51 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(19 replies, posted in Recruitment forum)

Ville wrote:

Zortarg.  Please read.

Actually it's zoom who should be reading it.

Go to forum: Recruitment forum

52 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(115 replies, posted in Balancing)

I swear to the gods... reading this thread is like playing chess versus a child who can't see past one movement.

Go to forum: Balancing

53 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(7 replies, posted in Balancing)

MoBIoS wrote:

I say we need to nerf Perpetuum.
I urgently need a patch which will change this came to a turn based game in table top manner.
When ever we want to deploy ewar, we will need to use a 2 D6 to roll out chances of success.
The same principle will be used on all offensive and defensive actions.
Each square can only be used by a single Mech, to minimize the chance of blobbing.

Please nerf nauw!

Instate count to twenty paces and shoot gameplay. Ewar consists in seconds sneezing to distract opponent.

It would also work for people insistent in defending their online e-honor.

Go to forum: Balancing

54 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(18 replies, posted in Balancing)

BadAss wrote:

Far weapons mounted on the robot only arms, head and feet are free, kind of charges - the chemical.
Attack distance of 350 meters, the robots are just for pure test. It turns out: mesmer vs Gropho - mesmer win. mesmer vs Set - set win. Gropho vs Set - synchronous Kill. it is unfair, you need to add% damage for gropho.

p.s. all skill 10

Are you sure you are not in STC? Because you sound like you are in STC.

Go to forum: Balancing

55 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(115 replies, posted in Balancing)

ITT: STC demanding corps to tell them how to play, or nerf the game. I guess you gotta do something while you "outlast".

Go to forum: Balancing

56 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(19 replies, posted in Recruitment forum)

Join PHM and discover you too can win without ticket spamming.

Go to forum: Recruitment forum

57 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(115 replies, posted in Balancing)

- Nerf EWAR!
- But dude *hush hush hush hush*
- Oh... oh... ok then Nerf CIR!
- One ticket at a time, one ticket at a time.

Go to forum: Balancing

58 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(27 replies, posted in General discussion)

Trial queue. If server has more than N players, trial servers cannot connect and have to sit on their own queue. There, I fixed you server capacity issue. That is if that was the reason why you didn't want trials for the time being.

Go to forum: General discussion

59 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(37 replies, posted in Balancing)

Norrdec wrote:

Syndic just mentioned that you don't fit well, which is on topic, you decided to have politics in it smile
The current ECCM stats make my high ep toon work like a 40k ep newbie. Sooo why do you want to nerf it again?

Because they can. Just like they got special treatment while other people's _reported_ possible eula violations get actively brushed aside.

Go to forum: Balancing

60 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(37 replies, posted in Balancing)

Mark Zima wrote:

You started with incorrect statement and continued well into the nonsense territory...

My informants tell me otherwise. What? Don't the rest of your guys know already? Man it must suck to keep dying like pigs and still be kept in the dark about what should concern them... I hope I didn't spoil anything.

Mark Zima wrote:

Also, this is not corp dialogues forum.

Then why are you trying to defend your corps interests with these threads?

Go to forum: Balancing

61 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(37 replies, posted in Balancing)

Mark Zima wrote:

If you really want to pvp with a head full of tunings, you'll need external RSA and EW protection, it's neither simple nor overpowered.

But Kaldenines, from your same corp, is stating that EW benefits the blob and needs a nerf so how do I reconcile these two conflicting statements from the same corp?

I don't know. It's like getting banned for reporting people for not complying for the EULA, and the violators getting ignored. Perhaps it because I'm of the wrong color.

Go to forum: Balancing

62 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(102 replies, posted in Recruitment forum)

Ville wrote:

A bit heavy handed lolz.

Apparently stealing peoples belongings is only a "bit heavy handed" for STC , yes. Different standards and all that. Like other game stuff.

Go to forum: Recruitment forum

63 Topic by BandwagonX9000

(2 replies, posted in Bugs)

Hello I wish to report a bug in the ticket system. It appears I can no longer use it. I feel this must be the cause of some bug because I have been dutifully reporting instances of clear EULA violations and of course I am sure this EULA is not applied selectively depending on who is creating the tickets.

