Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 .. 343 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ashtaroth Drakin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 03:58:17 -
[4471] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Ashtaroth Drakin wrote:Jerghul wrote: Ashtaroth We have sort of run with Fozie thinking cloaked ships are ok for the last number of pages. Afk cloaky campers were never really the problem anyway. The issue rests with the psychological impact they cause.
How do they perform this psychological impact? Why are players affected by it? Why is it so effective? The term I have been using is implicit threat. Lots of things cause it in game. Hotdropping supers are an implicit threat. Wh-style local is an implicit threat. To name two other examples. The last one I hope short-circuited the line your query was leading up to. The interesting thing about no local is why the implicit threat equivalent of afk cloaky camping on speed does not break wh space. I am currently exploring what I call mechanisms specific to wormhole space that lower implicit threat of both afk cloaky camping and no local to comfortable levels. Right now I am looking at strong, omni rats as a compensating mechanism.
implicit threat: I had to look that word up, and I feel that it being used in such a way that it makes it seem more then what it really is. Implied threat is also a good word. How about Absolute threat. These things all mean the same thing, however I don't feel that they apply to cloaking vessels. A thesauri does not help arguments. Information however does, Through my own research. I have discovered that this "issue" Has existed at the very least back to year 2010, that is almost going on six years now that this "issue" has been brought up, of the few ones I've looked at from back then, the information seems to not have changed much.
The line of this information is simple CCP has far more numbers and stats to look at then you or me, however I personally can't seem to find anyplace where CCP has clearly shown their own statistics on the matter, this results in a void of information when attempting to argue for, or against an idea to change cloaking, this results in most information numbers, stats and so forth thrown out there tend to be inconclusive, or simple put. Made up. you also find for every thread/site/topic that was brought up, there is roughly an equal number of supports as there were opposer.
As for making up jargon. Please do not do this, as a computer technician who is doing their best to attempt to get into the game producing field. I find such attempts to be... How should I put it? Annoying? Aggravating?
Next on my subject. You seem to have this fascination with redirecting subjects when it does not favor your argument. While I'm not here to argue, I am going to point out flaws in your reasoning. How would rats have any reasonable effect on a cloaked player, let alone a AFK cloaked player?
Don't answer that question, because the answer would be none. Just like players, Rats can not target, or in anyway interact with a cloaked player as long as that cloaked player is in no way decloaked, and thus target-able.
Then lets bring up another thing. almost 90% of the mechanics found in wormholes is also found in known space, the extreme exception of this, is one, wormholes tend to have these fancy effects, however the effects are not known to actively decloak, or provide cloaking any bonuses. The second thing that are not found in wormholes that is found in known space, is Local.
As for omni-rats. Omni-rats are also found in known space as well. Incursions are where you will find them, and I'm sure you will find plenty of cloakers looking for a juicy killmail in certain incursion sites. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
1284
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 06:29:54 -
[4472] - Quote
Mag's wrote:We've said for years one of the ways to mitigate risk with AFKers, is to refit your ship. It's not rocket science.
^
Jesus, throw a higgs anchor on a mining barge and you can make it go so slowly that a rorqual boosted miner could mine aligned for well over half an hour without having range issues. Something lands on grid, you click warp.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Ashtaroth Drakin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 07:51:24 -
[4473] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Mag's wrote:We've said for years one of the ways to mitigate risk with AFKers, is to refit your ship. It's not rocket science.
^ Jesus, throw a higgs anchor on a mining barge and you can make it go so slowly that a rorqual boosted miner could mine aligned for well over half an hour without having range issues. Something lands on grid, you click warp. Quote:Then lets bring up another thing. almost 90% of the mechanics found in wormholes is also found in known space, the extreme exception of this, is one, wormholes tend to have these fancy effects, however the effects are not known to actively decloak, or provide cloaking any bonuses. The second thing that are not found in wormholes that is found in known space, is Local. Save your breath. Like any good Dunning-Kruger posterchild, Jerghul is quite certain that, despite his complete lack of experience, he is a subject matter expert when it comes to wormholes and, in his expert opinion, a ratting fleet fit to accommodate a WH effect must surely be at a massive advantage over their would-be raiders. Nevermind that not every WH system even has an effect, or that really only two of those effects are likely to have any real fitting consequence, or that any ragerolling fleet is operating from home and can probably reship for pulsar/wolf rayet with little more than a right click -> board ship.
