Forgot your password?

typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Can someone who plays explain some things (Score 3, Informative) 101

by Wog (#32479866) Attached to: <em>EVE Online</em> PVP Tournament Streamed Live

When you die, you lose your ship right? What on earth would compel a team to enter a tournament unless they were sure they were in range of the top 4 spots?

Ships are not irreplaceable. If you play Eve, you WILL lose ships.

How isolated are these tournaments? Can random people just fly in and start messing stuff up? Can you run away if you're about to be killed?

The GMs move the teams to a specially isolated system where there is no way in and no way out. If you leave a certain radius from the center of the arena you are automatically destroyed. You can't return to the field after fleeing, so there's never anything to gain from running before doing as much damage as you can.

What are the limitations of the team? What's to stop a really rich team from having a better loadout? Or a really big team? Can you have a large team of cheap ships?

Different ships are assigned a point value, with a hard point limit imposed on each team. You can have a few expensive ships, quite a few cheaper ships, or some mix. It should be noted that both in terms of tournament points as well as in-game cost, the ability of a ship does not scale linearly with price. A ship that is 50% as expensive as another will probably be more than 50% as effective.

How many human players are involved in a battle.

Not sure what the hard limit on participants is, but I imagine that usually the limit is ship value as stated earlier.

Don't you think for streaming purposes they should remove the red/blue overlay which makes a cool space battle look like just a bunch of squares standing around if you don't know the game?

Doing so would ruin the value of the video broadcast for those who DO know what's going on. It would be reduced to a seemingly random video of shooting and explosions.

Hope I've helped.

Comment: Re:first post? (Score 1) 902

by Wog (#31612562) Attached to: Will Your Answers To the Census Stay Private?

He signed a credit card reform bill that had a guns in parks provision pasted into it. He didn't want to veto the entire bill on the basis of one sneaky addition, so he passed it. He's hardly a friend of the gun-owner. In his campaign, he promised to renew the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 that expired in 2004. He hasn't said a word about guns since the election.

So which is worse: That he said he would be anti-gun, or that he failed to deliver on his promises once elected?

Comment: Re:A fresh start (Score 4, Insightful) 859

by Wog (#30098462) Attached to: German Killers Sue Wikipedia To Remove Their Names

What about the rights of Walter Sedlmayr, who the duo tortured, mutilated, and killed because he was gay? He apparently doesn't matter anymore, you know, because they murdered him.

Everyone makes mistakes, right? Hogwash.

So these men should have a chance at a normal life again? What about Sedlmayr's normal life?

Comment: Re:Rocket science? (Score 1) 823

by Wog (#26918327) Attached to: Arctic Ice Extent Understated Because of "Sensor Drift"

All these things are good things, but they have a cost. If *you* decide that I need to recycle, so you come and rob me at gunpoint to get the funds for your recycling program, then you go to jail for aggravated robbery. But if you convince your senator to inflict a tax upon me (a tax which, if not paid, will result with men holding guns on my front porch) in order to get your recycling program, then it's called "social change".

This is why environmental socialism is bad. It's not that mass transit, clean energy, conservation, and recycling programs are bad things, but that you are essentially saying that we should pay for the solution you propose, or else be carted off to prison.

This novel is not to be tossed lightly aside, but to be hurled with great force. -- Dorothy Parker

Working...