And CCP disagree with your assessment.
vOv
Screaming at me about it isnt going to help.
But if you feel better now, Im glad I helped.
Ill know better next time not to play a game if I want fun, too.
That’s fine, but you are not CCP, so you repeating that is irrelevant.
Discussing the matter so a better approach to reach their end goal can potentially be found is something the community can do.
When people like you come around essentially telling people “just shut up, Lord CCP has spoken and no further input will be considered”… Yeah, no.
1 Like
Again, I don’t care about what you do or don’t find fun. Your idea of fun has nothing whatsoever to do with this discussion. At all. It never did, it never will.
Correctamundo! Like everything else said on these forums!
This is true.
There’s no one like me, sport.
But hey, Ive listened to you tell me how Im not allowed to object to;
“This affects all drone users!”
Even though I use drones because according to you my playstyle isnt valid. Then listing how it affects everyone in other styles.
Do you think I dont expect CCP to know that?
But why would you care, as my opinion, drone user or not is irrelevent. To you.
But its as relevent as yours to CCP, better or worse. And just because you dont like a change doesnt mean those of us who do are not entitled to say so.
So find a new style, wimp !
The thing is, from my perspective, you simply don’t care about the change - it’s not that there’s something about it you seem to like.
And while I’m here trying to find a more-suitable approach to achieving the same end goal, you’re sitting there basically telling people to shut up.
You don’t humour nor discuss different ways to achieve the same goal. You just tell people “well CCP said it’s going to be like this, so there - if you don’t like it, quit”.
If CCP won’t humour input on the matter then what skin is it off your back if others discuss how it could be done differently? If CCP won’t listen to them, why should people have to continually listen to you telling them CCP won’t?
Why can’t you instead be the one to just sit on the sidelines and let happen what will?
Or are you threatened by the idea that others might feel differently about this matter than you do, somehow?
No, I decided to bottom-line this conversation that was dangerously close to going off topic because I was to be honest tired of you making jibes in an attempt to say “Im smarter than you”, rather than just talk about it in an adult fashion. I dont see anything wrong with that.
The rest of what you are saying is just a repetition of what I just said to you, so we obviously agree on the basis of what we are supposed to be doing here, so do we do that or keep bickering?
I dont mind either way, but for the sake of the thread Id prefer if we do choose to discuss it, we can do so without your “you are a dumb if you cannot agree with me” and my “Well CCP have made up their mind, so its pointless anyway” as both are as useless as each other, are they not?
Then why in the ■■■■ do you keep saying this?
1 Like
You quoted me offering to draw a line under this, and not say that again… to ask me why I said that… in a reply explaining why I said that.
You’re right, you do operate on a mental level I cannot comprehend. Cya!
From the outset on this post I have been trying to discuss how and why a different approach than not having drones be able to automatically agress and transition to new targets is a poor route to take to address what CCP aim to.
You are the one who with me particucally started, right here, with the childish nonsense; in the form of attempting to discredit the notion that others’ concerns about the route to the end goal is valid:
It was your second reply to me. Long before I began getting even snarky with you.
You were also the first one to make assumptions about my person in:
Simply because I happened to primarily be talking about ‘working at close range’.
My first jab at you was in this:
As it stands, going over our discourse highlights that I really should have just found something else to occupy myself with between rounds of COD:MW…
I’ve said what I needed to, illustrated it in as simplified a manner as I’ve the current patience/energy to, and you’ve made evident it’s not of concern nor relevance to you - who are (presumably) not even involved in the decision-making for EVE anyway.
So for real, continuing this with you would be an immense waste of my time. I could at least be browsing porn or something…
Ah ok, so it was all basically over your opinion of a tone you perceived which you took as hostile even though it wasnt intended to be
Ok, I apologise that I came across as hostile, and for any offence it may have caused.
the boring is unvalid, if poeple want more active, they simply change weapon type and find the pve they enjoy the most. Its clearly to add to scarcity for poeple to use real money to sub.
This might be another black out unsub type of move, be carefull CCP.
1 Like
This is fine. Locking and shooting is part of the fun for me. Being engaged.
When in December will this happen?
1 Like
Actually it’s an ideal approach for CCPs aim here. Because it is literally the problem CCP are aiming at. This change is not some Jesus feature, it’s a narrow band change aimed at one specific thing.
And to date in this thread, every other proposal has impacted active drone players far more than this change does.
1 Like
this is 100% what will happen
1 Like
oh god no, i think i speak for every real player here when i say we don’t want something like that here, idk about you but i hate doing that thing… and having to do that each new target god forbid.
2 Likes
They do not care about AFK play, if they did, auto-targeting missiles and project discovery abuse would be getting nerfed as well.
These changes are 100% about making entitled veteran players feel smug. “hurr durr poor n00bs I never use drones anyway”.
2 Likes
Please explain how you can do this while afk…
So…basically, you’re just removing the aggressive setting altogether? If the setting will remain, what will be the difference between passive and aggressive?
Also, this is F*cking stupid. GFY.
2 Likes
Bots.