This is a great opportunity to bring up how I, that right, How I, me the person, think both sides are wrong. Simple put, from my perspective both sides are looking at the wrong angle of things. Why are both sides so perfectly balanced in in the last 5+ years. Little to nothing has changed?
Let me answer that for you. Information is the key why it never changes. Of all the things that happen and is still happening in eve online to this day, How information is process, how it obtained, and how it transmitted.
There is no way to break into other channels without making alts and earning their trust so you can spy. There no way to disrupt the flow of information without blowing your cover as a spy and thus removed as an element. And there is no way to provide truly false information to different channels in Eve online. Eve online has one perfect, infallible, unbreaking power in the game that everyone potentially has at their finger tips. The ability to create secure(Password protect) channels that can't be broken into by an outside force. Ontop of that, provides a near instant transmission of information to everyone in the channel.
Now if only there was a way to tie channels to player own structures. The ability that if broken into those structures, you could perform a number of... Things to those communication arrays.... and the further away you are from those information structures, the longer it takes for you to receive or give information.
If only. |
Wander Prian
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
96
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 08:58:48 -
[4474] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Wander If you want to run with the special mindset argument, then think of it terms of lower implicit threat being conductive to creating a desirable mindset.
In the rat case we are looking at; it should be obvious that it is easier to have a "damn the torpedoes" mindset if your ship is more or less pvp fit anyway (or does your mindset not vary depending on the ship you are flying and the way the ship is fitted?).
What is stopping you from omni-tanking your ship right now?
|
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 09:42:21 -
[4475] - Quote
Wander The same thing that would stop you from omni tanking in wormhole space if rats there did specific damage types.
Asharoth My position is more that if you have compensating mechanisms, then the price of information provided by local does not matter.
Surrender Did you have any feedback that might suggest that changing null sec rats would not change null sec ratting fittings?
Teckos So nothing more then on the ratting point I presented?
=========
If we are about done with the ratting point, then I suggest we move on to point 2/8.
"2. Closing gates Collapsing wormhole strategy lesson: Allow gates to be closed and opened using entosis links. A visual prompt on opposite side of gate to indicate if gate is currently being entosised (open or shut)
Simulates intentional wormhole collapses used to control access into a wh-system."
I trust it is rather self-explanatory that closing gates reduces implicit risk.
" We have been doing a lot of challenging old assumptions of late, and often with delightful results. Just because something is doesn't mean it should be..."
-Team Game Of Drones (Dec 2015)
|
Morrigan LeSante
Senex Legio The OSS
822
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 10:06:15 -
[4476] - Quote
That's a stonewall troll right there. Closing gates....lol
What an absolute nonsense. A child of 5 could see why. |
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 10:36:09 -
[4477] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote: That's a stonewall troll right there. Closing gates....lol
What an absolute nonsense. A child of 5 could see why.
You see why closing gates in nullsec (mirroring the ability to collapse wormholes in wh space) decreases implicit threat I trust. Which was the only question at hand.
" We have been doing a lot of challenging old assumptions of late, and often with delightful results. Just because something is doesn't mean it should be..."
-Team Game Of Drones (Dec 2015)
|
Wander Prian
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
97
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 10:54:44 -
[4478] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Wander The same thing that would stop you from omni tanking in wormhole space if rats there did specific damage types.
So basically what you are trying to not tell is that you could already omni-tank the ratters, but won't because isk/hohour.
It's starting to look like the reason AFK-cloAFK-cloakers are an issue is because of entitlement and greed |
Mag's
the united
20828
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 11:02:39 -
[4479] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Mags Then you see how the wormhole type rats reduce implicit threat. Its not exactly rocket science as you said :-) No. Plus it bears no relevance, to someone who is AFKing. When talking about rocket science, it's a good idea not to mix it up with magic.