If this would be the case, as unbelievable as it could be, I would like to be informed which tickets of cases of EULA violation I can report, and from whom to make sure I don't bother the developers too much with violations they do not want to know of.

I currently see one instance of a player that should be reported according to said EULA but I cannot report him. Please fix.

Go to forum: Bugs

64 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(96 replies, posted in Balancing)

Ozy wrote:

In general, the move away from follows made ewars stronger, i think, as follows used to mitigate some of these issues. Just out of curiosity, how would you say the general equation changes when we're moving from heavies to either mechs + ewar mechs or mechs + light ewar?

"Damn those followbot nerfs! Why should they actually make playing logi bots actually a worthwhile activity when nobody in my corp wants to do it! Nerf! Power to the ISBoxers!"

Go to forum: Balancing

65 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(115 replies, posted in Balancing)

Here's what would happen: they would hail their forum and ticket spamming as a victory, which would be short lived as they get punched the *** out of Nia anyway.

Disclaimer: After having been notified there is no difference between player and avatar by dev zoom then the logical conclusion is that any threat to a group of avatars (that is, a corporation) can be construed as a threat to a group of players. Therefore I feel it is, in the best interest of the game, to inform readers this is in no shape of form intended to be any kind of real world threat of violence against any player. I hope this keeps those efeelings from getting hurt and tickets from being spammed on the basis of hurt efeelings.

Go to forum: Balancing

66 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(88 replies, posted in Recruitment forum)

Ville wrote:

Friendly bump.

Watch out or Zortag will report you for assault.

Go to forum: Recruitment forum

67 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(115 replies, posted in Balancing)

Ioci wrote:

And your dramatic reply suggests you rely too much on EWar, much like STC relied too much on teleport beacons.

And your reply based on your interpretation of my reply shows what a ridiculous argument this thread is based on, back up to the amateurish "The official: " part in the subject.

Go to forum: Balancing

68 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(115 replies, posted in Balancing)

Ioci wrote:

Mechanics side, the impact E-War has is the weaker side is now unable to inflict enough damage on the more powerful blob that the fight isn't worth their while. Cost of victory over cost of defeat is no longer a consideration for the blob. They can insure minimal loss through spam tactic.

Lets nerf remote repairers then. And cap transfers. And dps numerical superiority. And whatever the other side fields that manages to stay out of range and not get hit. And terrain, can't have one side choosing and controlling terrain. And owning stations. And lets make it so that you can only produce a number of items despite how much you mine or how many producers you have.

And you'll still whine. Because you can't nerf other people's brains.

Go to forum: Balancing

69 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(115 replies, posted in Balancing)

Kaldenines wrote:

While some may argue that this is not really a problem, remember what happened last time all the pvp died off in this game?

Nothing like some good old scaremongering to start the morning.

You know how pvp dies? It does so when a corp with plentiful resources in material, player, EP, and years of perpetuum experience decide they're gonna stay docked and hope CIR gets bored and leaves, because this mystery corp only likes to "pvp" when there's no real competition.

Go to forum: Balancing

70 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(2 replies, posted in General discussion)

BOW CHICKA BOW WOW

Go to forum: General discussion

71 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(28 replies, posted in General discussion)

Zortarg Calltar wrote:

of cource you could not leave your usual propaganda bull*** out of things like this?

Tiiiiiicket timeeeeee!

Go to forum: General discussion

72 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(86 replies, posted in Q & A)

Martha Stuart wrote:

Thank you for proving my point with sexism.  Well done sir, you are a credit to your corp.

What? You are calling being recognized as a woman being sexist? That is offensive.

Go to forum: Q & A

73 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(86 replies, posted in Q & A)

Jita wrote:

This thread came about because insulting someone became a bannable offence. I personaly think that the term 'zortard' is kinda insulting but certainly not actionable where's the whole Spictron, Martha Jewert and Pedophile are probably a bridge too far.

Be careful, someone may report you for implying the Jew part in Jewert is offensive.

Go to forum: Q & A

74 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(86 replies, posted in Q & A)

Cassius wrote:

Ville, the best troll of all is the fact that you started this post.

Reported for being offensive towards other player and calling them names.

Go to forum: Q & A

75 Reply by BandwagonX9000

(46 replies, posted in General discussion)

I agree.

Go to forum: General discussion