101

(162 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Just as long as we agree that is know now and is on the long long list of things to do.

In the interim, PVE is my new occupation.


DEV Zoom wrote:

Again: I didn't say this is fine as it is, but you're not helping.

102

(641 replies, posted in Testing server)

I know.  I can dream though.

103

(25 replies, posted in General discussion)

this is my favorite thread

PLUS 1

104

(641 replies, posted in Testing server)

Could it be possible to look again, the possibility of not deleting items from bases that are under siege.

I know this is a touchy subject because HUN deleted three years of gear, but still it is a motivator to attack vs. not attack.

At this point, the only reason to attack is META as in i want to kill Jitas base to make him a sad panda.

know what I am saying?

105

(641 replies, posted in Testing server)

DEV Zoom wrote:
Ville wrote:

I'm not following zoom.  How do we as players attack something with more range than us (even ewar with Nexus)?  And we can't hide.

1. Numbers, turret numbers will be limited now. 10 turrets can't track 40 people at once.
2. However well we can improve the turret AI, it will still be just an AI. Wait who is attacked, apply remote support, march on with the rest.

You're thinking of sieges like some tiptoeing ninja operation, but that shouldn't be the case.


Perhaps have the Turret AI not agro support bots or haulers?  see what I did there

106

(25 replies, posted in General discussion)

circumventing forums mechanics

ChernoChiel wrote:
Rex Amelius wrote:

The + and - posts serve a fair purpose. By default they are meaningful in that they either agree or disagree with another post that expresses an opinion.

This forum is in desperate need of more moderation. But this change looks more like devs being too lazy to approach moderation in a meaningful way.

If it's not an administrator joke it's a real joke.

+ 1

107

(21 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Working as intended, nothing to see here.

108

(21 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Working as intended, nothing to see here.

109

(25 replies, posted in General discussion)

Add reputation system for the ultimate +- circle jerk

110

(162 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Working as intended, nothing to see here.

111

(162 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Working as intended, nothing to see here.

112

(162 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Working as intended, nothing to see here.

113

(21 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Working as intended, nothing to see here.

114

(21 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Free moneh bioteches!


+1

115

(162 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Working as intended, nothing to see here.

116

(35 replies, posted in Balancing)

Minus One

117

(9 replies, posted in Balancing)

Plus One !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I would love to make Torsoes and Legs and ***

maybe a arm would be in the loot container

118

(15 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

do you want it to mine it for you as well

maybe haul it too

MINUS ONE

Landmark beta!!!!!!!

got the invite yesterday

Thats the point of three characters, diversity.



Jita wrote:

I use my alts a lot really. I have 9 accounts, 27 characters total and use all of them. That's basically a corp unto itself and you can see how some new people might find that hard to compete with. As people reach two million plus ep its basically enough to have three decent characters on one account.

Work as a team.

The End.









Jita wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:
Jita wrote:

what I would suggest is that rather than take up development time creating imperfect fixes the devs just declare them as exploits with people doing it actionable under the EULA.

How much development time do you think would it take to actually enforce this idea? Detecting it, proving it, handling the reports, handling the aftermath of a punishment, etc.

I'll tell you: a lot more.

What if I told you that using current mechanics and tactics that some deem to be 'economic warfare' its perfectly possible to strip an islands NPC spawns so that nothing spawns on the island.

You would do this by using something with an ewar mod to drag a single mob from a spawn and then killing the remainder. All you then need is something with a lot of head slots to take over once they are dragged there and hold that single mob in position. This would mean that a single one of all the spawns would remain in the same place and nowhere else on the island would have NPC's.

Now are you going to do the same thing you did with beacons getting took over and say 'move somewhere else' with that tactic?

What you dont seem to get and over and over keeps getting demonstrated is that people in this game will do whatever they can outside of the mechanics to gain advantage, to annoy other users, to grief people or just to have some lols at the games expense. For every fix we see another hole is found. We have seen this with:

Police towers

Scout arkhe's

Alt accounts

Insurance fraud

Beacon pits

Missions

Plasma bombs

The list could go on.

What needs resolving is the spirit of people's interactions with the game and each other. For that you need something within the EULA that recognises deliberate breaking of the game with bugs or mechanics that are not intended or gameplay that could be considered griefing is actionable and considered an exploit. Not reporting it would be actionable too.

You just cant keep up with the playerbase in a sandbox, they will always find a way.

learn to use AHK better

lol


THIS GUY IS SO MAD


if you didnt live in Alpha, you wouldnt be permascouted

-1

use points over and over again as needed


penalty shmenalty

I cant wait for Gamma artifacting!

dont like the level 1s grinding either