Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Karii Ildarian
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:22:00 -
[241]
Originally by: Le Skunk
Originally by: Karii Ildarian
Why not go to 0.0 and gank BoB freighters? Got to be more profitable, I suppose.
Because the introduction of
1) Jump Bridges 2) Titans transporting fleets 3) Jump Freighters cynoing on top of massive undock npc station and insta docking
Means the only place you can get them is... higsec.
SKUNK
Wow, talk about avoiding the old r v. r.
|
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:23:00 -
[242]
Edited by: Garreck on 03/09/2008 15:24:10
Originally by: Le Skunk THE MATHS:
Out of curiosity, how about an officer/deadspace fitted navy raven? Assume fairly "typical" high sec lvl 4 mission runner "pimp my navy raven" setup.
I honestly don't know the answer on that one, but I'm willing to bet it's potentially more profitable, both gross and net, and requires considerably less effort/manpower.
And then of course there's just the typical "all of my life crammed into a t1 hauler" which is shockingly common and...well...easy profit there, with exponentially less effort/manpower.
Pirates are going to have to work harder, and do the math as you just did (impressive in my book.) They're going to have to scan and scout and weigh their options and potential profit. It's going to sting a bit when they miscalculate. It's going to sting a bit if someone else somehow manages to get to the loot first.
But it's been stinging the high-sec folks for a good while at no cost to the pirates. I'm not sayin' high sec afkers are smart or have much meaningful Eve existence at all...I don't approve of/understand the playstyle at all. But actions have consequence in Eve. The afk-ers/high sec lvl 4 missioners have faced the consequences for a while...but there was never much (any) consequence on the other side of the equation.
Now there is.
That's good for Eve overall.
|
Ki An
Gallente The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:23:00 -
[243]
Originally by: Karii Ildarian Ummm, if that makes you feel better...
(btw, Cpt. Branko's post was a strawman because he used false premises to support his conclusion...).
No, he didn't use false premises. You claimed they where false, but you failed continuously to prove that they where. In fact, you demonstrated throughout your failed straw man building that his premises where factual in a general sense. Since all you do is argue exceptions, I think it's fair to discount you from further participation in this and other threads.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Karii Ildarian
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:24:00 -
[244]
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Karii Ildarian Ummm, if that makes you feel better...
(btw, Cpt. Branko's post was a strawman because he used false premises to support his conclusion...).
No, he didn't use false premises. You claimed they where false, but you failed continuously to prove that they where. In fact, you demonstrated throughout your failed straw man building that his premises where factual in a general sense. Since all you do is argue exceptions, I think it's fair to discount you from further participation in this and other threads.
No, you proved they where, indeed, false.
|
Ki An
Gallente The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:26:00 -
[245]
Originally by: Garreck Out of curiosity, how about an officer/deadspace fitted navy raven? Assume fairly "typical" high sec lvl 4 mission runner setup.
I honestly don't know the answer on that one, but I'm willing to bet it's potentially more profitable, both gross and net, and requires considerably less effort/manpower.
Assuming said CNR is afk or just undocking, I would say about the same as a freighter, meaning the raven must be fitted with at least 13 billion worth of mods in order for the gankers to break even. Another way to say it is that faction fitted ravens are off the menue, or immune.
Originally by: Garreck
And then of course there's just the typical "all of my life crammed into a t1 hauler" which is shockingly common and...well...easy profit there, with exponentially less effort/manpower.
Pirates are going to have to work harder, and do the math as you just did (impressive in my book.) They're going to have to scan and scout and weigh their options and potential profit. It's going to sting a bit when they miscalculate. It's going to sting a bit if someone else somehow manages to get to the loot first.
But it's been stinging the high-sec folks for a good while at no cost to the pirates. I'm not sayin' high sec afkers are smart or have much meaningful Eve existence at all...I don't approve of/understand the playstyle at all. But actions have consequence in Eve. The afk-ers/high sec lvl 4 missioners have faced the consequences for a while...but there was never much (any) consequence on the other side of the equation.
Now there is.
That's good for Eve overall.
Noone's talking about stupid people getting their just deserves. We're talking about people who can now make themselves immune. That's a bad thing.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Ki An
Gallente The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:27:00 -
[246]
Originally by: Karii Ildarian No, you proved they where, indeed, false.
