Forums » General
Again, Fourm mod, will you please remove messages with "rocket Whores" in it? I realize that the entire of the content of the message is lost, but many people have had perfectly valid arguements removed because they used other such inflamitory responses. It's a price to pay for being petty.
And yes I realize that this message would be removed as well just so long as it remains consistant with previous posts in this thread.
And yes I realize that this message would be removed as well just so long as it remains consistant with previous posts in this thread.
Well, ammo capacity, maybe, but I'd like to see sunflares actually eat up energy, maybe 25 per shot.
Oh and slow the gauss a bit.
I have a solution, please hear me out.
1. It's not that sunflares are too powerful, it's that all the other weapons are too weak, give them a boost.
2. We need some sort of point defense system that you can purchase. It is a small laser that lets you target rockets, ammo on it is 25. You target the rocket and this weapon fires automatically. It has a 60% chance of destroying the rocket. And the explosion of the rocket has a 30% chance of detonating each surronding rocket. This point defense laser should take up 25 energy per shot. Repeating every .5 seconds (only when enemy rockets are near)
1. It's not that sunflares are too powerful, it's that all the other weapons are too weak, give them a boost.
2. We need some sort of point defense system that you can purchase. It is a small laser that lets you target rockets, ammo on it is 25. You target the rocket and this weapon fires automatically. It has a 60% chance of destroying the rocket. And the explosion of the rocket has a 30% chance of detonating each surronding rocket. This point defense laser should take up 25 energy per shot. Repeating every .5 seconds (only when enemy rockets are near)
Against.
I would like to see better countermeasures though. For example, make it possible to choose "forward" or "rear" arc for turreted weapons in station. Running away with an adv. gatling firing and proxies dropping would make any valk think twice.
I would like to see better countermeasures though. For example, make it possible to choose "forward" or "rear" arc for turreted weapons in station. Running away with an adv. gatling firing and proxies dropping would make any valk think twice.
Arolte,
Please calm down. If you have opinions that are different than mine, please offer valid arguments against them. I'd like to hear them. but don't be inflammatory. There's a thread about how to make an argument that offers ways to tone down language so that you do not accidentally hurt your own arguments by sounding aggressive.
My point isn't to "add more weapons just for the sake of killing rocket w****s." My point is that the way to solve a problem is to analyze it, and see what can be done to solve it while *improving* the game. Newer weapons, anti-rocket-gizmos, chaffe/flares,etc. will all introduce new tactics and make the game more fun for most people. Eventually, this leads to a very robust and extremely fun game.
Nerfing weapons (ANY weapon) does the opposite: It solves the problem by removing an element of the game. Eventually, this leads to a very boring game. Think of everyone sitting around in busses just watching each other trade.
"Wake up! REALISTICALLY it's IMPOSSIBLE to do anything about it in a slower accelerating ship."
No need to shout, I can hear you :-)
Actually, it's not just possible, it's easy. If someone runs up behind you, mine them*. All ships can't mine right now, so I've suggested adding small-weapon mines. Also, I think the engines need to be re-balanced a little bit (a very little bit). Again, these are positive suggestions on how to improve the game without removing anything. Removing the flares would just result in shifting the problem down to the next-most-powerful rocket. Removing rockets altogether would just be boring.
Please calm down. If you have opinions that are different than mine, please offer valid arguments against them. I'd like to hear them. but don't be inflammatory. There's a thread about how to make an argument that offers ways to tone down language so that you do not accidentally hurt your own arguments by sounding aggressive.
My point isn't to "add more weapons just for the sake of killing rocket w****s." My point is that the way to solve a problem is to analyze it, and see what can be done to solve it while *improving* the game. Newer weapons, anti-rocket-gizmos, chaffe/flares,etc. will all introduce new tactics and make the game more fun for most people. Eventually, this leads to a very robust and extremely fun game.
Nerfing weapons (ANY weapon) does the opposite: It solves the problem by removing an element of the game. Eventually, this leads to a very boring game. Think of everyone sitting around in busses just watching each other trade.
"Wake up! REALISTICALLY it's IMPOSSIBLE to do anything about it in a slower accelerating ship."
No need to shout, I can hear you :-)
Actually, it's not just possible, it's easy. If someone runs up behind you, mine them*. All ships can't mine right now, so I've suggested adding small-weapon mines. Also, I think the engines need to be re-balanced a little bit (a very little bit). Again, these are positive suggestions on how to improve the game without removing anything. Removing the flares would just result in shifting the problem down to the next-most-powerful rocket. Removing rockets altogether would just be boring.
Nytemare and Watercooled CT: Your concern regarding the term "rocket whores" was addressed way back in this thread (see below). I do think that we should abolish the term and go for something less inflammatory. I won't be going backward to delete all PRIOR messages using the term as they otherwise are sound arguments (and are not directly attacking any specific poster here, which is why some other posts were deleted - please try to understand the distrinction) but I will be removing future posts using the "rocket whore" term. Fair warning.
"Nice post.
I left "rocket whores" in, after a lot of thought, because I was trying to make the point about not attacking the person. The comment, while not to my liking, was not attacking anyone who was posting IMO. Civility is not going to be achieved in an afternoon, but it WILL happen."
"Nice post.
I left "rocket whores" in, after a lot of thought, because I was trying to make the point about not attacking the person. The comment, while not to my liking, was not attacking anyone who was posting IMO. Civility is not going to be achieved in an afternoon, but it WILL happen."
Thanks for the reply Mod.
viva la revolution!
viva la revolution!
Apparently some of you don't play 3D FPS games a lot. The term "whore" is used for a person who is obsessed about a particular weapon and continues to use it repeatedly. The literal "whore" meaning does not fit in the context of my posts (to sell sex to a rocket?), thus it is NOT inflammatory. Quit your whining already. Yeesh!
Second of all, the reason I'M USING ALL CAPS or sounding aggressive is because some of you are not reading my posts entirely. You ask the same questions or say the same things over and over without any thought into it.
Now, to respond to Nyte's misinformed posts once again...
> 1)He's not talking about fantasy politics. He's talking about real life. Thats how
> it works, in case you didn't notice.
You do know it's a game, right? Are you suggesting that the stages of government action be applied to the game along with the development process? Heck, we might as well stage votes from a simulated congress and allow players to vote for representitives! Ohh yaaaay, that would be fun.
> 2)Yeah its impossible, but so is dodging lightning mines outside each station
> exit. Shall we remove them as well? I'd suggest you fly a better ship. A Yugo
> WILL get owned by a Dodge Viper any day of the week. Its a fact you have to
> accept.
So why have the Yugo to begin with? By your reasoning we should only have 3 ships in the game. Why bother with non-special ships? Nice.
> 3)You seem to have reversed your argument. Are you asking for stronger
> everything else instead of weaker sunflares? I'm intrigued.
Where was this posted? I'm a little confused here. It doesn't matter how you look at it. Some people can say energy weapons are weak. While other people can say rockets are too strong. It's no different than saying the glass if half empty or the glass is half full. You're making an argument outta nothing. Give it a rest.
> 4) For the record, I suck with flares. I can't use 'em for squat. Geminis are my
> only projectile friends. From what I can tell a lot of people are the same way. I
> also can't say I've encountered may rocket rammers before. Sure, they're
> around, but how is that any more common or problematic than station mining/
> nuking, vets ganging up on weaker innocents, n00b hunting, or abusing veteran
> reputations to falsely declare people rammers, pirates, n00b hunters, griefers,
> etc?
These are all bad things, true. Nobody wants to single out rocket ramming, FYI. A lot of things need to be fixed in terms of gameplay. One thing I ask for you to do, however, is to LOOK AT THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD. It's the topic of discussion and it is to remain that way unless you want the Forum Moderator to have a deleting spree. If you have further concerns, feel free to make your own threads. Sunflares is the topic of discussion. Stick with it.
Second of all, the reason I'M USING ALL CAPS or sounding aggressive is because some of you are not reading my posts entirely. You ask the same questions or say the same things over and over without any thought into it.
Now, to respond to Nyte's misinformed posts once again...
> 1)He's not talking about fantasy politics. He's talking about real life. Thats how
> it works, in case you didn't notice.
You do know it's a game, right? Are you suggesting that the stages of government action be applied to the game along with the development process? Heck, we might as well stage votes from a simulated congress and allow players to vote for representitives! Ohh yaaaay, that would be fun.
> 2)Yeah its impossible, but so is dodging lightning mines outside each station
> exit. Shall we remove them as well? I'd suggest you fly a better ship. A Yugo
> WILL get owned by a Dodge Viper any day of the week. Its a fact you have to
> accept.
So why have the Yugo to begin with? By your reasoning we should only have 3 ships in the game. Why bother with non-special ships? Nice.
> 3)You seem to have reversed your argument. Are you asking for stronger
> everything else instead of weaker sunflares? I'm intrigued.
Where was this posted? I'm a little confused here. It doesn't matter how you look at it. Some people can say energy weapons are weak. While other people can say rockets are too strong. It's no different than saying the glass if half empty or the glass is half full. You're making an argument outta nothing. Give it a rest.
> 4) For the record, I suck with flares. I can't use 'em for squat. Geminis are my
> only projectile friends. From what I can tell a lot of people are the same way. I
> also can't say I've encountered may rocket rammers before. Sure, they're
> around, but how is that any more common or problematic than station mining/
> nuking, vets ganging up on weaker innocents, n00b hunting, or abusing veteran
> reputations to falsely declare people rammers, pirates, n00b hunters, griefers,
> etc?
These are all bad things, true. Nobody wants to single out rocket ramming, FYI. A lot of things need to be fixed in terms of gameplay. One thing I ask for you to do, however, is to LOOK AT THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD. It's the topic of discussion and it is to remain that way unless you want the Forum Moderator to have a deleting spree. If you have further concerns, feel free to make your own threads. Sunflares is the topic of discussion. Stick with it.
I only have one problem with the above comment:
>> 2)Yeah its impossible, but so is dodging lightning mines >>outside each station
>> exit. Shall we remove them as well? I'd suggest you fly a >>better ship. A Yugo
>> WILL get owned by a Dodge Viper any day of the week. Its a >>fact you have to
>> accept.
>So why have the Yugo to begin with? By your reasoning we should >only have 3 ships in the game. Why bother with non-special >ships? Nice.
Each ship has it's own pluses and minuses.
If you are in a medium agility ship with a medium engine, and someone is in a HIGH agility ship and Fast engine, then assuming all other things being equal, they should beat you regardless of the weapon they use. They are faster and more agile, their use of Sunflares simply gives the same result faster.
I hate to admit it but if you willingly choose a lower agile ship and put on a slower engine, you should expect to be killed.
But you get bonuses, normally you can carry more cargo and/or get more weapons.
The reason this was non-issue before is because if you wanted to trade (or fight normally) you took the heavy/fast combo and maintined a speed near 200 indefinately.
now that people are using all sorts of different engine batt combos, you must accept that some are better than others.
>> 2)Yeah its impossible, but so is dodging lightning mines >>outside each station
>> exit. Shall we remove them as well? I'd suggest you fly a >>better ship. A Yugo
>> WILL get owned by a Dodge Viper any day of the week. Its a >>fact you have to
>> accept.
>So why have the Yugo to begin with? By your reasoning we should >only have 3 ships in the game. Why bother with non-special >ships? Nice.
Each ship has it's own pluses and minuses.
If you are in a medium agility ship with a medium engine, and someone is in a HIGH agility ship and Fast engine, then assuming all other things being equal, they should beat you regardless of the weapon they use. They are faster and more agile, their use of Sunflares simply gives the same result faster.
I hate to admit it but if you willingly choose a lower agile ship and put on a slower engine, you should expect to be killed.
But you get bonuses, normally you can carry more cargo and/or get more weapons.
The reason this was non-issue before is because if you wanted to trade (or fight normally) you took the heavy/fast combo and maintined a speed near 200 indefinately.
now that people are using all sorts of different engine batt combos, you must accept that some are better than others.
This is not a flame Arolte, I'm seriously trying to point out to you why some people are offended by your posts. Please take this as criticism and not as an attack. While this is a little bit off topic, I think it is important because the debate about sunflares is getting lost with all this fighting. And it is an important topic.
To keep the topic alive, btw, I do make a point about sunflares; it's at the end, I promise :-)
1. "Thus it is NOT inflammatory. Quit your whining already" ironically, telling people that they are whining is inflammatory. Also, pointing out that people are inflammatory is inflammatory... I apologize for that, I really am just trying to help here.
2. While the use of the word w**** may be in a different context, it is still a bad word that will offend some people. I am glad the mod is going to cut it from future posts. (For the record, the one context you speak of is derived directly from the other; one who is so desperate for something that they would sell themselves for it.)
3. The use of all-caps: I realize that you are using caps for emphasis, but it can often be read as shouting and will change the tone of your post; that is, people will think you are being aggressive even if you aren't. Especially combined with bad language (see #2) and insults (see #1). So if you want to use all-cpas, read your posts carefully before submitting them to make sure they still read OK.
4. "Now, to respond to Nyte's misinformed posts once again..." ..you are singling out a single person and putting him down at the same time. This will undoubtedly cause Nyte to feel angry, and will prompt him to reply, potentially degrading this thread into even more of a flame-war. (it may have already happened, I've been writing this post for a while). Again, I realize that I'm being kind of hypocritical here; I am singling you out. However, I really am trying help....
Seriously, this is not an attack. Arolte, I feel you often have valid points to make and often have creative ideas about Vendetta. But I have to force myself to read your posts objectively sometimes because they come across with a bad attitude. You know, [name withheld] used to bug me too because he always came off as high-handed and condescending, but I learned to appreciate his insight over time. In fact, now I sometimes scan threads for his posts because they are usually very good and well-thought. I'm sure that I myself come across as an irksome prat. Looking back at my own posts, I can see how they could have been taken as attacks on you (although they weren't meant that way). We can all get more done, and we can take a very important first step in improving the game community, by first taming our own behavior in these forums.
OK -- now that you're all done reading my own version of "War and Peace", here's what I have to say about sunflares!
The main problem that people seem to have with sunflares seems to focus around the fact that you can make instant-kill configurations (3 or 4 in a group), and that you can't outrun them. This results in instant death while you are benevolently trying to flee. I voted against the sunflare ban because I feel that removing the weapon is curing the symptom and not the illness. Once the sunflares are gone, people will find some other way to kill fleeing ships. And some people (not me, btw) actually like to kill fleeing ships. So I say, keep the sunflares; yes, the game still needs some balancing... but please balance it ***with*** the sunflares.
To keep the topic alive, btw, I do make a point about sunflares; it's at the end, I promise :-)
1. "Thus it is NOT inflammatory. Quit your whining already" ironically, telling people that they are whining is inflammatory. Also, pointing out that people are inflammatory is inflammatory... I apologize for that, I really am just trying to help here.
2. While the use of the word w**** may be in a different context, it is still a bad word that will offend some people. I am glad the mod is going to cut it from future posts. (For the record, the one context you speak of is derived directly from the other; one who is so desperate for something that they would sell themselves for it.)
3. The use of all-caps: I realize that you are using caps for emphasis, but it can often be read as shouting and will change the tone of your post; that is, people will think you are being aggressive even if you aren't. Especially combined with bad language (see #2) and insults (see #1). So if you want to use all-cpas, read your posts carefully before submitting them to make sure they still read OK.
