open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Against Warp O
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 : last (10)

Author Topic

Thor Xian
Rebirth.
THE GOD SQUAD
Posted - 2006.12.02 07:31:00 - [211]
 

Originally by: Nanobotter Mk2
Sorry but i dislike these holier than thou nonesense reasons.


So do I.

Quote:
Look if you want eve to be about consequences DON't use warp to zero it is THAT SIMPLE.


I can only conclude that you don't understand what I'm saying.

Quote:
To be honest any arguement about risk is total nonesense because there are far more issues in eve that allow people to play and pvp with low to no risk.


O RLY? Let's see...

Quote:
Suicide gankers in empire sit in NPC corps camping gates 100% safe even though everyone knows they are waiting to gank the next phat hauler passing by ZERO RISK,


I'd say suicide is risky. But the tactic is definately a bit silly. Alts are what makes it possible/profitable. I'm against alts too.

Quote:
Sniping pirates in low sec almsot zero risk,


Sniping in general is less risky, close combat takes more balls.

Quote:
hell most any pirate very low risk,


Relatively low risk of running into a competent PvPer, yes. But the risk is there, it's just calculated.

Quote:
people in interceptors yup you goto it almost no risk,


Dunno about that, I kill interceptors far more often than they get away.

Quote:
big alliances in 0.0, got the choke poitns camped and loads of friendly's all around them and empty locals providing them with VERY HIGH INCOME, nil risk carebearland.


I think that is the point of numbers, to lessen the risk to the individual. But I could be wrong (I'm not).

Quote:
So really please save the lecture about WTZ somehow taking the rick out of eve.


It takes a lot of the risk out of Eve, it takes risk from every single one of those you mentioned above and more.

Quote:
How about this you grab a pair get out of that cheap unkillable inty stock up on a ship worth money that is often a sitting duck,


I spend 85% of my time flying my Battleships, I only jump into Frigates when I want to go a significant distance, usually to buy stuff. Which is basically the whole point, though with WTZ I can simply take my BS instead.

Quote:
and run some low sec missions in a BS,


I hate missions, why would I run any?

Quote:
then come back and talk to the rest of us about risk,


I've lived in low sec for most of my Eve life, and I feel safer there than I do in hi sec. I'm comfortable with risk, and I'm well aware that I am the one responsible for any losses I take.

Quote:
frankly anyone who flies inty's needs to stfu about risk because you play eve with almost ZERO risk, the rare time you do die your ship is pocket change to replace.


You are right, my inty rarely dies...but its a Crusader fitted with 4 Nanofibers, an mwd, a cap battery, and 4 ****ty beams (for those rare times I am face to face with an outlaw's pod in hi sec).

Quote:
All I see is people with agenda's posting, and your agenda's are fairly transparent,


I have an agenda, its to stop the proliferation of stupidity in Eve.

Quote:
because we ALL KNOW people serious about eve all had bookmarks for the areas they lived in so cut the crap this is literally about farming new or casual players end of story.


*snip* Please keep this flame free. - Dentai

Quote:
The reality is if you just do not like the ability to warp to zero you're still free to warp to 15 good luck with that because we all know you guys never did that anyways you used BM's.


I have used instas before, but I never got addicted to them...and never made them a daily part of my Eve life, because I consider them an exploit.

I do use WTZ, because it's there and whether I like it or not, its an intended game mechanic.

PS: You still think I'm wanting WTZ killed so I can kill people in pvp easier. Which shows how little you have been paying attention.

Mallikanth
Posted - 2006.12.02 07:44:00 - [212]
 

Well to start I've only read the OP.
And i'm afraid I'm for warp to zero if for only one reason - Less BM's therefore less lag.

Now to clarify - I can honestly say that I've only suffered from lag a few times and nothing that affected me greatly (no fleet battles) but I have read countless posts from people who have. If warp to zero helps the others then so be it.

As for me I've deleted the fifty or so Gate BM's and I feel I've done my tiny bit to help any form of lag (even for my own client loading / session changes).

Sorry but warp to zero is good. People who don't like it (and believe me there are things in Eve I don't like) have to adapt - How many times have we heard that phrase on these forums? Smile

Keep going CCP I, for one, believe we are heading in the right direction. Feedback from the forums is good but don't let the moaners (inc me on occasion) design the game.


AKULA UrQuan
Caldari
Druuge Crimson Corporation
Posted - 2006.12.02 08:10:00 - [213]
 

End result of WTZ? The playing field is now leveled between the "haves" and "have nots" in the area of traveling around eve.


PS: A PnP with under 500 BMs and 5 people on the buddy list is just dead sexy.

Ishquar Teh'Sainte
Euphoria Released
Merciless.
Posted - 2006.12.02 09:28:00 - [214]
 

Edited by: Ishquar Teh''Sainte on 02/12/2006 09:28:38
Originally by: Nanobotter Mk2

Lastly your talking about about somethin compltely different when you say removing all BM's Sure that would help server performance duh, but if you played eve enough you would also see it would spell death of the game, you just cannot manage many situations when towing in from 15km in eve, and once again I will repeat 15km is not some defacto distance the dev;s originally choose, originally you could warp to 3km... so get over it.



do i get this right?

in beta it was "warp to 3km" ... but then the Devs saw - "nah .. that's not good for the game in the way we intended it to be, they are travelling to fast .. New Eden should be perceived as a vast space" ...

so they increased the traveltime with "warp to 15km", and all the years they didn't had problems with it from a gameplay perspective (else they would have decreased the warp to distance)

but then some creative people were using a game mechanic to circumvent this design. after quite some while this creative use of BMs caused severe problems with the server. to fast-fix this problems the Devs had to get rid of BMs. the easiest solution .. WTZ.

and now tell me plz that a change in game-design to fix performance issues of the server doesn't affect the intended game-design.

IF the devs thought WTZ is a good idea in the first place - why did they wait 'til insta-BMs became unbearable for the server??

now show me the flaws in my logic Wink

Miss Overlord
Gallente
Doomheim
Posted - 2006.12.02 09:31:00 - [215]
 

Originally by: Ishquar Teh'Sainte
Edited by: Ishquar Teh''Sainte on 02/12/2006 09:28:38
Originally by: Nanobotter Mk2

Lastly your talking about about somethin compltely different when you say removing all BM's Sure that would help server performance duh, but if you played eve enough you would also see it would spell death of the game, you just cannot manage many situations when towing in from 15km in eve, and once again I will repeat 15km is not some defacto distance the dev;s originally choose, originally you could warp to 3km... so get over it.



do i get this right?

in beta it was "warp to 3km" ... but then the Devs saw - "nah .. that's not good for the game in the way we intended it to be, they are travelling to fast .. New Eden should be perceived as a vast space" ...

so they increased the traveltime with "warp to 15km", and all the years they didn't had problems with it from a gameplay perspective (else they would have decreased the warp to distance)

but then some creative people were using a game mechanic to circumvent this design. after quite some while this creative use of BMs caused severe problems with the server. to fast-fix this problems the Devs had to get rid of BMs. the easiest solution .. WTZ.

and now tell me plz that a change in game-design to fix performance issues of the server doesn't affect the intended game-design.

IF the devs thought WTZ is a good idea in the first place - why did they wait 'til insta-BMs became unbearable for the server??

now show me the flaws in my logic Wink


same reason they gave in on RAM drops only by agents and also um what wsa the other thing.... dunno oh yeah salvaging now requiring 3 mechanic and survey and not 5 survey

Ishquar Teh'Sainte
Euphoria Released
Merciless.
Posted - 2006.12.02 09:52:00 - [216]
 

Edited by: Ishquar Teh''Sainte on 02/12/2006 09:53:29
Originally by: Miss Overlord

same reason they gave in on RAM drops only by agents and also um what wsa the other thing.... dunno oh yeah salvaging now requiring 3 mechanic and survey and not 5 survey


the most important difference between your and my example is ...

t2 production/salvaging are game-mechanics - if they are screwed up they'll change intended balance in the game to the worse.

WTZ/WT15 are the same - they are in-game mechanics - if they are screwed up they'll change the intended balance in the game to the worse.

insta-BMs were a workaround for WT15 by creative players. it caused severe lag due to DB stress. so the Devs had to do something to remove this "threat" to their sevice (the accessibility of the sever) ... they've choosen the easiest solution to implement (especially implementation "into the community") ..
was it the best available solution gameplay wise? i doubt it.

the intention of WTZ is imho not to make this game better balance-wise. the intention is to resolve performance issues with the least resistance by the community.

Nanobotter Mk2
Posted - 2006.12.02 10:23:00 - [217]
 

OKay Ki lets go at it another round Razz

You say warp to zero isnt really optional if you want to be competitive? Hrmm you know what that is exactly the reason why people used bookmarks, they werent really optional for those who wanted to be competitive... you essentially just supported my position lmao, and you disagreed. I said people serious about eve used bookmarks anyways you said I was wrong, but here we are with you stating people need to use WTZ to be competitive /boggle, so ya you using BM's or not didnt make squat difference because msot everyone else serious about eve did use them.

Yes you can conclude I went after noobs, but We went after anything in low sec ( minus other priates ), because you know who is in low sec? People unprepared are in low sec, either mission running or mining HELLO! WTF you think pirates go after? You think they are camping BOB's POS? Which again is my point ( wow note the consistency ) pirate get to play pirate with little to no risk because they are able to prey on the weak, and there is no real reason for people to try to hunt pirates, and if you do good luck catching them because they are set up for pvp and running, UNLIKE someone running missions or mining... get it? Please refer to the MANY posts made by people who express their frustration of trying to hunt pirates.

Inty is not that skill intensive. My point is that there needs to be some balance in the risk factor and alot of the people who see no reason for BM or WTZ are people who live in inty's which is arguably the safest chicken**** cheap boat in the game to fly, so ya they have no problem removing those things, have those same guys try running around for a night in a BS and see how they feel about slow boating in from 15km everywhere...Anyrate my point was you should need to match relative ISK to destroy a ship. I mean are you suggesting an inty should be able to kill a titan? I am suggesting that if you fly an inty that costs 10 mill and you are gonna try to kill a Bs worth 100 mill, then you should need atleast 6 or more inty's to have a chance, and the BS pilot should have a farking chance to kill off a few intys maybe... right now 1 inty can tackle hold and work over a Bs indefenitely because they BS will simply miss nearly every single time.... The Bs has no chance to get away but if the inty suddenly decides things might go bad he can be assured to get away from the BS.... Something needs to change people are catching on and eve pvp is turning into fleets of small cheap ships that can safely and risk free hit and run to incur big losses on others. NO Bs shouldnt be pwn mobiles, but we need a middle ground, and right small cheap ships are too effective in pvp.


I am not so much defending WTZ as saying it really isnt horrible for eve and probably is benificial right now, I am saying deal with it they made the change give it a run before you go whining the end of the world is here, sorry that isnt an agenda, trying to make sure my little niche stays untouched.

I am not wrong my assumption is pretty accurate, I know alot of the players who have whined about WTZ with my main I KNOW how they play and what there gig is. I am nto saying every last player who complains about WTZ falls into those catagories but most are, and they are here fabricating stuff to get things back to EZ mode for themselves.


I am right you are wrong if you had much experience in 0.0 you would know I am 100% correct most serious players used instas, most serious trader used insta's most serious mission runners used insta's, most serious miners used them too. even if i showed you statistics you wouldnt be convinced, but simple common sense should tell you that IF CCP stated BM's are a huge problem in eve because of thier volume and never ending growth that should be enough to deduce BM's were used by alot of the playerbase. We can go on but your stubborn, WTZ has been around for days? yet you claim it will ruint he game.whateva

Varis
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2006.12.02 10:48:00 - [218]
 

Edited by: Varis on 02/12/2006 10:57:38
Edited by: Varis on 02/12/2006 10:54:57
Edited by: Varis on 02/12/2006 10:51:52
nanobotter - instabookmarks were bad anyway - precisely because they sped the game up - they changed the value of modules, ships etc because they made certain setups good, and other bad.

It was, practically, an exploit - a game changing non intended feature.

even if it gave no DB problems, they still should have been removed.

I already saw the effects of instas - and it was bad - so how can you expect me to like giving free instas to everyone?

when instas started being used - it gave the person who had them an "unfair" advantage over those who didn't have them, as the people with instas can move more equipment and better equipped ships around faster. If you can move cruisers and battleship and industrials at a speed with instas that takes an interceptor to match without - yes, instas make a BIG difference. and YES you need to use instas to then compete against those who have them.

So yeah, now the game is "on an equal footing", cause now no-one needs to seriously consider logistics.

the game is loosing something that is valued by some people.

How about if you gave every gun 100 damage, and 1 sec rate of fire... and removed all skills that effected damage or rof? it also "levels the playing field" but it would be a bad change...

Arktiger
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2006.12.02 11:14:00 - [219]
 

Edited by: Arktiger on 02/12/2006 11:17:01
I love the new warp to 0 option.

Before this, having to do 52 jumps each way in a cargo podded Badger sucked ass.

Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
Emptiness.
Posted - 2006.12.02 11:30:00 - [220]
 

Originally by: Stitcher
Basically, it boils down to either:

1: people are allowed to warp to 0m

2: people are not allowed to warp to 0m, but lag up the game with BMs and do it anyway.

I'm afraid your opinions are not relevant here, folks.


really no.. there is a 3rd option that i suggested and no one listened.

Make all warps have a 0-15km RANDOM error on a spehere around target.

That would remove instas completely since when you made an insta you would not land on it second time you used it... and would not remove the HUNT FUN....

Ishquar Teh'Sainte
Euphoria Released
Merciless.
Posted - 2006.12.02 12:17:00 - [221]
 

Edited by: Ishquar Teh''Sainte on 02/12/2006 12:27:09

Originally by: Nanobotter Mk2
I am suggesting that if you fly an inty that costs 10 mill and you are gonna try to kill a Bs worth 100 mill, then you should need atleast 6 or more inty's to have a chance, and the BS pilot should have a farking chance to kill off a few intys maybe... right now 1 inty can tackle hold and work over a Bs indefenitely because they BS will simply miss nearly every single time.... The Bs has no chance to get away but if the inty suddenly decides things might go bad he can be assured to get away from the BS.... Something needs to change people are catching on and eve pvp is turning into fleets of small cheap ships that can safely and risk free hit and run to incur big losses on others. NO Bs shouldnt be pwn mobiles, but we need a middle ground, and right small cheap ships are too effective in pvp.



and i always thought heavy NOS and light drones kill tacklers ... let me check ... allmost any BS has a free utility slot and enough drone bay to use 5 light drones.

uh oh ... now only tacklers using faction scramblers are able to hold a BS infinte in place. and guess what an interceptor using a faction scram is coming close to the 100mio isk pricetag.

oh wait .. i'm not a serious EVE player because i hadn't BMs for the south .. cool.

in some ways instas were following the "actions and consequences" philosophy. you wanted to be safe? invest time and ISK ... and deal with the caused lag by them. the only REAL problem with instas was the fact they lagged not only the owner but (around three corners) everyone in the cluster.

btw - more power to kagura Very Happy

Sen Goku
OEDO Express
Posted - 2006.12.02 12:22:00 - [222]
 

I agree with Kagura, it's a good compromise.

James Duar
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2006.12.02 13:09:00 - [223]
 

Originally by: Kagura Nikon
Originally by: Stitcher
Basically, it boils down to either:

1: people are allowed to warp to 0m

2: people are not allowed to warp to 0m, but lag up the game with BMs and do it anyway.

I'm afraid your opinions are not relevant here, folks.


really no.. there is a 3rd option that i suggested and no one listened.

Make all warps have a 0-15km RANDOM error on a spehere around target.

That would remove instas completely since when you made an insta you would not land on it second time you used it... and would not remove the HUNT FUN....

No it isn't, then all I've got to do is make the displacement of that random 15km sphere relatively small. How? I make my insta-BM 100km from the gate, warp to 100 on it. Even if I land 15 km in a random sphere around the BM, I still have an excellent chance of landing within jump range on the gate.

Bodziu
Gallente
GreenSwarm
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2006.12.02 13:28:00 - [224]
 

I think warp to 0 is ok.
i was 1.5 year in 0.0 and have a ton off bms beacause live in 0.0 without them is a death.
How i see that removed bms help a lot. 2 fleets meeting in alliance wars evry fleet meet 200 persons each. How you think how many bms that 400 peoples have in 1 node? I cant even imagine. think about how much cpu ram it take from server. Now I was in 1.0 sec system with 120-200 persons in local and before new expansion come it wasnt playble when peoples reach around 160 in local. Now when most o that persons delete that bms like i made it a much smooth game play. it is bad?
I dont think so. In 0.0 you can buble gate by smal or medium or even large mobile buble or more simple flywith interdictor.
Do you remember too that autopilot still warp to 15km to the gate?
Im for warp to 0 it help a lot with server and not get too much in gameplay.

With regards
Bodziu

babyblue
Posted - 2006.12.02 13:36:00 - [225]
 

Edited by: babyblue on 02/12/2006 13:37:08
Originally by: Ishquar Teh'Sainte


do i get this right?

in beta it was "warp to 3km" ... but then the Devs saw - "nah .. that's not good for the game in the way we intended it to be, they are travelling to fast .. New Eden should be perceived as a vast space" ...

so they increased the traveltime with "warp to 15km", and all the years they didn't had problems with it from a gameplay perspective (else they would have decreased the warp to distance)



No this isn't right. The original distance was increased in order to create greater "zones of interaction". It was recognized that the early game (without bubbles, interdictors, etc.) gave no opportunities for players to fight each other - err, I mean for one player to gank the other [because we all know that if two players want to fight each other, they can regardless of warp distance!]. So it was increased to 15km; giving 15km for one player to "interact" with the other.

The main problem with this was that it resulted in travel times increasing. Not just travelling from one side of the universe to the other, but travelling from here to next-door. Increasing travel times are directly correlated with increasing boredom/frustration (I've spent approximately 1/2 my characters age actually susbscribed because of this), so the player-base invented the "insta". As with all fantastic ideas, the insta quickly spread (Meme theory) resulting in system performance problems.

Now here is an analogy to help: at my University (many years ago), a new building was constructed with a large patch of grass to the side. Rather than cut out and make a path across the grass for people to walk from one building to the other, the University left it to grow. After a year, a path had developed where the grass didn't grow because students/staff had walked from one point to the other on their preferred route. Now the builders came along and filled in this path with concrete. The end result was an optimal preferred path from A to B for the students.

So as with all things involving human activity, it is possible to proscribe the "rules" or let people create them themselves. In the case of WTZ, the players made their own path (with bookmarks) and CCP have simply filled it in with concrete. The result of all of this is a better game.



Varis
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2006.12.02 15:43:00 - [226]
 

hmm..
consider this

what if: when you set an enemy into your buddies, and set their standing to exactly -5.5 - all your shots would automatically do wrecking damage on every hit.

result: everyone would set every person in eve to -5.5 to get full damage. Not to do so would be stupid, because you would be fighting gimped by comparison... the DB would take a bit hit as everyone would have their buddies list getting very very big...

answer? equivalent to wtz - CCP makes it that all shots automatically do wrecking damage - negating everything about tracking.. yes, easier game, everyone on equal standing again.

good idea?

James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2006.12.02 16:39:00 - [227]
 

Originally by: Varis
hmm..
consider this

what if: when you set an enemy into your buddies, and set their standing to exactly -5.5 - all your shots would automatically do wrecking damage on every hit.

result: everyone would set every person in eve to -5.5 to get full damage. Not to do so would be stupid, because you would be fighting gimped by comparison... the DB would take a bit hit as everyone would have their buddies list getting very very big...

answer? equivalent to wtz - CCP makes it that all shots automatically do wrecking damage - negating everything about tracking.. yes, easier game, everyone on equal standing again.

good idea?


I like that analogy. I might have to steal it :)

James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2006.12.02 16:40:00 - [228]
 

Originally by: Sever Aldaria
Originally by: James Lyrus
Funnily enough, I have a corp filled with people I know IRL. We live in the same system, and it's actually pretty easy to 'interact'.


I assume its those same people you pvp against then since you don't leave? Laughing jk. Most corps aren't comprised of people that all know each other IRL though, nor that all only play in one system. My story wasn't focusing on people being in different systems as much as the time for 15km gate travels to every gate and leading to problems with it's unnecessary time wastage. Either way, they still roam systems for pvp (more so in 0.0 than low sec anyway).



Or fly a fast ship, rather than a slow one. Cruisers with MWDs move pretty quick without instas...

000Hunter000
Gallente
Missiles 'R' Us
Posted - 2006.12.02 17:34:00 - [229]
 

man what a fuss!

Warping AWAY from a gate was always the more tricky part as then u could be intercepted, warping to a gate was usually bookmarked anyways.

Now stabs are nerfed (god knows why cuz them filling up low slots was a nerf enough allready) and several other improvements have been introduced and people are still complaining.

Well i like it and not specifically cuz it makes flying through low sec safer but because it shortens travels to unbookmarked places.

Loftur sterki
MASS
Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service
Posted - 2006.12.02 20:23:00 - [230]
 

This is nothing to argue about....
Those of you who miss 15k jumps adjust he default warp to 15km.....
Those of you living from killin plp without instas.. get a decent job....

If its so anoying play WOW...

Have a nice day

Varis
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2006.12.02 20:33:00 - [231]
 

Originally by: 000Hunter000
7
Well i like it and not specifically cuz it makes flying through low sec safer but because it shortens travels to unbookmarked places.


umm, thats sorta why we're complaining. - mainly that it shortens travel time to everyone - not just those who fit for it.

Wibiq
Cloak and Daggers
Posted - 2006.12.02 21:02:00 - [232]
 

The point that I see everyone ignoring is an out of game issue. Instas were an exploit that were never intended to function as they so very efficiently did. Yes, most players used them to at least some extent. BUT, the real issue isn't fixing/nerfing the game balance. IT WAS REMAINING IN BUSINESS. CCP had a choice: accept a commonly used exploit as a fact of life and change the mechanics of the game to compensate for it, OR buy tons of new hardware and PASS THE COST ON TO THE CONSUMER. WTZ wasn't a game balance fix, it was a financial necessity. CCP could either give a nod to the playstyles of the majority of their customers, or price themselves out of the business. Not much of a choice.

Ishquar Teh'Sainte
Euphoria Released
Merciless.
Posted - 2006.12.02 21:06:00 - [233]
 

Edited by: Ishquar Teh''Sainte on 02/12/2006 21:08:19
Originally by: Wibiq
CCP had a choice: accept a commonly used exploit as a fact of life and change the mechanics of the game to compensate for it, OR buy tons of new hardware and PASS THE COST ON TO THE CONSUMER.


or they could have fixed the exploit instead of institutionalizing(sp?) it Wink

Allen Deckard
Gallente
Roadking Hawg's
Posted - 2006.12.02 21:12:00 - [234]
 

heck lets just get rid of warping all together.

Just think how big eve would feel then. I'd be great.Rolling Eyes

Anghi
Posted - 2006.12.02 21:12:00 - [235]
 

i love wt0...every day a bit more ughVery Happy

Krravinn
Posted - 2006.12.02 21:14:00 - [236]
 

One thing in years of gaming that I have noticed: every exploit fix invariably generates a work-around from clever players. I don't personally think that WTZ was inherently a good idea as such, but it did fix the underlying problem by removing an exploit. Making a exploit legal IS removing the exploit. Maybe it could have been done in several different ways. Maybe not. I have seen some really interesting proposals for the alternate fixes. BUT, I applaud CCP for fixing the DB issues, and not spending too much time on a solution that would have been eventually defeated. The player base required it. Prohibition being repealed did the same thing. People were gonna find a way to get drunk one way or the other, so the US government bowed to necessity and made it legal again, thereby freeing up law enforcement resources to combat "real" crime. Instas were a fact of life, love em or hate em. WTZ fixes the problem with the DB. Let CCP now work on "real" problems. The player base made WTZ inevitable.

Varis
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2006.12.02 21:28:00 - [237]
 

well, that the only thing going for it in my eyes - that there will be no longer anything to "work around" as it'll be impossible to move any faster.......

The BMs are still in game at the moment - although that'll be gone next tuesday (hopefully)


darklegionca
Caldari
Dark Deliverance Holdings
Posted - 2006.12.02 21:45:00 - [238]
 

i make it faster to where i need to go with warp to 0 if you want to be lazy and use the autopilot then go afk then do that but warp to 0 should stay

Ruciza
Minmatar
The Feminists
Posted - 2006.12.02 22:08:00 - [239]
 

Edited by: Ruciza on 02/12/2006 22:13:16
The argument "if you don't want to wait that use an interceptor" must be a joke. Dude...what are haulers and freigthters good for then?

Essentially, nothing much happened but the introduction a time saver for everybody. E-v-e-r-y-b-o-d-y. You have it, your competition has it. Nobody has any special advantage.

Slow boating is not acceptable for real people with real lives who play a game for fun. And this is the argument that beats all meta-level game considerations. End of story. Real life wins. You lose.

My fun multiplied manifold with my new global insta set. Good decision.

ToxicFire
Phoenix Knights
Posted - 2006.12.02 22:12:00 - [240]
 

One of the issues that hasn't really been considered yet is the fact that now with revelations there will be a lot of autopilot macro's running trade routes and courier missions. People will go yarrrrrrr but you could do that before with insta's anyway. Yes you probably could but the way people and places worked with insta's made it infinitely more complex. Now it would be frankly very simple to macro a warp to zero autopilot. It would also be far harder to detect.


Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 : last (10)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only