These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2007-09-14 19:25
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-04-07 20:48
  • Likes Received: 0

Darek Castigatus

Security Status -8.9
  • Immortalis Inc. Member since
  • Shadow Cartel Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • CCP has given up on EVE online, Stop giving them your money in EVE Communication Center

    DrysonBennington wrote:
    Sounds like manus is phising the forums to use your replies as a semi-legitimate reason to war dec your corporations.


    So hes both an idiot and terrible at pvp, nice to know I guess.

  • CCP broke the no intervention on Market rule in EVE Communication Center

    Jeremiah Saken wrote:
    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    Aside from CCP re-introducing contraband PLEX from banned accounts to the market, I dont know of any CCP interference in markets.

    There was an presentation at 2014 fanfest about PLEX, they were interfere with PLEX market directly.


    Yes, using the method described in the quoted post. This does not make it a new thing or something people should be up in arms about.

  • CCP, are you going to do anything about the Ghost Training exploit? in EVE Communication Center

    Do Little wrote:
    I think it's unlikely CCP will talk about it. They'll simply fix it and people with omega skills in their queue will simply stop training when their omega time expires. You'll learn that it's fixed when people using the exploit start crying about it.

    I gather it's very difficult to prove intent so making it a bannable offence is problematic. Best to simply fix it quietly.


    Yeah thats one thing I think a lot of the 'ban them all and take their money' crowd havent considered, that it is most likely extremely difficult to tell the difference between someone using ghost training and someone doing normal unsub/resub activities when you only have logs to go off. And if there isnt a way to reliably spot it then you cant just ban the people who said they used it, Globby being a good example here, because then you open yourself up to accusations of unfairness.

    its better to just fix the issue and move on.

  • Why no capships in high-sec? in EVE Communication Center

    Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
    Antichrist of Revelations wrote:
    I just sat here and read his opening post, and re-read it after reading what you said. ... I also saw nothing of him wondering why everyone isn't instantly agreeing with him.

    Or, perhaps you are seeing what HE wants you to see? The Great Beast , The Very Form of Maleficence. Lies and deceit and misdirection incarnate.

    ...He explained so-called 'cherrypicking' to my satisfaction. He's not gonna respond to any and everything. He's going to do what everyone else does.

    ...From his point of view....

    I can understand being embarassed by your own posts so you switch to an alt, but referring to yourself in the third person?

    Pure dickhead.


    Well at least in a very roundabout way he did answer the question, by effectively admitting he has no intention of discussing anything in good faith, so I'm not going to waste any more time on him.

  • Why no capships in high-sec? in EVE Communication Center

    Beast of Revelations wrote:
    Nick Bete wrote:
    Beast of Revelations wrote:


    ...Look, at the end of the day, it's no big deal, and I really don't care that much either way...

    Then why did you start this thread in the first place?


    I get it, you're a troll, along with Jenn aSide who is one of the biggest trolls on this forum. But I'll bite anyway.

    I wonder if it could be true that there are at least 100 things I'd fix first before doing any gymnastics or backflips - assuming any are required - to put capships in highsec... and yet I still have a question as to why capships aren't allowed in highsec?

    I wonder if it could be true that if capships are never put into highsec, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it at night, I wouldn't cry, I wouldn't quit the game or threaten to quit... and yet I still have a question as to why capships aren't allowed in highsec?

    I wonder if it could be true that this thread is not unlike most threads I post, and also not unlike most threads most people post. Their lives don't depend on the question they have or the point of view they put across (balance on this or that particular unit, etc), they won't lose any sleep at night over any issues presented... yet they still went through the trouble to start a thread.

    Naturally, you don't care about the answer to this question - you're just a forum troll. But for anyone else reading this, I wonder if any of this could be true?


    Irony thy name is Beast of Revelations.

    But to do you the phenomenal courtesy of assuming you asked your question in good faith and not just because you love a pointless argument, the reason you're getting jumped on is three fold.