You're like a little child just shouting words at mommy. You have no idea what you're saying, but you figure if you shout loud enough, mommy will stop telling you to go to bed.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:34:00 -
[247]
Edited by: Le Skunk on 03/09/2008 15:34:41
Originally by: Karii Ildarian
Originally by: Le Skunk
Originally by: Karii Ildarian
Why not go to 0.0 and gank BoB freighters? Got to be more profitable, I suppose.
Because the introduction of
1) Jump Bridges 2) Titans transporting fleets 3) Jump Freighters cynoing on top of massive undock npc station and insta docking
Means the only place you can get them is... higsec.
SKUNK
Wow, talk about avoiding the old r v. r.
What does that mean? (the abbreviation)
SKUNK
|
Drunk Driver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:34:00 -
[248]
Ki An is looking to buy isk for real money.
If you sell isk for real money you should contact him with a price.
. |
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:36:00 -
[249]
Originally by: Ki An Noone's talking about stupid people getting their just deserves. We're talking about people who can now make themselves immune. That's a bad thing.
5 years of pvp has taught me that taking the right steps makes one all but immune from any pvp at all and has for a long time.
That doesn't mean everybody (or even a lot of people) are smart enough or patient enough to take those steps. This nerf won't change that at all. The people who already took steps to prevent themselves from being ganked will likely now train up/use freighters just for the extra security. The people who have a pattern of not taking steps to protect themselves from suicide gankage likely won't take steps even given new/better options.
That's just the way of Eve, man. Piracy has rarely been successful against smart/careful pilots of any kind (pvp or industrialist). Piracy tends to prey on the stupid/careless...which is fine. That won't change.
|
Ki An
Gallente The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:36:00 -
[250]
Originally by: Drunk Driver [linebreak]Ki An is looking to buy isk for real money.[linebreak][linebreak]If you sell isk for real money you should contact him with a price.[linebreak][linebreak][linebreak][linebreak].
No, I'm simply interested in how much you charge for isk from your macro bots.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
|
Ki An
Gallente The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:37:00 -
[251]
Originally by: Garreck
5 years of pvp has taught me that taking the right steps makes one all but immune from any pvp at all and has for a long time.
That doesn't mean everybody (or even a lot of people) are smart enough or patient enough to take those steps. This nerf won't change that at all. The people who already took steps to prevent themselves from being ganked will likely now train up/use freighters just for the extra security. The people who have a pattern of not taking steps to protect themselves from suicide gankage likely won't take steps even given new/better options.
That's just the way of Eve, man. Piracy has rarely been successful against smart/careful pilots of any kind (pvp or industrialist). Piracy tends to prey on the stupid/careless...which is fine. That won't change.
You misunderstand me. I am talking true immunity, no matter how stupid you are. Freighter pilots and noob corp mission runners now have it. They can't get suicide ganked anymore, because it would send whoever did the ganking into financial ruin.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:45:00 -
[252]
Originally by: Ki An
You misunderstand me. I am talking true immunity, no matter how stupid you are. Freighter pilots and noob corp mission runners now have it.
Well I guess what I was getting at is that, given what you've shown through good numbers; that freighters are pretty much immune to high sec ganking (unless carrying a cargo of extremely unlikely value into a gank of extremely unlikely firepower)...there are still plenty of people who won't use freighters even if they have the skills and isk to do so. They'll keep flying their haulers with valuable stuff, keep getting ganked, and very likely keep crying about it.
If CCP pulls another nerf in the face of these new changes just because of said whining, I guess I'll happily eat crow. Well, not happily.
|
Ki An
Gallente The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:47:00 -
[253]
Originally by: Garreck
Well I guess what I was getting at is that, given what you've shown through good numbers; that freighters are pretty much immune to high sec ganking (unless carrying a cargo of extremely unlikely value into a gank of extremely unlikely firepower)...there are still plenty of people who won't use freighters even if they have the skills and isk to do so. They'll keep flying their haulers with valuable stuff, keep getting ganked, and very likely keep crying about it.
And in the mean time, we have certain individuals who are immune. I don't like it. I guess CCP does.
Originally by: Garreck
If CCP pulls another nerf in the face of these new changes just because of said whining, I guess I'll happily eat crow. Well, not happily.
Just wait for it. In light of the dev's statements in that other thread, it is clear that they intend to make high sec even safer.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Malin0
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:49:00 -
[254]
Originally by: Ki An
You misunderstand me. I am talking true immunity, no matter how stupid you are. Freighter pilots and noob corp mission runners now have it. They can't get suicide ganked anymore, because it would send whoever did the ganking into financial ruin.
Suicide ganking was a problem for everybody in high sec. U numb your brain doing the mission grind to afford that faction fit CNR and decent security rating. Accept your mission and fit for Guristas and then jump through the gate and boom, blown up by a suicide gank squad after your 1.5 bill isk Gist Shield booster.
Now I can fit my ship for PvP and sit by a 0.5 gate and do the same to a pirate with a minus standing as he comes through :).
Mal
P.S. yes I'm a carebear and proud of it :)
|
Ki An
Gallente The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:50:00 -
[255]
Originally by: Malin0
Originally by: Ki An
You misunderstand me. I am talking true immunity, no matter how stupid you are. Freighter pilots and noob corp mission runners now have it. They can't get suicide ganked anymore, because it would send whoever did the ganking into financial ruin.
Suicide ganking was a problem for everybody in high sec. U numb your brain doing the mission grind to afford that faction fit CNR and decent security rating. Accept your mission and fit for Guristas and then jump through the gate and boom, blown up by a suicide gank squad after your 1.5 bill isk Gist Shield booster.
Now I can fit my ship for PvP and sit by a 0.5 gate and do the same to a pirate with a minus standing as he comes through :).
Mal
P.S. yes I'm a carebear and proud of it :)
What? You're going to suicide gank the pirate then?
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Karii Ildarian
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:56:00 -
[256]
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Karii Ildarian No, you proved they where, indeed, false.
You're like a little child just shouting words at mommy. You have no idea what you're saying, but you figure if you shout loud enough, mommy will stop telling you to go to bed.
Quote:
(a) Anyone using the ISK they make in high-sec to fund their PvP (which is a LOT of people) is the problem.
(b) Anyone selling modules obtained through PvE and competing with people trying to do business in low-sec/0.0 while being completely immune is the problem.
(c) Anyone buying modules and ships by ISK obtained through PvE and competing with low-sec/0.0 people for the same items while being completely immune printing ISK in high-sec is the problem.
My questions, your responses:
Do you think that the market is, in fact, a form of PvP?
Originally by: Ki An
Yes, the market is a form of PvP.
What do mission runners usually do with their loot/salvage?
Originally by: Ki An
Either they sell the loot and salvage they got from their non-competitive environment, thereby outcompeting people who actually had to compete for their loot and salvage, or they reprocess the loot and put it on the market, thereby outcompeting miners who got their minerals in a competitive environment, and build rigs to put on the market, thereby outcompeting salvagers who got their salvage in competitive environments.
Is it possible to loose your ship while running a mission?
Originally by: Ki An
No unless you're (a) insanely stupid, or (b) running the mission for the first time in an ill fited ship, i.e. you're not ready to run it yet.
Are any players actually restricted from running missions, any time they choose, as long as they meet the mission requirements?
Originally by: Ki An
Nope.
Is it possible to enter a mission runner's mission and loot/salvage the wrecks, if one is so inclined to do so?
Originally by: Ki An
Yes, it's possible, but IT DOESN'T MAKE MISSION RUNNING A COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT. THE REASON FOR THIS IS THAT THE MISSION RUNNER STILL GETS 90% OF HIS REWARDS WITHOUT COMPETITION.
Is it possible to kill a player, while said player is running a mission?
(You really didn't like this question, wonder why...)
Originally by: Ki An
No. Not unless he's in low sec, but we're not talking about low sec missions.
Originally by: Ki An
No, because if I start listing the exceptions, you will take twist that around and make my post into something it wasn't. 'No' is the general answer. It's what's important in this discussion.
There are exceptions, that will make it impossible to kill a player running a mission?
Originally by: Ki An
There are exceptions to the "not possible to kill a high sec mission runner". Those exceptions are just that, exceptions, and are not relevant to the debate.
Your position is that it is not possible, in general, to kill a player, while that player is running a mission?
Originally by: Ki An
Yes, in general.
So if a player does, in fact, get ganked while running a mission, you believe that this is some sort of exploit?
Originally by: Ki An
No, I believe the ganked player was stupid.
(So, I guess you mean, in fact, yes, it is possible to kill a player running a mission).
So, by my reckoning, you have contradicted the statement, related above claiming that the players, in question, were "completely immune", while engaged in their activities.
I agree with your assessment, therefore the poster, above, based his conclusions on a faulty premises.
|
Kin Dahl
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:56:00 -
[257]
I just woke up and jumped on to the forums, and damn, the thread is still going. Which shows there is quite a bit of concern over the recent changes. I have read alot of good arguements in this thread and respect everyones opinion.
I hope CCP are looking at both threads, theres another one title "lets end the pretense and make hi sec no PVP" i think thats 17 pages long already. Hi Sec has to remain a place where pvp is possible in all forms, balanced for both sides, and fair. But it should not be getting safer because fellow pod pilots cant think for themselves.
Pod pilots have to challenge themselves, this time it looks like the suicide gankers have to think a little harder, be more patient.
But witht he upcoming war dec changes, im worried high sec will just become safer and safer, until boom, there is no high sec pvp. If thats what it becomes then Eve is no longer the Eve we all love.
|
Malin0
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:57:00 -
[258]
Originally by: Ki An
What? You're going to suicide gank the pirate then?
Why not? According to the dev blog if I have a security rating of +5 and the rat has say -4 and we're in a 0.5 system then it might just be possible (not tried it yet).
Could be fun.
Mal
|
Ki An
Gallente The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 16:05:00 -
[259]
Originally by: Karii Ildarian summary of the discussion so far
Nice to see you quote your failure once more. It doesn't make it any less of a failure though. Face it, your argument sucks. You failed to brand Cpt Branko's post as a straw man, and instead you invested lots of time into building one yourself, only to have it torched by me. Forum warfare, you gotta love it.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Ki An
Gallente The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 16:05:00 -
[260]
Originally by: Malin0
Originally by: Ki An
What? You're going to suicide gank the pirate then?
Why not? According to the dev blog if I have a security rating of +5 and the rat has say -4 and we're in a 0.5 system then it might just be possible (not tried it yet).
Could be fun.
Mal
Go ahead. It's in the spirit of the game.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
|
Karii Ildarian
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 16:10:00 -
[261]
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Karii Ildarian summary of the discussion so far
Nice to see you quote your failure once more. It doesn't make it any less of a failure though. Face it, your argument sucks. You failed to brand Cpt Branko's post as a straw man, and instead you invested lots of time into building one yourself, only to have it torched by me. Forum warfare, you gotta love it.
From Dictionary.com
Quote:
delusional Browse Nearby Entries Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This de+lu+sion Audio Help /dɪˈluʒən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[di-loo-zhuhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation ûnoun 1. an act or instance of deluding. 2. the state of being deluded. 3. a false belief or opinion: delusions of grandeur. 4. Psychiatry. a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact: a paranoid delusion.
|
Ki An
Gallente The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 16:11:00 -
[262]
Originally by: Karii Ildarian
From Dictionary.com
Quote:
delusional Browse Nearby Entries Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This de+lu+sion Audio Help /dɪˈluʒən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[di-loo-zhuhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation ûnoun 1. an act or instance of deluding. 2. the state of being deluded. 3. a false belief or opinion: delusions of grandeur. 4. Psychiatry. a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact: a paranoid delusion.
So, you are able to look up stuff on the interweb as well? I'm so proud of you. Now stop posting.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Webster Carr
Gallente Magellan Exploration and Survey
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 17:50:00 -
[263]
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Julietta
Originally by: Kin Dahl Ive said this before, deep down inside I hope the subs fall, and maybe just maybe we will get that harsh dark world where you are all alone.
You HAVE got it, in the vast majority of systems - being all of those which are 0.4 or below.
Why do you insist that the people who DON'T want it, but are happy with a non-PvP area, should be forced out of the game entirely? Why are you so implacably opposed to a game which caters for both groups?
That's like asking a football team to accommodate players who only like non-contact sport. It can't be done. You can't play football when half of the players want to have you arrested if you tackle them.
Turning your question around: Why are you so implacably opposed to EvE being a full PvP game? Why did you even start playing a game that is advertised as being such?
Or if you don't want PvP in hi-sec, how about really removing PvP; from now on, players in hi-sec can only sell items for their listed base value. After all, why should you be allowed to nerf my playstyle by profiteering at my expense?
Or did you actually mean that your playstyle should take precedence over mine, by allowing you the freedoms you do like, but denying me the freedoms you don't like...?
Actually, to extend your analogy...it is more like telling the football players that they can't tackle the other teams' coach, cheerleaders, fans, or waterboy...i.e. the ones that are there for the game but aren't actually on the field. Sure these other people impact the game (morale, 'logistics support', etc...) but they aren't all involved in the same way, both sides can have these support 'players' equally, but they aren't fair game for a tackle...
Just an observation, Webb
|
Talan Calonid
VEX.
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 18:02:00 -
[264]
Quote:
Actually, to extend your analogy...
Actually, can we stop with the analogy, as it's crap.
Eve is supposed to be a full pvp game, in all it's aspects. The argument is about whether hisec is becoming 'too safe,' or not. I believe it is.
Karii, please stop posting.
|
Norrin Ellis
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 18:04:00 -
[265]
Originally by: Julietta
Originally by: Kin Dahl Ive said this before, deep down inside I hope the subs fall, and maybe just maybe we will get that harsh dark world where you are all alone.
You HAVE got it, in the vast majority of systems - being all of those which are 0.4 or below.
Why do you insist that the people who DON'T want it, but are happy with a non-PvP area, should be forced out of the game entirely? Why are you so implacably opposed to a game which caters for both groups?
The ones who complain about CCP making the game appealing to carebears are those who only want PvP against people who have no business being on the field with them. They want easy pickings, so they can boast about the wars they've won against tiny corporations in high sec who don't have the manpower or resources to ever conceivably mount a defense, no matter how hard they may try. These are the people who have prompted CCP to label the system for what it is, "paying to grief."
The people you see here demanding a "cold, harsh EVE universe" are only interested in cold and harsh for you, not themselves. Now that they'll have to stay out in lowsec and 0.0 fighting opponents with the manpower and resources to put up a reasonable fight, they're going to lobby for the easy mode PvP they've always enjoyed.
PvP pilots who really enjoy combat and risk are still out in lowsec and 0.0, beating the crap out of each other and having a fine time of it, then coming to high sec to trade with the carebears who drive a number of markets in the game. These are respectable folks who appreciate the role of the often solo carebear gamers in EVE.
|
Allen Ramses
Caldari Typo Corp
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 18:08:00 -
[266]
Originally by: Talan Calonid Karii, please stop posting.
As well as everyone else in this thread.
STFU, the lot of you. ____________________ Pimped out Raven to run level 4 missions quickly: 210 Mil ISK. Realizing your 120 Mil ISK Drake gets the job done faster: Priceless. |
Farrqua
Minmatar Turbo Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 18:16:00 -
[267]
Originally by: Webster Carr
Actually, to extend your analogy...it is more like telling the football players that they can't tackle the other teams' coach, cheerleaders, fans, or waterboy...i.e. the ones that are there for the game but aren't actually on the field. Sure these other people impact the game (morale, 'logistics support', etc...) but they aren't all involved in the same way, both sides can have these support 'players' equally, but they aren't fair game for a tackle...
Just an observation, Webb
Actually that is a crappy analogy. For one when you logging your are taking the field. You are a participant. Plus I have seen quite a few fans, ref's, Coaches, water boys and so on get there asses handed to them by the players on the field, in all the different sports.
So I guess you not safe anywhere...are you.
Just an observation.
|
Ryoji Tanakama
Caldari Firestar Drive Yards
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 18:28:00 -
[268]
Originally by: Talan Calonid
Eve is supposed to be a full pvp game, in all it's aspects.
Patently False.
Explain the existence of CONCORD in your fallacy of EVE.
|
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 18:45:00 -
[269]
Originally by: Ryoji Tanakama
Explain the existence of CONCORD in your fallacy of EVE.
PvP has rules?
|
Anaalys Fluuterby
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 19:03:00 -
[270]
Originally by: Talan Calonid
Eve is supposed to be a full pvp game, in all it's aspects.
Wrong.
If it was a full PvP game there would be no missions, no concord, no market, no mining.
It is a PvP-BASED game (Oveur's exact quote), meaning that the PvP in it is non-consensual and effects all parts of the game (including missions). It does not mean you can shoot everyone, any time, any where with no repercussions. That went out with MoO and the introduction of the new Concord several years ago; CCP essentually told everyone back then that there were lines you don't cross or they WILL restrict your actions.
Suiciders that didn't even bother to scan before blowing up "thousands of ships" (CCP quote) and WarDeccers that do it just for the lulz have bellied up to the trough one too many times and CCP has decided that they aren't going to stop on their own.
It isn't a change in policy, it is a failure to interpret what CCP has been saying all along. -------------------------------------------------
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
Not it isn't, people should be encouraged to get out in low sec space, but never forced to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |