These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

New Freighter's - Mandated by EULA Section 16

First post
Author
DrysonBennington
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2014-08-02 22:48:18 UTC  |  Edited by: DrysonBennington
And I quote directly from the EULA - Section 16

Quote:

Quote:
You may not do anything that interferes with the ability of other EVE Online subscribers to enjoy the game or web site in accordance with its rules.


If I could put loud explody things in brackets around it I would.

This includes, but is not limited to, making inappropriate use of any public channels within the game and/or intentionally creating excessive latency (lag) by dumping cargo containers, corpses or other items in the game world.

The new freighter is a necessary addition to the ship categories as mandated by the EULA Sect. 16 because of the simple and obliquely obvious fact of the matter being that a Freighter can be bumped from a gate or station using modified ships to induce the bumping so that the freighter is not able to align and warp to its destination is the first infraction of Section 16 which is not a primary abuse but a secondary abuse. The primary abuse comes in the form of The Gank when the Bump Ship continues to bump the Freighter and the gank fleet arrives to then either assault the freighter pilot with a permit for safe passage or be destroyed.

With the freighter being unable to protect itself at all the pilot operating the freighter has had her or his EULA Section 16 Protected Right violated as the pilot does not have a third avenue of operation to employ in order to escape the gank without being destroyed by the gank, ejecting from the freighter, self destructing the freighter or purchasing the permit. The last clause purchasing the permit is a measure of escape but does not allow the freighter pilot to engage in combat actions if so desired in order to have present another means of escaping and being able to enjoy the environment because of the interference of others and the inability of the freighter to provide a means of escaping.

This means that a new type of freighter must be developed and made available to the Capsuleer of New Eden so that EULA Section 16 is not violated by any other Capsuleer who is in essence exploiting a weakness in the mechanics that the freighter pilot does not have any other options than surrender to employ.

Two New Freighters are therefore being mandated to be built pursuant of EULA Section 16

Freighter Type One

FTO will have a cargo hold of a minimum of 150,000k m/3 will have three low slots, two mid slots and two high slots, one high slot being for any munitions based module, munitions meaning that the module will launch or fire or emit a laser pulse, projectile round, hybrid charge or missile. The second high slot will be designated as a non munitions' based module.

FTO will also have two rig slots and a calibration of 200 points with a drone bay of 50 m/3 and bandwidth of 50 mbits/s.

Freighter Type Two

FTT shall be designed similar to FTO with the exception of third high slot being added to mount a Covert Ops Freighter Cloaking Device that is only able to be used on FTT. FTT will also have a reduced cargo hold volume of 100,000 and will not be able to employ the Cloaking Device unless it is operating in Low or Null Sector.


Both types of freighters will give the Capsuleer the ability to have the option of combat against the aggressing Gank Fleet if the pilot so chooses to do so.

Both ship designs are protected under Section 16 of the EULA and in order to maintain legal conformity must be developed by all available New Ede Shipyards.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2 - 2014-08-02 22:49:43 UTC
You are, without doubt, one of the worst posters ever.

Oh, and your interpretation ignores the "in accordance with its rules" part.

The rules allow bumping.

/thread

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Paikis
Vapour Holdings
#3 - 2014-08-02 22:51:40 UTC
No.

Don't carry enough stuff to be made a target and you wont get shot.
DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
CODE.
#4 - 2014-08-02 22:54:01 UTC
No.

Also, I had no idea you were a internet spaceship lawyer in addition to a stratagic commander and the creator of the legendary Scissors Technique.

Also, how are those ESS's in high sec working for you? Will they still not work right for some reason?

Dryson, I love you so much. Never stop posting :)
DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
CODE.
#5 - 2014-08-02 22:59:20 UTC
Paikis wrote:
No.

Don't carry enough stuff to be made a target and you wont get shot.


Untrue these days. We don't even usually cargo scan, man. We pick a system, and nuke every single freighter we can possibly pew pew with. Loot is nice, but we really don't care. It's about the explosions and watching them burn.
FireFrenzy
Cynosural Samurai
#6 - 2014-08-02 22:59:31 UTC
Best troll thread ever... Wait you're being serious aren't you?

Okay how do you imaging the cloaky freighter working, its presumably to slow to rapidly align and if my inty hits approach on where you were when you cloaked i could still decloak you even if you were magically immune to bumping... Seems sorta pointless...

That said I feel this thread requires some ISD attention and nuking from orbit...
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#7 - 2014-08-02 23:00:55 UTC
This has to be a troll because it's surely not possible to have so little grey matter between the ears and still be capable of typing.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff

DrysonBennington
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2014-08-02 23:01:04 UTC
Also, I had no idea you were a internet spaceship lawyer in addition to a stratagic commander and the creator of the legendary Scissors Technique.

Still trying to spin the objection in your favor with humor based semantics to try and create a reality that you want to believe is real?

I never said that I was an Internet Spaceship Lawyer...which is merely misdirection on your part and is not a valid objection to the argument that I have clearly stated which is based on provable facts and the EULA.

If you can't come up with an objection other than to troll the idea to have the thread locked then I can say that I have won the argument because of the in justifications for your argument that you provided.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#9 - 2014-08-02 23:02:51 UTC
DrysonBennington wrote:
the argument that I have clearly stated which is based on provable facts and the EULA.


In the first post I explained that your interpretation is wrong, due to being entirely based in a lie of omission.

Not that I expected better honestly, it is still you after all.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

DrysonBennington
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2014-08-02 23:03:42 UTC
admiral root wrote:
This has to be a troll because it's surely not possible to have so little grey matter between the ears and still be capable of typing.



Only a troll such as yourself would post a response as you have in order to derail the thread in hopes of it being locked so that your little fantasy world of being High Sector Gankers can go on.

So little grey matter?

Explain to me what I just said regarding the EULA.
DrysonBennington
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2014-08-02 23:05:40 UTC  |  Edited by: DrysonBennington
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
DrysonBennington wrote:
the argument that I have clearly stated which is based on provable facts and the EULA.


In the first post I explained that your interpretation is wrong, due to being entirely based in a lie of omission.

Not that I expected better honestly, it is still you after all.


Semantics not based in EULA Factuality but in your mind only.

Explain to me how my interpretation should be based on how you expect the interpretation to actually be then without violating EULA Section 16.


So how am I liar when the facts are clear and present based on EULA 16 and the design facts of the Freighters and tactics that are employed against the Freighter which violates the capsuleers ability to enjoy the game because the freighter pilot does not have any options other than to surrender which takes away from their ability to enjoy the game but makes the game absolutely enjoyable for you?
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#12 - 2014-08-02 23:09:46 UTC
DrysonBennington wrote:
Explain to me what I just said regarding the EULA.


You mean the part where bumping and ganking are allowed by it?

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#13 - 2014-08-02 23:12:09 UTC
DrysonBennington wrote:

Semantics not based in EULA Factuality but in your mind only.


Oh, the irony. I didn't think you'd actually be this easily lead around by the nose, but I was incorrect.


Quote:

Explain to me how my interpretation should be based on how you expect the interpretation to actually be then without violating EULA Section 16.



If you can't figure it out already, then nothing I say will fix you. You've twisted the facts to serve your preconceived conclusion.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#14 - 2014-08-02 23:12:44 UTC
" in accordance with its rules."


Bumping is in accordance with the rules.

Now SHOO!
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
CODE.
#15 - 2014-08-02 23:14:08 UTC
DrysonBennington wrote:
The Code always wins

I know it's not what you wrote, but it's actually what you said when you once again cried for CCPs help because you lose all the battles in the actual game. Maybe EVE isn't for you and you should take up something less confusing and difficult to play.
DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
CODE.
#16 - 2014-08-02 23:15:57 UTC
DrysonBennington wrote:
Also, I had no idea you were a internet spaceship lawyer in addition to a stratagic commander and the creator of the legendary Scissors Technique.

Still trying to spin the objection in your favor with humor based semantics to try and create a reality that you want to believe is real?

I never said that I was an Internet Spaceship Lawyer...which is merely misdirection on your part and is not a valid objection to the argument that I have clearly stated which is based on provable facts and the EULA.

If you can't come up with an objection other than to troll the idea to have the thread locked then I can say that I have won the argument because of the in justifications for your argument that you provided.


Fair enough. I'll give you valid objections - but I hate to use the time to bother, as when I give valid objections to other awful posts you make, you simply resort to strange ranting about cows. But I digress.

Bumping is 100% permitted under the EULA. CCP has flat out stated that bumping is a 100% valid game mechanic. This happened a long time ago. Your entire argument is that bumping somehow violates the EULA, which CCP has publically said is not the case. The ideas you get when you read the EULA don't matter, what matters is how CCP rules on the issue - and CCP has flat out said bumping is fine. The only exception to this is using bumping as a form of harassment, which they define as following someone thru "many" systems and bumping them everywhere they go for no other purpose then the annoy them. Your argument is flawed, invalid, and not based in reality.

Your proposed ships are game breakingly bad. I am not even going to go into why, I am sure if you think about it you can see why. Not only are they game breaking bad, they totally neglect the actual role of a freighter - moving things. That's what they do. They are not covert ops. They are not combat ships. They are big slow space bricks that can move an insane amount of things. Combat is done by intel, being aware, scouting, and fleet members to back you up. Fly one blind, alone, with no scout - you deserve to go boom. It's a stupid idea.

Freighers are easy to defend. It's calling being a social player (or even using alts) and having a scout to check things out. Using the map and intel channels to avoid hot spots. Having friends (or even alts) to back the player up should things get ugly.

It's just the usual Q.Q, Dryson. CCP gives everyone every single tool they need to defend themselves, players refuse to use these tools due to the effort required (usually they are the type of player who wants no communication or interaction with other players to begin with), and then they cry and post game breaking ideas on the fourms to attempt to make EVE work the way they think it should work in their heads.

Freighters have low slots now. There's quite a lot one can do with them. In fact, every form of hauling/mining/industry ship in the entire game over the last couple years has received buffs, more EHP, extra slots, and more options to make things easier.

Use the tools you have. Think outside the bun. You'll be fine.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#17 - 2014-08-02 23:18:41 UTC
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:

Use the tools you have. Think outside the bun. You'll be fine.



That's just mean to say, DJ.

If they were capable of doing those things, then they'd be a real player anyway, and not a carebear.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Samillian
Angry Mustellid
Lost Obsession
#18 - 2014-08-02 23:33:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Samillian
An interesting if basically flawed attempt.

If you put half as much effort into thinking about how to use the tools already provided by CCP as you have into this thread you would see that neither of these suggested freighters are necessary or desirable.

NBSI shall be the whole of the Law

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#19 - 2014-08-03 00:08:20 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
You are, without doubt, one of the worst posters ever.

Oh, and your interpretation ignores the "in accordance with its rules" part.

The rules allow bumping.

/thread

Within certain limits. The Devs have stated that you can't stalk and harass or bump for hours on end just for LoLs.
But Bumping so a gank fleet you already have formed up can come and gank is totally legit, agreed.

However, Op, even if we assumed you were correct, your proposals would do nothing. Since the bump ship has not aggressed the freighter, so you can't shoot it without concord attacking you.
Pheusia
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#20 - 2014-08-03 00:22:58 UTC
Other players blowing my ships up interferes with my enjoyment of the game therefore DCUs should give 100% shield resists.
123Next pageLast page