    1) The way you asked the initial question.
    Your opening post frankly reads like a little kid stomping into a room, loudly declaring 'this thing I don't like is stupid' and then wondering why everyone isn't instantly agreeing with him. Theres no support for your points or explanation of your reasoning, just vague declarations that you dont like something.

    2) Poor reasoning and cherrypicking of responses.
    The reasons you've given to support your arguments both in the initial post and throughout the thread have betrayed a fundamental lack of knowledge about the subject, in this case capital ships and the effects they have on gameplay, which you've shown no inclination to correct. As several people have already said you have also been cherry picking only those points you have a response for and ignoring the rest, even when what you chose to ignore fundamentally undermines the argument you then try and make.

    3) If you arent a troll you sure talk a lot like one.
    A lot of the rhetorical techniques you've been trying to use in the latter part of the thread are very similar if not identical to those used by trolls and others who don't argue in good faith. The cherrypicking, the declaration that suddenly the subject doesnt matter to you, the accusations flung at other users, these and other things you have said and done make you ping on peoples troll radars even if that isnt what you intended.

    Might want to think about these things if you want to actually have productive discussions rather than rehashing the same argument over and over again.

  • How many more players must we lose to bullying in EVE Communication Center

    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Darek Castigatus wrote:


    At its heart this argument is and always has been about two opposing viewpoints, some people think they shouldn't have to have what they perceive as limits placed on their game play by other players and some people think they should be able to play the game in the way they feel it has been put forward by the developers without having to care about what anyone else thinks.


    That sums it up well. The problem is that one side in demonstrably right and the other on lives in a world of fantasy and unreasonable personal preferences. One side adapted to how EVE is on day one and has been mostly happy since then, and the other side has complained about how EVE is since day one and been very unhappy (rather than just stopping themselves from playing a game they fundamentally don't like..

    Why should people who are right (and sane) "try to understand" people are provably wrong (and could probably use some mental health care services to help them stop torturing themselves with video games they hate)?


    Because it then makes it easier to convince them of that, assuming of course they are arguing in good faith in the first place which is where the troll issue comes in again. Perhaps I'm giving people too much credit here but I also think its simple good manners to show that you can understand someones viewpoint even if you disagree with it and are going to try and convince them to take up yours instead.

    Im not blaming you specifically for this or saying you shouldnt argue your case but polarising the discussion by not caring about the other side simply results in the same back and forth bullshit where people pay zero attention to what the other person is saying unless they can use it to score some petty 'gotcha' point. It achieves nothing and to be honest we've seen it for far too damn long now.

  • How many more players must we lose to bullying in EVE Communication Center

    So....have people finished having the exact same argument thats been going back and forth for over a decade yet?

    At its heart this argument is and always has been about two opposing viewpoints, some people think they shouldn't have to have what they perceive as limits placed on their game play by other players and some people think they should be able to play the game in the way they feel it has been put forward by the developers without having to care about what anyone else thinks.

    Personally I come down more on the pro ganking side, simply because I agree with the argument that what the developers have always said they intended the game to be is more important than a few players slightly bruised feelings, however I can understand the reasoning behind the other sides arguments even if i dont agree with it.

    Of course the situation isnt helped when theres a substantial part of both sides that arent interested in actually having a discussion and just prefer to troll threads by spouting hyperbole, arguing in bad faith and refusing to even try and understand the opposing viewpoints. I'm also going to reserve a special hell for those idiots who play the 'If you act badly in a game then you're a bad person in real life' card, because not only is it a bullshit argument in the first place but its chronically missing the point.

    I know this post isn't going to change anything and likely as not I'll be reading a whole new iteration of the same damn thing in a few weeks anyway but i felt it had to be said.

  • Every year, there are less users playing, why?? in EVE Communication Center

    Galaxy Duck wrote:
    This thread can get to 100 pages, we just have to believe.


    And yet nothing new will have been said, at all. Its the same sides having the same arguments in the same ways just like every other time this subject has come up.

  • Why do people assume how we play the game reflects us in real life? in EVE Communication Center

    Dracvlad wrote:
    Scipio Artelius wrote:
    Teckos Pech wrote:
    Dracvlad wrote:
    Tsukino Stareine wrote:
    Nobody thinks they are a hero, we are just doing what is heeded to get ahead in an environment without consequences.

    If you can't handle it I'm sure Hello Kitty online spoonfeeds and protects you enough to your standards


    Jenn a'Snide was calling them heros, one of them goes out on missing people searches, and all of them were in the military or emergency services or something like that . It must be true Jenn a'Snide said it... Lol



    LInk the post please. I've read two of her posts and while she listed some anecdotal evidence of what some of the "bad guys in EVE" did in RL I don't see claims that gankers are heroes.

    I know the search function is a bit limited, but a search for 'hero' doesn't turn up Jenn in any of the references related to this thread:

    https://puu.sh/r53Ki/7968cddbee.png

    So don't hold your breath waiting if that is the case. It would be a case of the usual, a claim made in error with nothing to support it.


    Still butt hurt from earlier I see Roll As I said those people were doing it for their own needs and desires, you are just too stupid to realise it.

    The post where Jenn a'Snide talks about a ganker going out to search for missing people is in this thread, not my issue that you are unable to locate it mate. Lol


    Yes it is but what you seem to have missed is that shes talking about members of the community she's personally interacted with, not making a general claim about an entire group. Even if she had been the social dynamics of one specific group are functionally irrelevant to a discussion about general ethics.

  • Raven in EVE Gameplay Center

    Dante Graydon wrote:
    message re the crystals something to consider

    on another note would FOF missiles work better with this as no need to lock


    Maybe carry a few in cargo in case of ecm but dont use it as primary ammo, its too easy to be manipulated into uselessness

  • RIOT! Gamedevelopment follows exclusively the interests of investors in EVE Communication Center

    Lucy Lollipops wrote:
    I judge a game and a company for the content they keep adding to the game.

    Taking as an example WoW, I'm giving a look at the new legion expansion and I can say:

    - I paid for it? Yes, I paid.

    - I still need a subscription? Yes, I need it ( or "plex it" as I am doing for the next 5 free months...)

    What are they giving me?

    Tons of new things to do, tons of content, tons of new zones, new dungeons and so on. All with one account, because I can have several chars in the same account and if I play them they level up, all of them, not only one at a time as here.

    Now you will say:

    - WoW is something totally different, it's a ****** game, a family game, a themepark and so on.

    Partially I agree, I love Eve for it's sandbox nature, but they are giving us nothing, or almost nothing.

    Do you really think this is something decent....?

    - New mining ship skins and some slots removed/some stats modified
    - Some links mechanics changed and some new animations?
    - Something else? I dunno what, some more little things?

    I'm quite new to the game so I'm lucky enough to play all the old content that's a new content for me, so for the next year I already paid my subscription for I can be ok and enjoy the game, but If I was a veteran I would be really enraged, I would be rioting for sure seing undecent new skins added all time for sale, and developers effords focused only on trying to attract new players while giving absolutely NOTHING to the already existing players, always protected by the stupid excuse that "it's a sandbox, users make content"

    It's not about being a sandbox with using making the content, it's having a player base totally abandoned and having developers slacking and doing nothing at all for the veterans.


    The problem with your Wow example is simple, the content Blizzard gives you is the only content you can do in that game. CCP doesnt work that way, they dont believe its up to them to tell us how to play, they simply give players a bunch of tools and a big wide open space to use them in and then sit back and see what happens. I mean how many times have they been caught out because players did something in a way they hadnt anticipated or in some cases didnt even think was possible, that is simply not something you get very often in games like WoW.

    People may not like changes or having to adapt how they play to cope with a new situation but at the end of the day CCP gives us far more choice and scope in how we can choose to play this game than any other MMO developer I've ever seen. The central point of your argument appears to be that CCP isnt giving us enough new stuff to do but I would argue it isnt their job to do that, its their job to give us as players the tools and opportunities to make our own content and in that regard I think they're doing a pretty good job.

  • Problems of EVE online in EVE Communication Center

    Linus Gorp wrote:
    Darek Castigatus wrote:

    Woot, free sandwich Big smile

    Now I'm hungry Sad


    dammit, now I am too Ugh

  • Problems of EVE online in EVE Communication Center

    Serene Repose wrote:
    Caleb Seremshur wrote:
    Bumblefck wrote:
    Serene Repose wrote:
    For all who feel compelled to offer their two-cents worth on this done-to-death topic: This topic has been done to death.
    Do you feel compelled to comment?
    Me thinks thou doth protest too much
    *Takes the sandwich anyway*


    Woot, free sandwich Big smile

  • RIOT! Gamedevelopment follows exclusively the interests of investors in EVE Communication Center

    Nana Skalski wrote:
    Money isnt everything and I dont see investors boasting that they play EVE on daily basis.
    Also, money is aquired from players, so they are the source of income, not the game. In interest of any investor is to provide service that customers like in the first place.


    This, in order to make money you actually have to have something people want to buy in the first place.

  • Dev blog: Command Bursts and the New World of Fleet Boosting in EVE Information Center

    Daemun Khanid wrote:

    It's not a question of being able to fly the ships but even if it were just because you had leadership V that doesn't mean you can fly a command ship. But more importantly someone who trained a skill that required no specific ship or module shouldn't be forced to fly a specific ship/module to get use out of a skill they trained without those restrictions. A person doesn't just train basic leadership skills so they can be a link pilot flying a t3 cruiser they train them so they can command small gangs and fleets and get bonuses no matter what ship they are flying. This change says "well, if you want to get anything out of the skills that you've already devoted time training then you will be a boost ship" or "you can pay us to extract your skills and you can put the sp towards something that you'll actually use."

    If you can't figure out the analogy that's your intellectual deficiency and not my fault but I'll break it down for you anyway.
    Player plays monthly fee which allows them to train a skill.
    (Consumer buys a guy that drives just fine and runs on gas like any other)

    After making your purchase CCP says sorry but that skill doesn't do that any more.
    (Consumer is told they can't buy gas anymore)

    CCP says BUT if you fly fleet boost focused ships and used fleet boost modules you'll still get use of your skills
    (Car dealer says, you can drive your care on these special roads and it'll work just fine)

    CCP says you can always buy extractors from us and redistribute your sp (Car dealer say, you can by this special upgrade and drive wherever you want)

    Understand now? They sell you a product, then decide after the fact that the product you paid for is no longer going to perform the task that you intended it for when you paid for it. They then try to upsell you more products just so you can get the same benefit from your purchase that you already paid for. More commonly referred to as a scam.

    Honestly it really doesn't effect me that much. I started training my link alt to be ongrid combat links back when the command dessi's were released because their creation was an obvious move in the direction of on grid links. It wasn't a matter of if boosts were going on grid it was just when. I extracted my leadership skills from my main and injected the sp into my combat links alt. So again, I planned ahead and don't really have anything to lose w these changes. That still doesn't make their approach to the skills and potential profit from extractors less shady.


    Passive bonuses that apply all the time with no effort involved in applying them are exactly what CCP is trying to get rid of with these changes, its something thats been widely disliked for a long time by both players and devs. Yes that going to change how the skills apply in the game but guess what, you're not entitled to have your skills remain a certain way just because its what they were like when you trained them.

    Should I complain that theres no longer just one skill for flying Battlecruisers despite it being that way when I trained for them? Should I complain that a lot of my skills have had their prerequisites reduced since I trained them, making them easier to get for others than they were for me?

    And yes CCP are pushing skill extractors as a solution. Why? because thats what they were designed to do, to allow people to take skill points they either no longer want or no longer use and put them somewhere else. Yes they cost money but guess what again, CCP is a business not a charity and a business that doesnt try to make money is a business that doesnt last very long. I honestly struggle to see whats in any way shady about pushing a product that function as a direct address to an issue your customers have raised.

    Finally I understood your analogy perfectly well, i just thought it was shite and being jaw droppingly condescending about it doesn't make me think its any less shite.

  • Dev blog: Command Bursts and the New World of Fleet Boosting in EVE Information Center

    Daemun Khanid wrote:
    Moac Tor wrote:
    Alhira Katserna wrote:
    Annia Aurel wrote:
    Will you refund all SP currently allocated in Leadership skills?
    Those you still want them are free to reallocate them ...


    Good question. I hope they get refunded as they┬┤re useless now for at least 90% of the people who trained them just to support their fleet.

    They are still useful and are still used for supporting your fleet. So why would there be any refund?

    Plus all the begging for an SP refund is a moot point as you can just extract and sell the skills.


    a. Because previously they provided a bonus for any and every FC running a fleet. Now they aren't gonna do jack unless FC wants to hop in a boost ship and put a target on his forehead in every engagement.

    b. Saying we can "extract them" is just accepting the fact that its just a way for CCP to squeeze more money out of ppl by giving them a reason to buy extractors just to get use out of the SP that they already spent monthly fee's on in order to train. It's like selling someone a car then telling them gas isn't gonna be sold for that car anymore and it can only be driven on specific roads unless they buy a new special upgrade. It's essentially bait and switch.


    well A is blatant bullshit, anyone who has the skills can fly the ships and provide the boosts which guess what is exactly the same as it was before, and B is your opinion combined with a terrible analogy. Please explain why I or anyone else should find either of those things in the slightest bit convincing.

    And Hamasaki perhaps you should wait for the actual details to come out, like perhaps in a dev blog they've already said will be coming well before the release of these changes, before you fly off the handle and start making a fool of yourself with wild claims.

  • Taking the fight to CODE in EVE Gameplay Center

    Dracvlad wrote:
    Darek Castigatus wrote:
    Dracvlad wrote:
    Darek Castigatus wrote:
    Why would we want to fight CODE, their antics and the utter uselessness of the people trying to fight them are hilarious.

    Its almost as amusing as the people who think I'm a CODE supporter just because I think most antigankers are complete idiots, or the guys who think that because I said 'hey I saw some of your POCOs died, come and use ours instead' and warned we would defend them if people tried to kill them that I'm somehow demanding people come and fight us.

    Do as you wish, we'll carry on giving zero fucks about your opinions just like always.


    I just think you are a useless troll, on one hand you talk about CODE not affecting you, which is evident you are in lowsec, the next thing you decide that AG should man up and blap your POCO's in lowsec. You are obviously butthurt over something, but I can't quite work out why you would think AG would 'man up' and have interest in your POCO's, it just seems utterly inane to me and I have you marked as a shrill for CODE.

    I certainly give zero fecks about you and your opinions, yet another loud mouth HTFU poster shrilling for CODE. Roll


    You call me a troll and yet you're the one putting words in my mouth and trying to criticise me for something I didn't actually say, the irony is strong with this one.

    I'll spell this out since you seem to be having trouble understanding, announcing we will defend ourselves if our stuff is attacked is not the same thing as demanding people come and fight us and thinking one side of a conflict is a bunch of useless, disorganised, overly paranoid fools does not mean I automatically support the other side.


    You suggested that AG develop some balls and come to lowsec to blap your POCO's it was one of the biggest loads of shite I had seen on the forums and your point was hot air thrown in the direction of AG players because you are some leet lowsec noboddy shrilling for CODE. That is the conclusion I drew from it. You have no idea about operating in hisec and it shows.


    Then your conclusion is as idiotic as you are, but I'm really not surprised by that now.

  • Taking the fight to CODE in EVE Gameplay Center

    Dracvlad wrote:
    Darek Castigatus wrote:
    Why would we want to fight CODE, their antics and the utter uselessness of the people trying to fight them are hilarious.

    Its almost as amusing as the people who think I'm a CODE supporter just because I think most antigankers are complete idiots, or the guys who think that because I said 'hey I saw some of your POCOs died, come and use ours instead' and warned we would defend them if people tried to kill them that I'm somehow demanding people come and fight us.

    Do as you wish, we'll carry on giving zero fucks about your opinions just like always.


    I just think you are a useless troll, on one hand you talk about CODE not affecting you, which is evident you are in lowsec, the next thing you decide that AG should man up and blap your POCO's in lowsec. You are obviously butthurt over something, but I can't quite work out why you would think AG would 'man up' and have interest in your POCO's, it just seems utterly inane to me and I have you marked as a shrill for CODE.

    I certainly give zero fecks about you and your opinions, yet another loud mouth HTFU poster shrilling for CODE. Roll


    You call me a troll and yet you're the one putting words in my mouth and trying to criticise me for something I didn't actually say, the irony is strong with this one.

    I'll spell this out since you seem to be having trouble understanding, announcing we will defend ourselves if our stuff is attacked is not the same thing as demanding people come and fight us and thinking one side of a conflict is a bunch of useless, disorganised, overly paranoid fools does not mean I automatically support the other side.

  • Taking the fight to CODE in EVE Gameplay Center

    Dracvlad wrote:
    Darek Castigatus wrote:
    Dracvlad wrote:
    Darek Castigatus wrote:
    Bullshit.

    You can fight back you just cant or wont use the methods required to do it. Youve always had them available to you but you're such a bunch of paranoid disorganised idiots that you constantly fail and never seem to realise why.

    And since you trumpeted that POCO kill so much I have a counter proposal.

    Hey CODE guys if you want to make some catalyst money somewhere I guarantee those people will never try to stop you why not look up our extensive lowsec POCO network, we just added 50 more offices to the 1000+ we already own so theres bound to be one near you somewhere. Ask in Shadow Cartels public channel for contact details.

    And believe me AGs, you are welcome to try and take them from us.


    Why don't you go and shoot CODE seeing as you are so professional?


    Because I dont give a **** about them, they have zero effect on my game or my ability to play. I'm merely making a suggestion that would bring us some extra business and maybe some pew if a miracle happened and the AGs actually got organised and ventured out of highsec.


    I am a bit amused to see a low sec pirate group suggesting that a hisec militia group that fights ganking in hisec should go and blap the pox ridden POCO's of Shadow Cartel in low sec. That does not make any sense whatsoever.

    Also in terms of your previous post it was hot air, you lot have no way of fighting CODE, you would be damn useless at it.


    Why would we want to fight CODE, their antics and the utter uselessness of the people trying to fight them are hilarious.

    Its almost as amusing as the people who think I'm a CODE supporter just because I think most antigankers are complete idiots, or the guys who think that because I said 'hey I saw some of your POCOs died, come and use ours instead' and warned we would defend them if people tried to kill them that I'm somehow demanding people come and fight us.

    Do as you wish, we'll carry on giving zero fucks about your opinions just like always.

  • Taking the fight to CODE in EVE Gameplay Center

    Dracvlad wrote:
    Darek Castigatus wrote:
    Cockchaos wrote:
    Jacques d'Orleans wrote:
    Nitshe Razvedka wrote:
    I agree, nothing like codie salt. Smile


    The thread is named "Taking the fight to CODE.", so when exactly are you taking said fight to CODE, because shooting POCO's isn't fighting. A fight it is when your oponent actually can fight back. Even the voices in your head should know that, you pompous wazzock.



    CODE is the our opponent and at the moment we cant fight back, we can just disrupt.


    Bullshit.

    You can fight back you just cant or wont use the methods required to do it. Youve always had them available to you but you're such a bunch of paranoid disorganised idiots that you constantly fail and never seem to realise why.

    And since you trumpeted that POCO kill so much I have a counter proposal.

    Hey CODE guys if you want to make some catalyst money somewhere I guarantee those people will never try to stop you why not look up our extensive lowsec POCO network, we just added 50 more offices to the 1000+ we already own so theres bound to be one near you somewhere. Ask in Shadow Cartels public channel for contact details.

    And believe me AGs, you are welcome to try and take them from us.


    Why don't you go and shoot CODE seeing as you are so professional?


    Because I dont give a **** about them, they have zero effect on my game or my ability to play. I'm merely making a suggestion that would bring us some extra business and maybe some pew if a miracle happened and the AGs actually got organised and ventured out of highsec.

Forum Signature

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome