On 2005-10-08 14:45, Enterprise wrote:

Quote:

Now, while i dont mean to smash or flame or hate on anyones opinion, which is what i saw this slowly turning into. I wanted to take time and acknowledge someone saying that this game is in constant evolution, and we all must adapt. 480 is gone, i'm sorry that the appeal from that version is gone from some of you as well, some of the 'vet's have simply learned to move on from that, others are seemingly so hoplessly caught in the retro of it that they stay unsubbed, sit in the lobby and rant about how much the gameplay sucks now. Thats their choice i suppose, and they can argue all they want that they have an idea that they know whats best for the game, and what worked well. While some of them may have valid arguements on the latter, the fact of the matter is the creator of the game wanted to take it someplace else. Direction? only he knows.

Adapt? Well perhaps, if you can adapt (as we all have) to WHs in SYs in the past few years, try adapting without them. Instead of complaining that it could have adverse effects on new players, perhaps they, too, should adapt to an evolution such as that.

Adapt? Well perhaps, if you can adapt (as we all have) to WHs in SYs in the past few years, try adapting without them. Instead of complaining that it could have adverse effects on new players, perhaps they, too, should adapt to an evolution such as that.

I think you totally missed my point.. Well, nearly the entire latter half of the statements i made were misread, but i can understand that.

As for what i just quoted. You seem to have this notion that that point was a complaint, i'm sorry to say it wasnt. I said that it is not known how the players post 480 would take it. Nowhere did i 'complain' that they wouldn be able to handle it and the sky is falling.

Now, rolling back i do not believe is moving forward, which is where i hope that faustus is taking the game. I had no arguements on your views as to taking the SY or WH's out, so instead of becoming adversarial on that it would be prudent to actually read what i had said.

As for reading and interpretation, 2 seperate things. But the next time you want to come after me about complaining, i suggest you speak to me for clarification on what was said. Misinterpretation leads to wars.

Now, rolling back i do not believe is moving forward, which is where i hope that faustus is taking the game.

On 2005-10-06 19:10, Enterprise wrote:


Will try not to state painfully obvious...will not try to state painfully obvious...

Oh forget it. Look, how long has it been since SYs and WHs were implemented? Thats a good what, 2 years? Yes, two years. Now, the things above listed have been occuring, needless to say, for two years. Now in two years I have already tryed to suggest changes be made, already tryed what your suggesting now.

However, it seems no matter how hard we try someone wants to abuse it. But thats not merely the only reason. Sometimes I feel like people just pick the part of a post they want to flame and ignore the rest of it. I don't generally want to repeat the main idea three billion times before some reads it. As you said, read it then flame.

But of course you hadn't read, as no one is argueing the benefits I listed countless times in my first post - no one is argueing the facts I stated. Instead people just decide that "hey, you didnt think it out so your idea sux haha kkthxbye."

Maybe F might actually read it - everyone else, however, seems to not want to.

Instead of trying to nerf something, why not simply remove it - and return some of the core concepts of the game.




-Ent

then do it 2 more years. because obvilusly, your bitching havent had anything of value yet to get Faustus attention. now u have so lets acually make something good out of it?
no? didnt think so.

On 2005-10-08 22:24, Jar Jar Binks wrote:

then do it 2 more years. because obvilusly, your bitching havent had anything of value yet to get Faustus attention. now u have so lets acually make something good out of it?
no? didnt think so.

On 2005-10-13 09:53, DOM700 [-IMO-] wrote:
Actually having no more shipyards is better for the faction with fewer players, they obviously dont have a chance in a fight faction a vs faction b...(lets say 3 vs 5)
but they still can capture a whole system until the enemies arrive (theoretically).....which is not possible with shipyards in any way

On 2005-10-13 19:38, Fatal Command *CO* wrote:
LMAO......ummmm.ICC is DEFENSIVE faction....which means we have great defense.piss poor offense.BUT ok......we'll trade....we lose shields..you lose flux.....kluth lose cloak....all Factions lose MAIN component of their faction.....then what?SY and Whs have lkilled the MAIN part of what was FUN in this game.SO...lets deal with 1 issue at a time plz....and trust me.....with the current bombing ISSUES......shields dont mean a thing anymore...