You can attempt as many mental gymnastics as you like, you are still wrong. As can be seen by your avoidance of posts, facts and the editing out of text to suit your point.
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
Mag's
the united
20828
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 11:04:31 -
[4480] - Quote
Wander Prian wrote:Jerghul wrote:Wander The same thing that would stop you from omni tanking in wormhole space if rats there did specific damage types.
So basically what you are trying to not tell is that you could already omni-tank the ratters, but won't because isk/hohour. It's starting to look like the reason AFK-cloAFK-cloakers are an issue is because of entitlement and greed That's why he suggested changing all rats to omni. It means they can keep their Isk p/h level high.
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
|
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 11:09:43 -
[4481] - Quote
Wander Prian wrote:Jerghul wrote:Wander The same thing that would stop you from omni tanking in wormhole space if rats there did specific damage types.
So basically what you are trying to not tell is that you could already omni-tank the ratters, but won't because isk/hohour. It's starting to look like the reason AFK-cloAFK-cloakers are an issue is because of entitlement and greed
Or it could be because EvE is generally about optimizing whatever you are doing. There is a reason people in engineering are shall we say a bit over-represented in Eve. The game appeals to our oh so slightly autistic inner engineer.
From your post perspective we could say that perhaps wormholes need a pass to rebalance net isk/hr rates.
We would not want it be said that wormhole mechanics should remain static because of some feeling of entitlement and greed after all, would we?
" We have been doing a lot of challenging old assumptions of late, and often with delightful results. Just because something is doesn't mean it should be..."
-Team Game Of Drones (Dec 2015)
|
Wander Prian
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
101
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 11:58:36 -
[4482] - Quote
The only consensus we've reached is that your ideas are bad for multitude of reasons, which you choose to ignore.
It doesn't matter what kind of a change you make, the only thing that would satisfy the people who have an issue with a neutral in local sitting cloaked somewhere, is a magic wand that would make the rattimg risk free surrounded by Intel-channels and the early warning system that is local |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
15464
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 12:03:32 -
[4483] - Quote
Wander Prian wrote:Jerghul wrote:Wander The same thing that would stop you from omni tanking in wormhole space if rats there did specific damage types.
So basically what you are trying to not tell is that you could already omni-tank the ratters, but won't because isk/hohour. It's starting to look like the reason AFK-cloAFK-cloakers are an issue is because of entitlement and greed
Starting? That's been the reason for years and years.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 12:31:36 -
[4484] - Quote
Wander Prian wrote:The only consensus we've reached is that your ideas are bad for multitude of reasons, which you choose to ignore.
It doesn't matter what kind of a change you make, the only thing that would satisfy the people who have an issue with a neutral in local sitting cloaked somewhere, is a magic wand that would make the rattimg risk free surrounded by Intel-channels and the early warning system that is local
Geeze, Get a real life McJob for 500 mill/isk hr equivalent (or whatever) after you plexed it into Eve if you want to maximize your isk/hr.
People like to optimize in Eve is all. And like to feel there is optimizing balance.
We seem to have reached a consensus that wh space omni rat types reduce implicit risk.
I have seen no feedback that suggest disagreement on that point that has not been discussed sufficiently.
" We have been doing a lot of challenging old assumptions of late, and often with delightful results. Just because something is doesn't mean it should be..."
-Team Game Of Drones (Dec 2015)
|
Wander Prian
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
101
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 12:43:33 -
[4485] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Wander Prian wrote:The only consensus we've reached is that your ideas are bad for multitude of reasons, which you choose to ignore.
It doesn't matter what kind of a change you make, the only thing that would satisfy the people who have an issue with a neutral in local sitting cloaked somewhere, is a magic wand that would make the rattimg risk free surrounded by Intel-channels and the early warning system that is local Geeze, Get a real life McJob for 500 mill/isk hr equivalent (or whatever) after you plexed it into Eve if you want to maximize your isk/hr. People like to optimize in Eve is all. And like to feel there is optimizing balance. We seem to have reached a consensus that wh space omni rat types reduce implicit risk. I have seen no feedback that suggest disagreement on that point that has not been discussed sufficiently.
Bumping the difficulty would result in a bump of value, which would result in an increase of risk, since you'd have to put more isk on the line to kill the rats, which would mean you wouldn't undock with a neutral in local since "he might have a cyno"
Net result of the change= more isk flowing into the game and the same amount of whining about AFK-cloakers.
GJ fixing the issue! |
Mag's
the united
20831
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 13:00:14 -
[4486] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Mags Still not about me and any ulterior motive you might think I have. I am looking at mechanisms in wormhole space that reduce implicit risk in 0-sec if mirrored there.
We seem to have a consensus that omni rats as described would indeed reduce implicit risk in 0-sec. It's about that fact you are ignoring posts and are unwilling to face arguments that show you are incorrect.
What you are doing is a lot of mental gymnastics, in an attempt to fudge the issue. Your stance regarding implicit risks and omni rats is irrelevant. They do not and haven't ever stopped pilots AFKing.
We also do not have a consensus, but then facts seem to be an issue with you.
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 13:11:39 -
[4487] - Quote
Wander Ratters tend to optimize their fittings to kill rats and clear sites as fast as possible. Which means the ships are already as powerful versus specific rats types and as expensive as the ratter can afford to lose. Harder rats simply reduces the numbers killed per hour. Omni type damage and ewar capable rats would also not entail more expensive ships.
However, it is likely that cooperative ratting would become more common.
The only specific thing achieved is reducing the amount of yolo opportunistic predation. Which does reduce the things ratters need to worry about (or reduces implicit risk). Successful ratter killing would require a greater degree of pre-meditation, coordination, and planning.
Mags We still seem to have consensus that wh style rats reduce implicit threat. Feel free to make your argument if you feel that is not the case.
" We have been doing a lot of challenging old assumptions of late, and often with delightful results. Just because something is doesn't mean it should be..."
-Team Game Of Drones (Dec 2015)
|
Wander Prian
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
102
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 13:17:47 -
[4488] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Wander Ratters tend to optimize their fittings to kill rats and clear sites as fast as possible. Which means the ships are already as powerful versus specific rats types and as expensive as the ratter can afford to lose. Harder rats simply reduces the numbers killed per hour. Omni type damage and ewar capable rats would also not entail more expensive ships.
However, it is likely that cooperative ratting would become more common.
The only specific thing achieved is reducing the amount of yolo opportunistic predation. Which does reduce the things ratters need to worry about (or reduces implicit risk). Successful ratter killing would require a greater degree of pre-meditation, coordination, and planning.
Mags We still seem to have consensus that wh style rats reduce implicit threat. Feel free to make your argument if you feel that is not the case.
When the isk/hour drops because of more difficult rats, most will just justo to the next best isk/hour and that won't be ratting in groups. They will see that they can do the same isk with less risk in highsec, so null will get more quiet and there will be less targets. And if you think that won't happen, you are a fool |
Mag's
the united
20831
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 13:21:44 -
[4489] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Mags We still seem to have consensus that wh style rats reduce implicit threat. Feel free to make your argument if you feel that is not the case. No we don't and I have already made my argument, you ignored it.
I very rarely say this, but at this point I'm starting to think you're just trolling. No one can be so ignorant and blatantly dishonest.
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 13:40:06 -
[4490] - Quote
Wander Prian wrote:Jerghul wrote:Wander Ratters tend to optimize their fittings to kill rats and clear sites as fast as possible. Which means the ships are already as powerful versus specific rats types and as expensive as the ratter can afford to lose. Harder rats simply reduces the numbers killed per hour. Omni type damage and ewar capable rats would also not entail more expensive ships.
However, it is likely that cooperative ratting would become more common.
The only specific thing achieved is reducing the amount of yolo opportunistic predation. Which does reduce the things ratters need to worry about (or reduces implicit risk). Successful ratter killing would require a greater degree of pre-meditation, coordination, and planning.
Mags We still seem to have consensus that wh style rats reduce implicit threat. Feel free to make your argument if you feel that is not the case. Wander When the isk/hour drops because of more difficult rats, most will just justo to the next best isk/hour and that won't be ratting in groups. They will see that they can do the same isk with less risk in highsec, so null will get more quiet and there will be less targets. And if you think that won't happen, you are a fool
Which still leaves us with reduced implicit threat, even if we were to assume that isk/hr does fall with wh style rats. Which seems an odd assumption:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=410322
Mags Ok. Feel free to disagree for reasons of your own. It is noted.
" We have been doing a lot of challenging old assumptions of late, and often with delightful results. Just because something is doesn't mean it should be..."
-Team Game Of Drones (Dec 2015)
|
|
Wander Prian
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
102
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 13:43:23 -
[4491] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Wander Prian wrote:Jerghul wrote:Wander Ratters tend to optimize their fittings to kill rats and clear sites as fast as possible. Which means the ships are already as powerful versus specific rats types and as expensive as the ratter can afford to lose. Harder rats simply reduces the numbers killed per hour. Omni type damage and ewar capable rats would also not entail more expensive ships.
However, it is likely that cooperative ratting would become more common.
The only specific thing achieved is reducing the amount of yolo opportunistic predation. Which does reduce the things ratters need to worry about (or reduces implicit risk). Successful ratter killing would require a greater degree of pre-meditation, coordination, and planning.
Mags We still seem to have consensus that wh style rats reduce implicit threat. Feel free to make your argument if you feel that is not the case. Wander When the isk/hour drops because of more difficult rats, most will just justo to the next best isk/hour and that won't be ratting in groups. They will see that they can do the same isk with less risk in highsec, so null will get more quiet and there will be less targets. And if you think that won't happen, you are a fool Which still leaves us with reduced implicit threat, even if we were to assume that isk/hr does fall with wh style rats. Which seems an odd assumption: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=410322 Mags Ok. Feel free to disagree for reasons of your own. It is noted.
So your idea of "fixing" AFK-cloaking is to drive people back to highsec to do their PVE?
|
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 13:52:25 -
[4492] - Quote
Wander I think you are wrong in concluding isk/hr decreases with wh style rats (see link I provided). But we can note that down as something to avoid (isk/hour can be tweaked easily by manipulating drop rates or bounty levels for example).
" We have been doing a lot of challenging old assumptions of late, and often with delightful results. Just because something is doesn't mean it should be..."
-Team Game Of Drones (Dec 2015)
|
Wander Prian
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
102
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 14:08:43 -
[4493] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Wander I think you are wrong in concluding isk/hr decreases with wh style rats (see link I provided). But we can note that down as something to avoid (isk/hour can be tweaked easily by manipulating drop rates or bounty levels for example).
I can't believe you still don't get it. No matter how much you tweak the rats, the risk will be the same or worse. You will either end up back where you started or drive people to do their PVE somewhere else. As long as there is a unknown name in local, people won't risk it.
This isn't a mechanical problem in the game, it's a mental problem in the head of sov-null ratters. They think they are entitled to complete safety because . It already is THE safest place to do PVE in. The only way the attackers have of disrupting that safety-net that is local and Intel-channels, is to make that local be something you cannot rely on 100Gäà |
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 14:17:55 -
[4494] - Quote
Wander Prian wrote:Jerghul wrote:Wander I think you are wrong in concluding isk/hr decreases with wh style rats (see link I provided). But we can note that down as something to avoid (isk/hour can be tweaked easily by manipulating drop rates or bounty levels for example). I can't believe you still don't get it. No matter how much you tweak the rats, the risk will be the same or worse. You will either end up back where you started or drive people to do their PVE somewhere else. As long as there is a unknown name in local, people won't risk it. This isn't a mechanical problem in the game, it's a mental problem in the head of sov-null ratters. They think they are entitled to complete safety because . It already is THE safest place to do PVE in. The only way the attackers have of disrupting that safety-net that is local and Intel-channels, is to make that local be something you cannot rely on 100Gäà
Yes, I get that you think that non-wormhole PvE activity is only done by the mentally and morally deficient. However, that was not the question at hand.
My query related to looking at wormhole mechanisms that reduce implicit risk as they might look if mirrored into nullsec. 1/8 was in regards to wh style rats. 2/8 was in regards to closing null sec gates that mirror wh players collapsing wormholes to restrict access.
" We have been doing a lot of challenging old assumptions of late, and often with delightful results. Just because something is doesn't mean it should be..."
-Team Game Of Drones (Dec 2015)
|
Mag's
the united
20831
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 14:18:35 -
[4495] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Mags Ok. Feel free to disagree for reasons of your own. It is noted. You mean you'll carry on ignoring arguments that prove you wrong.
How about you get back on topic and stop fudging the subject matter?
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 14:30:46 -
[4496] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Jerghul wrote:Mags Ok. Feel free to disagree for reasons of your own. It is noted. You mean you'll carry on ignoring arguments that prove you wrong. How about you get back on topic and stop fudging the subject matter?
I am on topic.
The problem is not afk, cloaky camping. The problem is implicit risk derived from afk cloaky camping and other things. To mitigate the perception of afk cloak camping as an issue - reduce implicit risk.
How is implicit risk reduced in wh space where cloaky camping is not perceived as a problem? What would the wh mechanisms that reduce implicit risk and the perception of afk cloaky camping as an issue look like in null-sec?
" We have been doing a lot of challenging old assumptions of late, and often with delightful results. Just because something is doesn't mean it should be..."
-Team Game Of Drones (Dec 2015)
|
Morrigan LeSante
Senex Legio The OSS
823
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 14:36:14 -
[4497] - Quote
Jerghul wrote: What would the wh mechanisms that reduce implicit risk
There's no such thing, that's the whole point. Your entire premise is false. |
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 14:40:09 -
[4498] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:Jerghul wrote: What would the wh mechanisms that reduce implicit risk There's no such thing, that's the whole point. Your entire premise is false.
Feel free to substitute implicit risk with "pretty big psychological effect" if you prefer the term used by a CCP developer.
I know the logic is not completely linear, but geeze...
Edit Or you could use the term "feel safer" instead of "lower implicit risk" if you want.
For example: Do you see how having an omni tank might make a ratter feel safer? Do you see how collapsing wormholes or closing gates might make a ratter feel safer?
" We have been doing a lot of challenging old assumptions of late, and often with delightful results. Just because something is doesn't mean it should be..."
-Team Game Of Drones (Dec 2015)
|
Morrigan LeSante
Senex Legio The OSS
823
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 14:42:40 -
[4499] - Quote
You cannot accept the reality that certain groups of players are simply more risk averse than others.
This is not something CCP should be dealing with, peoples own mental blocks are their own to deal with. |
Mag's
the united
20831
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 14:43:38 -
[4500] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Mag's wrote:Jerghul wrote:Mags Ok. Feel free to disagree for reasons of your own. It is noted. You mean you'll carry on ignoring arguments that prove you wrong. How about you get back on topic and stop fudging the subject matter? I am on topic. The problem is not afk, cloaky camping. The problem is implicit risk derived from afk cloaky camping and other things. To mitigate the perception of afk cloak camping as an issue - reduce implicit risk. How is implicit risk reduced in wh space where cloaky camping is not perceived as a problem? What would the wh mechanisms that reduce implicit risk and the perception of afk cloaky camping as an issue look like in null-sec? No, you're not. You're trying to fudge the topic. Rats do not and haven't ever stopped pilots AFKing. They are not the cause of psychological warfare and they are not the reason AFKing doesn't work in WH space. It's been explained in detail.
The reason AFKing doesn't work in Wh space, is because of the lack of local. Your mental gymnastics, do not change that fact.
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 .. 343 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |