These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

I always read how Hi-sec has been buffed.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#201 - 2014-07-28 18:43:10 UTC
Milan Nantucket wrote:
Unfortunately others don't have logic 101. Those that do warned me about the carebear mentality and the refusal to see the facts staring them in the face.
You mean indisputable facts such as there being nothing in the EULA that prohibits the number of accounts you can run on a single computer?

Quote:
So some undisputable facts were put out there and my colleagues were correct. People were getting butthurt over the facts and making up facts. The only proof provided by me was the eula written by the almighty CCP themeselves.
Yes, you certainly did all of those: you disputed the facts, made up your own, got butthurt over having these two things pointed out to you, and even provided proof against your own claims.

You then outed yourself as a troll, as if it was even necessary at that point. Still, it was nice to see you actually provide a single factual item in the thread.
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#202 - 2014-07-28 18:51:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Sibyyl
Milan Nantucket wrote:
For example: CCP declared ISBoxer legit. Now you have miners like the one you post but you also have incursion runners various other types of players using it.

I might be partial because I know a supercute incursion runner who does this amazingly well, but I'll try and be objective.

There is a *difference* between whether CCP considers ISBoxer legit (they do) and whether ISBoxer encourages "farming" type behavior. I think the latter is a complicated discussion and you certainly won't be able to resolve it in this thread (it's totally off topic). Does it break my heart to see an ice belt disappear in the blink of an eye? Sometimes. Would I be at a severe ISK-making disadvantage compared to an ISBoxing incursion runner? Sure. We are not going to resolve this particular matter in this thread. It is way off topic.


Quote:
To use it you need more than 1 account on the same computer which is actually against CCP own End User License agreement
https://community.eveonline.com/support/policies/eve-eula/
Under License:
"you have 2 Accounts, you must have 2 licensed copies of the Software. You may not use more than one Account with a single licensed copy of the Software. You may make one (1) copy of the Software for backup or archival purposes.

Edit: You know what, I re-read this section and you're right. Multiboxing looks like it's against the EULA. CCP's *interpretation* as well as how they market the game has been completely different, however.

How can the EULA hold up if we purchase a product based on an expectation of multiboxing that is set up in advertising and marketing?

I'm no lawyer (yet), but you are incorrect in your interpretation. The section you are quoting has to do with ESTABLISHING an account, not playing with one. This section has to do with purchasing subscriptions and nothing to do with how many copies you are running.

Quote:
You may establish only one (1) Account for each copy of the Software licensed. If you wish to establish another Account, you must obtain another license for the Software (you may do this by purchasing and downloading the Software from CCP at the EVE Online web site, http://www.eveonline.com.)


Here is the section about playing, which does not forbid multiple clients on the same machine.

Quote:
REQUIREMENTS TO PLAY
To play EVE, you must: (i) purchase and download a copy of the Software; (ii) establish a valid account within the Game (an "Account") and keep that Account active by paying the subscription fees on a timely basis; (iii) obtain and maintain your own Internet access (Internet access is required to play EVE; CCP is not responsible for your access to the Internet); and (iv) comply with the EULA.


I think your interpretation is incorrect. You should re-examine the language of EULA again.

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.
Tennej
LoTax POCO Company of HiSEC
#203 - 2014-07-28 18:53:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Tennej
Jenn aSide wrote:
Tennej wrote:
New player? if you're new, how do you know about meta 0 modules and drone alloys?



FFS here we go again.... Pretending I was a new player and did the things I used to do when I actually was.... sorry for the confusion.

Name calling and insults..... make your damn point without it otherwise I just quit reading your post even if its actually worth reading.


Son, you haven't seen my name callin yet. When I do, you'll know it, because you'll also hear this in the background. BTW your avatar sure has a peerty mouth.

But as for your 'method', it's dumb, you screwed up your own experiment with personal bias. A new player wouldn't be doing half the crap you did.


Man you really are a bitter Vet..... its a game.... Stop being such a serious Sally.

You Miners think you have it so damn tough.  When I first started playing we didnt even have mining lasers.  You had to fly close to an asteroid.....pop a hatch and gnaw at it with your teeth.   - Bitter Vet
Tennej
LoTax POCO Company of HiSEC
#204 - 2014-07-28 18:56:52 UTC
Rhivre wrote:
So you pretended to be a new player who had enough isk to buy a Harby etc, and considered L3 mission income to be low, and therefore missions suck?
Why did your new player not know that higher level missions give higher level rewards and test those instead, whilst strangely being a new player who knew about how missions were in the past?

My main complaint when missioning on a "new" player is that I can no longer AFK my drake or domi in a mission



Don't remember saying missions sucked. Didn't like the removal of Meta 0 modules and drone alloys. In fact (altho not enough) missioning is one of the things this game has going for it. The new MTU deployable is absolutely fantastic and I think I said so.

Is there a question in here?

You Miners think you have it so damn tough.  When I first started playing we didnt even have mining lasers.  You had to fly close to an asteroid.....pop a hatch and gnaw at it with your teeth.   - Bitter Vet
Paranoid Loyd
#205 - 2014-07-28 18:57:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Paranoid Loyd
Milan Nantucket wrote:

Fact:
To use ISBoxer you need more than 1 account on the same computer. You have to login to all your screens or have isboxer do that for you.

Fact:
In the EULA "For each valid Account you maintain, you may install a copy of the Software on, and access the System from, a single computer or Game platform"

Fact:
you have 2 Accounts, you must have 2 licensed copies of the Software. You may not use more than one Account with a single licensed copy of the Software. You may make one (1) copy of the Software for backup or archival purposes.

Fact:
CCP not enforcing their own EULA by allowing the EULA to be broken.

OP's original question why is everything nerfed... well those who cry the most get what they want. CCP doesn't listen to those who follow the rules rather those who bring in the most cash.


Did anyone read this part in their Dwight Schrute voice? Lol

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#206 - 2014-07-28 19:03:55 UTC
Sibyyl wrote:
You know what, I re-read this section and you're right. Multiboxing looks like it's against the EULA. CCP's *interpretation* as well as how they market the game has been completely different, however.
In what way would it be against the EULA?
The EULA does not limit how many licenses (and thus accounts) can be tied to or used on one computer, only how many computers may be used for one account (two) and how many accounts may be used per license (one).
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#207 - 2014-07-28 19:32:52 UTC
Sibyyl wrote:

Edit: You know what, I re-read this section and you're right. Multiboxing looks like it's against the EULA. CCP's *interpretation* as well as how they market the game has been completely different, however.



you read that, I read "you can only use 1 account per client".
not computer, not network, not backbone.

1 client.

of which you can have several in your computer, since 1 account = 1 license.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
General Nusense
Doomheim
#208 - 2014-07-28 19:40:06 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
All of these high sec nerfs also happened in every other area of space.


yup, they did nerf everything. but they also buffed nullsec to the point where high sec needs an income stream buff. this is a sandbox game and you should beable to play this game anywhere you want and make decent isk. as a member of the biggest carebear group in the game, you should understand this.

Made a signature so I am taken seriously on the forums, since thats the only thing they are good for.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#209 - 2014-07-28 19:48:34 UTC
General Nusense wrote:
they also buffed nullsec to the point where high sec needs an income stream buff.

I don't think it does. There is plenty of income to be made in high-sec.

Quote:
this is a sandbox game and you should beable to play this game anywhere you want and make decent isk.

Since when does a sandbox have to promote equality?

Oh god.
Christina Project
Screaming Head in a Box.
#210 - 2014-07-28 20:04:01 UTC
Tennej wrote:
In fact (altho not enough) missioning is one of the things this game has going for it.
Seriously, when will you people stop responding to this bullshit thread?

Instead of helping them by keeping all this **** up,
the lot of you should make sure it gets closed.


But noooo ......

[i]"Don't look into another human's bowl to see how much he has ... ... look into his bowl to see if he has enough !" - Sol[/i]
Tennej
LoTax POCO Company of HiSEC
#211 - 2014-07-28 20:06:05 UTC
Quote:
I don't think it does. There is plenty of income to be made in high-sec.

Since when does a sandbox have to promote equality?



As this Thread is starting to prove there is still a substantial income to be made in hi-sec if you are willing to work for it. Passive hi-sec income is gone and won't be returning.

Sandbox doesn't promote or ensure equality....but from a financial perspective, a new player friendly environment will make you a little more money through sustained accounts. That new player environment has changed a lot recently.

You Miners think you have it so damn tough.  When I first started playing we didnt even have mining lasers.  You had to fly close to an asteroid.....pop a hatch and gnaw at it with your teeth.   - Bitter Vet
Tennej
LoTax POCO Company of HiSEC
#212 - 2014-07-28 20:07:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Tennej
Christina Project wrote:
Tennej wrote:
In fact (altho not enough) missioning is one of the things this game has going for it.
Seriously, when will you people stop responding to this bullshit thread?

Instead of helping them by keeping all this **** up,
the lot of you should make sure it gets closed.


But noooo ......



Seriously why do you hate this thread so much....keep reading it.....AND keep whining about it???

You Miners think you have it so damn tough.  When I first started playing we didnt even have mining lasers.  You had to fly close to an asteroid.....pop a hatch and gnaw at it with your teeth.   - Bitter Vet
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#213 - 2014-07-28 20:08:53 UTC
Christina Project wrote:
Tennej wrote:
In fact (altho not enough) missioning is one of the things this game has going for it.
Seriously, when will you people stop responding to this bullshit thread?

Instead of helping them by keeping all this **** up,
the lot of you should make sure it gets closed.


But noooo ......

You're no fun.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#214 - 2014-07-28 20:22:12 UTC
Quote:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

26. Off-topic posting is prohibited.

Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued.

Thread closed.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department