely. CCP is a business and their aim is to make money. They would likely exercise some discretion so as not to upset an otherwise legitimate and EULA abiding customer - and especially not when said customer has already taken steps to prevent such usage contrary to the EULA from happening in future.

I would however suggest that the OP express themselves more carefully so as not to implicate themselves.



People have been ban for less.

Been around since the beginning.
Keno Skir
#17 - 2017-01-03 19:26:11 UTC
d0cTeR9 wrote:
Marcus Binchiette wrote:
Charley Varrick wrote:
Yea OP Id check your wording. They are like a cop writing a ticket for doing 56 in a 55 around here and there are no shortage of players who will point it out!


Unlikely. CCP is a business and their aim is to make money. They would likely exercise some discretion so as not to upset an otherwise legitimate and EULA abiding customer - and especially not when said customer has already taken steps to prevent such usage contrary to the EULA from happening in future.

I would however suggest that the OP express themselves more carefully so as not to implicate themselves.



People have been ban for less.


It's pretty obvious you're sharing accounts. Nobody really cares around here tbh, but I've enjoyed watching the back-paddling.

Marcus the EULA is there partly to ensure CCP make money, it's not something they would ignore for money.

Black Lanterns Blog <- Read my ramblings -.-

250,000 Bonus SP when you start an Alpha Clone HERE <---
Akali Mid
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2017-01-03 19:58:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Akali Mid
When is people gonna realise that CCP controls everything?

CCP knows all the data of what materials are being used and if there's lack or abundance of them and controls the resources.

CCP goes as deep as feeding the market with orders or buying out items from people to increase or decrease the price.

The trick is to create a healthy and attractive economy to entertain people.


Eve economy would be dead if it wasnt for CCP controling the market the industry entirely.


Edit: CCP knows exactly what is the average people make in this game, so they also control the Plex price, not players.

CCP feeds plexes through ALTs and/or buy orders from players to increase or decrease the price to an acceptable value according to CCP statistics of what an average player can afford.
Aurelius Oshidashi
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#19 - 2017-01-03 20:22:51 UTC
Akali Mid wrote:
When is people gonna realise that CCP controls everything?

CCP knows all the data of what materials are being used and if there's lack or abundance of them and controls the resources.

CCP goes as deep as feeding the market with orders or buying out items from people to increase or decrease the price.

The trick is to create a healthy and attractive economy to entertain people.


Eve economy would be dead if it wasnt for CCP controling the market the industry entirely.


Edit: CCP knows exactly what is the average people make in this game, so they also control the Plex price, not players.

CCP feeds plexes through ALTs and/or buy orders from players to increase or decrease the price to an acceptable value according to CCP statistics of what an average player can afford.


Do you always make outrageous claims without even providing a hint of evidence?
Matthias Ancaladron
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#20 - 2017-01-03 21:17:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Matthias Ancaladron
Marcus Binchiette wrote:
Vortexo VonBrenner wrote:

I thought it was technically a EULA violation to share your account with anyone?


It is a violation of the EULA to allow anyone else to use your account. Though, it is technically possible that someone could have used the account without being allowed by the account holder, and that therefore means that there is no concrete evidence that the EULA was breached. For there to be grounds for claiming that the EULA was breached it would not only be necessary to prove that the account was used by another person, but also prove that such usage was sanctioned by the account holder.

The OP was not specific in relation to this, and so that statement cannot be construed as evidence of breach of the EULA. All we know is that some other person used the account, and now they are banned from using it... No one at any point identified that the original usage was allowed by the OP.


Being devil's advocate is fine and all but theres not much room. You can argue he was vague but his exact wording was the other guy that uses this [account]

Uses is plural and present tense not singular and past tense indicating a one time non sanctioned act. Uses indicates recurrent "use" that the op is seemingly aware of.

Not taking sides just saying that the vague wording isn't so vague.