Hyperstrike
-
Posts
8829 -
Joined
-
Just to throw salt on the wounds, here's a screenie from last year.
(Click to get full-sized)
-
Quote:Why waste the time and money with water? Are you overclocking?Originally Posted by corridor
Though given that I have 2 dogs and one cat i might consider swapping to liquid cooled at some later point. Help keep the dust and hair issues at a minimum. But for now, I'm good with the stock cooler on the GPU
If not, using fan filters is a FAR more economical means of keeping the inside of your case clean. -
Quote:WRONG! If you're in the zone, you're:Originally Posted by Smurch
If you don't want PVP and are unwilling to participate in it, you have no business being in the zone in the first place.
- PVP
- Shivan Strike
- Badging
Only one of the three REQUIRE that you actually engage in PVP. The other two merely have the additional threat value of other players added to the endeavor.
And, yet again, someone trying to tell other people what, where and how to play.
Hint: You do not dictate how other people utilize the game. Please commit this to memory.
No. You're consenting to the POSSIBILITY of PVP encounters. You're not required to engage in them if you don't desire to.Quote:You're consenting to PVP by entering the zone, explicitly and implicitly
Oh please. Just shut up now. Seriously.Quote:and then if you change your mind you're essentially going back on that agreement.
Even if, in some bizarro universe, you were somehow right, the agreement is NOT with you or any of the other players in the zone. It's with an immobile, noncombatant NPC.
Again, since when has running in PVP NOT been a valid tactic?Quote:You're tipping over the chessboard rather than lose your queen. It's poor sportsmanship to agree to play a game and abide by the rules of the zone then refuse to play the game when it doesn't go your way.
And I'm sorry, you wouldn't recognize sportsmanship if you stepped in it.
This isn't fiteklub. -
Two to go here as well.
-
Quote:Do you want the HONEST answer? Or are you just looking for a nice palatable one?Originally Posted by Prof_Backfire
Post Deleted by Moderator_08
Warning!: Most people are looking for the latter, while a giant percentage of the minority saying they want the former are still looking for the latter. -
Quote:supergiantlol!!!Originally Posted by thirty_seven
i'm sorry, but out of a possible score of 20 pts. Per post, your op got an f.
perhaps if you were to do some corrections on your original work, you may not have to retake posting 101. -
Quote:If you're not ready for opposition to your opinions, you probably shouldn't be posting.Originally Posted by MLEdelen
Leblanc, It's the idiots out there that try to flame a post which makes posting opinions on the boards a bad idea.
If you can't defend your position with more than "someone told me this once..I think", you probably shouldn't be posting.
And that's EXACTLY what you got. Others let you know what they thought. All you did was troll them because they didn't yes-man you. Was it fun?Quote:This is a forum, a place to voice your opinions and find out what others think about the topic.
But only if they don't disagree with you, right?Quote:That is what the boards are for, information and conversation.
Disagreeing with you, even snarkily, isn't a flame. Grow some thicker skin before posting again please.Quote:But if someone has an opinion that is different than others, or a question that is unknown to the original poster but someone thinks it's so easy....thats when the flame starts instead of people just posting with common sense and civility. -
Quote:Because, of course, nobody plays on any server but Freedom.Originally Posted by MLEdelen
Post Deleted by Moderator_08
No. Sorry, you used it as an absolute. Right there you should have known you were wrong from the get-go.Quote:Post Deleted by Moderator_08
Disagreeing with you and questioning your statements is not "bashing you".Quote:Post Deleted by Moderator_08
Good advice. Please follow it yourself.Quote:Post Deleted by Moderator_08 -
Quote:Originally Posted by MLEdelen
Noone really uses the bases anymore.
No. Sorry, but bases are still very VERY useful.Quote:Aww it's good and fun to see if you can make the best and most clever base you can....but ultimatly it's useless.
Ah, an LOLPVPer.Quote:You can't do base raids
Okay, take a level 1 character and get them to Peregrine Island, or Eden faster than a base teleporter.Quote:the TP's in the base is rather outdated since you can get everyone with ourobus, wentworth tp, mission tp, and trains.
Try getting someone to Faultline faster than the base teleporter. Even if you havethe Pocket D VIP pass, it's still faster with a base.
Sorry, but you're incorrect.
Because not everyone is playing a toon above level 25.Quote:Really, why have tp'er in a base when everyone uses Ourobus to TP where they need to go most of the time.
How many is "a lot"? And how do you know the people you talked to weren't idiots?Quote:I've asked alot of people on the freedom server, and they all say there is really no need to have a base.
And did you consult people who weren't PL'ing on one of the most populous servers?
Also! I'm going to assume this was blue-side. Did you ask people red-side?
If it was your opinion, why did you ask other people then bring up their opinions as if to support yours?Quote:That is my opinion
*Suggestions on alterations to make base transits more "valuable". DE-LETED!*
No. Sorry. Don't start farting with travel in the game please. -
Quote:Originally Posted by MrCaptainMan
Maybe the Devs should implement non-PvP versions of all the PvP zones, choosable upon zoning into them. That way, PvEers could get tgeir Shivans without having to PvP, and PvPers can be assured that whoever they meet in a PvP zone is up for a fight. They'd have to either nerf the 'PvE Shivans' or add challenge to getying them to balance out the lesser risk of course, but both sides would benefit, wouln't they?
Eco
If the devs do this, they'd have to significantly cut down the power of the Shivans, or seriously bump the power and frequency of NPC encounters. While I don't personally care for PVP (though I've done a little), I realize that part of the danger during their acquisition is the threat of getting killed by another player. -
Quote:I swear to GOD! I thought my toggles were up!Originally Posted by Godpants
*This may be assuming too much. I've seen some boneheadedly suicidal behavior in PvP zones.
-
Quote:That's great, but it didn't answer my question.Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
One thing you're missing here.
If the person runs, and evinces exactly ZERO desire to PVP, doing everything in their power to get away not not attacking a single time, do you feel you have the inherent right to hound them out of the zone? -
Quote:Try popping out of edit mode, then going back in.Originally Posted by Hercules
Question 1:
I crafted a teleporter and placed 2 beacons nearby and they binded to the teleporter correctly. Then, I deleted both beacons, added 2 new ones, and they refuse to bind to the teleporter.
I re-added the original 2 beacons, they also refuse to bind.
Is this a known bug - if you remove beacons, the teleporter is rendered unusable from that point on? Or is there some trick to get it to reassociate to new beacons?
You should not have to craft a new telepad every time you want to shuffle beacons.
Also, where are you trying to place the beacons? You may be trying to place them in a place where they're intersecting with the telepad bounding box. If you're trying to place them on the wall behind the telepad, this is probably what's happening. You'll need to slide the telepad forward a bit to make room.
Additionally, are these tech or arcane? If tech, you may want to try temporarily floating a cubicle so that it intersects with with front pillars of the telepad and use the cubicle wall to mount the beacons flush to the pillars. Hit up the Base Builder channel and someone can show you how it's done. Or shoot me a PM and I'll give you a quickie tutorial.
You can click on the pic below to see a full-sized image. The link to the whole gallery is at the bottom of the page.
The Accent Lamp will stack on itself and is dead useful for setting items more exactly as stuff floats at multiple points on the lamp. Most of the flat top desks will stack on themselves. Safes also stack. Additionally, if you're looking to do floors, you can use the floor tile to set a nice contiguous level (if they overlap, no biggie, they have no real thickness) to stack desks on.Quote:Question 2:
I've tried to get items to stack like I've seen people mention in some threads, with no luck. Are there only certain item combinations that will stack? Is there a list?
Nope.Quote:Question 3:
Is there some way to get a long hallway from the entrance room to another room that is "centered"? The connector always wants to go either right or left.
Again, no way to do that. Putting it flush will always remove the trim piece. What you can do is get creative about how much trim you get removed. One way for tech teleporters is to scooch them together on their 1x2 upraised pad. Their bounding boxes will actually overlap a bit, but then you get a clear area in the middle and retain the trim on the sides. Again, see the picture above or look at my gallery for more quick looks.Quote:Question 4:
How do you get a ramp to correctly adjoin to a raised portion of the room without losing the "edge". I currently can either leave a small gap to keep the edge or adjoin which leaves a bare section to either side which has a "tech" look. -
Quote:Now the flip side. Do you feel that someone who comes into a consensual PVP zone has the implicit right to be a jerk and dog someone is overtly not fighting back and doing everything they can just to escape?Originally Posted by Smurch
Do you feel that someone who enters a consensual PVP zone has an implicit right to NOT be attacked by the opposing side?
-
Quote:Again, no. It's not.Originally Posted by Smurch
No, that's entirely wrong.
The expectation of a PVP zone is you MAY be attacked. It's not a certainty. And, if you want to AVOID being attacked, you can run.Quote:You're entering a consensual PVP zone.
You give tacit consent to the POSSIBILITY of being attacked.
What you do not OVERTLY consent to is the certainty having to actually engage in PVP combat.
Running is still a valid response.
No, you're warned you MAY be attacked.Quote:You were warned at least three times when you entered that you WILL be attacked by other players
No, consenting to the possibility of being attacked by another player isn't the same as consenting to PVP combat. Sorry, you can twist it and warp the argument however you want and you'll still be wrong.Quote:You therefore CONSENTED TO PVP both implicitly and explicitly.
I'll put this in short, simple words so you can comprehend.Quote:You do not come into a PVP zone, where PVP is enabled, then complain when people engage you in PVP claiming their "forcing their fun" on you.
Screw you. Don't tell me how or where to play a game I pay to play.
Simple enough? I even kept in monosyllabic for you.
No, they didn't.Quote:You CONSENTED to their fun.
Yup. And running is a valid tactic in PVP and PVE. So stop whining about it.Quote:If you enter a PVP zone, you're open game. -
Quote:Wrong. Try again.Originally Posted by Smurch
So, if you're saying that:
PVP is not fun
BUT
Running AWAY from PVP IS Fun.
Correct?
PVP is not fun, so the person is doing their level best simply to avoid an activity that isn't fun. The equation isn't binary. It's not simply one or the other. Stop assuming it is.
Strawman. No. Simply because you can't wrap YOUR brain around it doesn't make it illogical or nonsensical.Quote:Because if you're NOT saying that, then what you said is illogical and nonsensical.
Again, the equation isn't binary.Quote:If the choice is:
Do something Fun
Do something NOT fun
Until you can understand this concept, there's really nothing else to talk about. -
Quote:Good for you.Originally Posted by Smurch
No. There are very, very few foods I dislike the taste of (I'm an epicure) but those that I don't like, I can describe in great detail exactly why I do not like them.
Ah, applying "If this isn't the way I do it it's wrong" yardstick. Good! Good!Quote:I cannot imagine someone saying "I just don't like it but I don't know why".
*FACEPALM*
How about "I don't think it's fun?". It's not up to them to explain their every reason for not wishing to engage in a minor facet of the game.Quote:That smacks to be of them either being dishonest with me or dishonest with themselves. If we dislike something we know why.
Probably. Part of it is also probably dislike of the PVP mechanics and not really caring to learn them. Especially with the reputation of zone PVP'ers being as negative as it is.Quote:Just sometimes, when that something involves other people, it challenges some of our ideas about ourselves, so it's uncomfortable to admit that the reason we don't like it is because of, for example, an irrational fear of losing face, of being rejected, etc.
Not saying that all zone PVP'ers are jerkoffs. However, the jerkoffs have, unfortunately, defined the reputation that seems so firmly entrenched in people's minds.
Also, part of it comes down to OVERT consent. Simply entering the zone is a form of passive consent. But a lot of PVE'ers aren't really looking for PVP.
Yup. Because they look at the Shivan as an objective and the other player isn't a manageable risk.Quote:If someone doesn't like PVP, I am sure they ALSO don't like having to run away, leave the zone, and abandon their progress on their Shivans, but they're really ready to do THAT, aren't they?
I'm sorry. This just is NOT true. Powers function demonstrably differently in PVP.Quote:PVP, in it's current incarnation, isn't all that different from PVE except there is a real person on the other side of that "boss". It's mechanically a little different, sure, but the basic idea is the same: kill them before they kill you. Use your powers.
And trying to simplify it down to "kill them before they kill you" is the worst form of dishonesty.
Save the shards you have collected. And the time you spent (in the player's mind, WASTED, with the fight).Quote:Worst case scenario, you go back to your base WHICH IS WHERE YOU WERE ABOUT TO RUN TO ANYWAYS. So you lose absolutely nothing.
Horseturds. First to last.Quote:The only difference between PVP and PVE that's significant in this instance is purely psychological.
And 375.193 numbers out of 986426134 are pulled from some place dark and fecal-smelling.Quote:The only difference between PVP and PVE is the human factor, and someone who says "I don't like PVP" is ultimately saying "I don't want to compete against other humans" and they certainly do know why they feel that way. There's a psychological reason why they want to avoid that scenario, and 9 times out of 10, it's an irrational fear.
And labeling people who don't wish to PVP as both irrational and fearful.
*Le Sigh*
We don't care about your anecdotal 'evidence'.Quote:My wife was the same way.
You're welcome to think it. Just don't try to enforce your ideals on others who militantly refuse them.Quote:I think most people are the same.
Point completely missed. Utterly. You're not even in the same galactic cluster as the point.Quote:Such extreme avoidance of PVP to the point that you'll spend several minutes fleeing to the place that another player could just send you in seconds isn't because "I don't like PVP", it's because you're afraid of losing, you're afraid of looking bad, you're afraid of losing face, and you're afraid of being ridiculed.
It's not about the speed of getting to the base. It's the desire not to waste time on an activity they have no interest in. And, again, comes back to overt consent.
Thanks for the explanation Dr. Freud. While in some cases you're probably right, don't try to apply it to everyone.Quote:People run in PVP because they are afraid.
This simply shows that your understanding of the psychology of the situation is lacking.Quote:No other explanation makes any sense at all.
Keep thinking that. I'm sure it makes you feel so much more braver and makes you a unique snowflake.Quote:Running is because of fear. Period. -
Quote:Not a problem Bill. I tend to be "in your face" as well. It's just the way I am. So if I'm coming across as offensive, I apologize too.Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
Also - quick note to hyperstrike. I think I've been going from arguing over into "aggressive" with you. It's certainly not my intent to do so, if it has come off like that. And if it has, sorry - think we're just going to have to agree we see this vastly differently and leave it at that.
And I guess agreeing to disagree is going to have to suffice. -
Quote:Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
OK. Let's take this to the ultimate conclusion with just this statement.
No zone in the game is a PVP zone. Why? Because you must interact with the PVE world to get there. (The flyer/chopper or its pilot, or an arena terminal. After all, by your own statement, you have to "interact with an object" - not fight, just interact - thus forcing it to be PVE.)
There, argument solved. There are no longer any PVP zones. It's all PVE with some relaxed rules about player interaction. (And quite honestly, you've just ripped the PVP out of multiple games that most assuredly ARE PVP based with that, as well.)
Sound ridiculous? Yes. But, IMHO, so does that statement as *any* measure of what's PVP or PVE.
Oh - and when is clicking on a glowie counted as "Versus?" The computer doesn't fight back. It doesn't try to prevent me from completing the mission. It doesn't give away my position (though it does keep me in place for several seconds for another player to possibly kill me.)
Edit:
So, let's redesign this to be a purely PVP mission, that cannot be completed without PVP, and has no PVE interaction (no, clicking on an NPC or glowie does not count, there is no "versus" - which implies opposition - involved there.)
What in the mission now is PVE - environment resisting and threatening (versus) you, unavoidable conflict? The turrets. I can get (and typically do) the shards without fighting anything or risking being attacked by the environment. (Jetpack, hover at 65 feet, the shivans often won't even come out. Yes, even at the meteor hidden under the trees.)
So how do we purify this mission to be strictly PVP?
1. It is unavailable if there is nobody from the other side in the game. It requires PVP to finish.
2. The firebases are completely locked down. In order to unlock them, there are no turrets - every opposing player, on defeat, releases a key. Only one is needed to enter a firebase (renamed bunker.) Teleporting is disabled.
3. Keys cannot be kept. They cannot be traded, stored, sold, or acquired in any way other than by defeating another player.
4. Bunkers will only let one player in at a time. The player must have their own key. The bunker relocks immediately after a player enters and finishes.
5. Players with keys must have taken at least X% damage from an opposing player. Confused same-side players do not count. (enter RP reason about "blood is required to activate the key.") This is to prevent someone just standing around to get killed.
Does that sound Fun? Does that sound like anybody whatsoever would bother? Or does it sound like it'd sabotage the zone, reducing population further?
You're still missing the point Bill.
Nobody's saying the mission should be changed. Or that PVP should be deactivated or any of your other hypotheticals.
They're saying that the mission is a PVE mission with some PVP alternatives that still require some amount of PVE.
Nothing more. Nothing less. Trying to expand it into anything more than that is a pointless exercise and a strawman. -
Quote:No more than, say, the Loa Bone, or a Nictus fragment, or a Jump Pack.Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
SO the reward - directly influenced by mechanics and *location* (PVP zone) with associated risk, doesn't matter to you.... mmmkay.
Nice to have, but not necessary.
My argument isn't "they should pull this to a PVE zone". My argument is that, at the lowest levels, it's still PVE content. Even if there are alternatives for acquiring some of the stuff by PVP, someone STILL had to PVE to complete the mission. Both to initially get the fragments, and then to access the console.
You first.Quote:No, and quit being foolish about it.
It still doesn't make the content PVP. Sorry. You're wrong. Get over it.Quote:That's direct reference to how *PVP directly influences the intent and reward of the mission*.
Again, do it without me being in-zone. And access the console. PVE.Quote:Nope. I can take a processed shard away from you. PVP.
And I've never said this. Granted, if I'm in a PVP zone, I whack someone, and they run away, I'm not really going to assume they still want PVP. Nor am I going to chase them.Quote:Actually, it has been in the past (to remove any semblance of anything someone could consider PVE from the PVP zones.) Said in this thread? No, not to my recollection. Often said earlier in response to "I want my badges/shivans/other rewards, I have the right to be left alone" type posts.
Yes. While it draws some people to the zones, it doesn't help retain them in zones.Quote:Is it? -
Quote:Because, for whatever reason, some people do not wish to engage in PVP combat. Ever. It's really and truly that simple.Originally Posted by InfamousBrad
And all that anybody can tell me that they gain when they do this is "I didn't PvP." OK. That's what, not why. Why is that so important?
-
Quote:Nobody said any such thing.Originally Posted by The_Larker
The other side says no it's pve and should be removed.
The missions for the nukes and the Shivans are nice and all. But their original objective (to drive more people into the PVP zones and, hopefully, get them to try PVP) is an abysmal failure of biblical proportions. -
Quote:We're not talking about the reward. We're talking about the mission mechanics themselves.Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
The strength of the reward, per Castle, is directly related to the risk of PVP and it being in a PVP zone.
Get him in here and get him to try and tell me that the mission requires PVP.Quote:Now go tell Castle he's wrong.
What? The name-dropping? Nope!Quote:That not good enough?
Yet PVP is not required to complete the mission.Quote:I can complete part of the requirements for the Shivan mission (and Warburg nukes) without ever entering into PVE combat - by stealing another player's shards or codes. How do I do that? PVP.
Not quite sure why this is such a difficult concept to grasp...
Actually, you still have to interact with the various consoles and, possibly, down one of the bunkers in BB. So yeah, that's still PVE mechanics.Quote:It doesn't require a PVE mechanic at all
So you're incorrect. Sorry. It happens to the best of us. -
Quote:Nobody ever said they were.Originally Posted by Smurch
You know, the badges in PVP zones, and shivans and nukes aren't all necessary things you MUST have to play in PVE. You can play PVE all the way through quite successfully without getting any of those things, ever. They're not a requirement.
No. You're consenting to the possibility of being ganked by another player, nothing more. Nothing is forcing you to PVP. And, if you don't wish to continue, you simply get away from the impediment to your objectives (see: Other Player)Quote:If you enter a PVP zone, you're consenting to PVP.
Not the same thing as being forced to actually fight back.Quote:By being there. You're warned in about 3 different ways that yes, you can be attacked by other players in the zone, and if you don't want to be attacked, please leave the zone.
Who stays and complains? If they do, that's their problem. The OP was whining about someone running away when he tried to engage in a PVP duel.Quote:Yet you stay and complain about PVP when you just want your shivans.
No, it's even easier. If you don't want to be attacked, just get away from your aggressor and try again later.Quote:You get no sympathy. If you go to a PVP zone, you can get attacked. You're consenting to being attacked by being in the zone, but implicitly and explicitly. If you don't want to be attacked DON'T GO INTO THE ZONE. It really is that easy. -
Quote:Some missions? Yeah. The mechanic is still PVE. Player Versus ENVIRONMENT.Originally Posted by Lucky666
So what you can do mission without ever fighting npcs too your arguement fails
NPC's aren't the only thing that qualifies as environment.
*Le Sigh*Quote:Yes impediment you said it yourself that's what missions have stuff that usually gets in your way
Are you reading what I'm typing or reacting to it?
Something you completely missed.Quote:some people are spazzs to whats your point
See what I mean about that argument?Quote:?
Ah, ad hominem instead of a real argument. Good job! You lose!Quote:no not really learn to read and maybe you may learn something