4. "Now, to respond to Nyte's misinformed posts once again..." ..you are singling out a single person and putting him down at the same time. This will undoubtedly cause Nyte to feel angry, and will prompt him to reply, potentially degrading this thread into even more of a flame-war. (it may have already happened, I've been writing this post for a while). Again, I realize that I'm being kind of hypocritical here; I am singling you out. However, I really am trying help....
Seriously, this is not an attack. Arolte, I feel you often have valid points to make and often have creative ideas about Vendetta. But I have to force myself to read your posts objectively sometimes because they come across with a bad attitude. You know, [name withheld] used to bug me too because he always came off as high-handed and condescending, but I learned to appreciate his insight over time. In fact, now I sometimes scan threads for his posts because they are usually very good and well-thought. I'm sure that I myself come across as an irksome prat. Looking back at my own posts, I can see how they could have been taken as attacks on you (although they weren't meant that way). We can all get more done, and we can take a very important first step in improving the game community, by first taming our own behavior in these forums.
OK -- now that you're all done reading my own version of "War and Peace", here's what I have to say about sunflares!
The main problem that people seem to have with sunflares seems to focus around the fact that you can make instant-kill configurations (3 or 4 in a group), and that you can't outrun them. This results in instant death while you are benevolently trying to flee. I voted against the sunflare ban because I feel that removing the weapon is curing the symptom and not the illness. Once the sunflares are gone, people will find some other way to kill fleeing ships. And some people (not me, btw) actually like to kill fleeing ships. So I say, keep the sunflares; yes, the game still needs some balancing... but please balance it ***with*** the sunflares.
One can only be pushed so much before they begin to push back. Slappy, scroll back up and tell me who posted in an inflammatory manner first. That's right, Nytemayre did. In fact, it came to the point where the moderator had to delete his first post. Point is, if you treat me with disrespect you can expect to be treated like s**t. It's as simple as that. Common sense can go a long way.
I'm done with this thread. I have better things to do than argue back and forth with [name withheld]. [name withheld] had a bad idea to start, and was complaining about a problem that he/she/it/they is part of.
Oh, and I'll gladly admit that I "started" this (as far as this thread goes). However, [name withheld], you're the one who rocket rams me while trading, fires geminis at my busses and proclaims me to be all sorts of evil in-game. I'd say that you're the one who is disrespectful to *me*.
Mods: please do not delete this!
Oh, and I'll gladly admit that I "started" this (as far as this thread goes). However, [name withheld], you're the one who rocket rams me while trading, fires geminis at my busses and proclaims me to be all sorts of evil in-game. I'd say that you're the one who is disrespectful to *me*.
Mods: please do not delete this!
Okay, this thread is LOCKED.
It's locked largely because the topic itself is exhausted for the moment.
A few notes:
-Go back and read the very first post. THATS a good post, well thought-out, not inflammatory, reasonably succint and to the point.
-Now continue to read. Notice anything in the second post? How about the third? Continue to observe the evolution. Nevermind blaming each other, what could YOU have done better? Did you further the discussion, or were you caught up in the emotion?
-This was certainly an unruly thread, but I think the problem did get discussed in between the flames, and the did appear to a learning process about posting opposing arguments in an intelligent manner. I don't intend to be this active in the individual threads, but we have to work on this stuff folks.
It's locked largely because the topic itself is exhausted for the moment.
A few notes:
-Go back and read the very first post. THATS a good post, well thought-out, not inflammatory, reasonably succint and to the point.
-Now continue to read. Notice anything in the second post? How about the third? Continue to observe the evolution. Nevermind blaming each other, what could YOU have done better? Did you further the discussion, or were you caught up in the emotion?
-This was certainly an unruly thread, but I think the problem did get discussed in between the flames, and the did appear to a learning process about posting opposing arguments in an intelligent manner. I don't intend to be this active in the individual threads, but we have to work on this stuff folks.