Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 29 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lord Zim
2308
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 19:05:00 -
[691] - Quote
Nullbear, "nerfing" hisec, goons overlords and goon's pet. That post ticks all the troll checkboxes. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 19:16:00 -
[692] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Nullbear, "nerfing" hisec, goons overlords and goon's pet. That post ticks all the troll checkboxes. I have a different opinion, I must be a troll. You can't prove me wrong so you try to be provocative but I see clearly trough your ruse. If they "nerf" high sec they need to nerf nullsec for the same reasons, they also need to make low sec attractive and fun.
|
Lord Zim
2308
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 19:30:00 -
[693] - Quote
Afk Moon Goo wrote:If they "nerf" high sec they need to nerf nullsec for the same reasons Do tell what these reasons are.
Afk Moon Goo wrote:they also need to make low sec attractive and fun. Do tell how this'll benefit either hisec or nullsec. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
Marian Devers
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
16
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 19:47:00 -
[694] - Quote
Malcanis, what are your thoughts regarding supercaps; also, regarding Shadoo's 0.0 Thunderdome? |
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 19:49:00 -
[695] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote: Do tell what these reasons are.
I don't know dude, aren't you voting for this guy? You should know the reasons better mate. - no risk, high reward isk that can be scaled - huge afk income - convenient and easy to setup etc
Lord Zim wrote: Do tell how this'll benefit either hisec or nullsec.
If you don't see how making lowsec more attractive will benefit hisec I don't know what to say friendo. Gatecamp and instalockers are horrible designs, don't get me wrong you should be able to die but only if you fail/got outplayed not because people are camping a gate with a setup that require no skill. There is no way to annoy pirates for example, on the other hand you can suicide gank bears in hs pretty easily, they should allow bombs in lowsec and remove instalocks gg you fixed ls, maybe add a % of lock time that scale with the number of ships next to the gate.
|
Lord Zim
2308
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 19:53:00 -
[696] - Quote
So in short, lots of usual trolly catchphrases in the first post, made by a day 0 alt with trolly name, most likely no idea what these "hisec nerfs" it's complaining about actually are, and a hilarious assumption that the only thing wrong with lowsec is "gatecamps everywhere" and "instalocks ruining mah game".
Yep. All the troll checkboxes. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 19:58:00 -
[697] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:So in short, lots of usual trolly catchphrases in the first post, made by a day 0 alt with trolly name, most likely no idea what these "hisec nerfs" it's complaining about actually are, and a hilarious assumption that the only thing wrong with lowsec is "gatecamps everywhere" and "instalocks ruining mah game".
Yep. All the troll checkboxes. All you do is call me names, not a single argument. Afk Moon Goo is a serious problem and a reality, you're in denial if you don't believe that. Instalocks and gatecamps are bad designs, it's ok for null because sov and **** and you should be punished in null for running into camps but it's the main reason why low sec is bad, you can't punish pirates, being a pirate is literally the easiest pvp you can get.
|
Lord Zim
2308
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 20:08:00 -
[698] - Quote
So what you're really here for is to ***** about how moongoo works as a financial tool, after there's been indications that CCP might be working towards a better system for money generation for alliances, and you're bitching at some of the things which would help shift alliances' finances towards this by bitching about "you just want to nerf hisec" (and, of course, throwing some tripe about how nullsec needs to be nerfed the same way ... I don't even know what you're on about there, but do elucidate)? Moongoo does work in an suboptimal manner as a financial tool, but there are far, far better ways of going about getting it fixed than making a dedicated/gimmicky troll account and spouting gimmick troll memes. But I don't really expect you to come up with anything non-trolly.
And no, lowsec's main problems don't involve the word "gatecamp". Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 20:21:00 -
[699] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:So what you're really here for is to ***** about how moongoo works as a financial tool, after there's been indications that CCP might be working towards a better system for money generation for alliances, and you're bitching at some of the things which would help shift alliances' finances towards this by bitching about "you just want to nerf hisec" (and, of course, throwing some tripe about how nullsec needs to be nerfed the same way ... I don't even know what you're on about there, but do elucidate)? Moongoo does work in an suboptimal manner as a financial tool, but there are far, far better ways of going about getting it fixed than making a dedicated/gimmicky troll account and spouting gimmick troll memes. But I don't really expect you to come up with anything non-trolly.
And no, lowsec's main problems don't involve the word "gatecamp". Hey that's some pretty harsh words friendo, kinda rude. That moon goo money shouldn't be used to suicide gank in high sec because noone is fighting in nullsec because lol politics and why fight when you can make easy money, that's a problem. I'll keep it simple for you since you seems to have problems understanding my logic : - afk income = ok - afk income that can scale = bad I seemed to have touched a chord, moongoo seems to be really important for you and I can understand why. Yes gatecamp and instalocks are a bad designs when there is no way you can punish gatecampers, feel free to explain yourself tho, you seems confused maybe you should take some time to breath and think about your post I feel kinda bad for you when I'm reading your posts... By the way I'm pretty sure you are misusing the word "troll", a different opinion with decent arguments is not a troll, you can disagree with me but I'm pretty sure you are the one "spouting" troll memes we are not in funnyjunk ahaha. Thanks in advance friendo.
Afk Moon Goo for CSM9 |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
1428
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 20:25:00 -
[700] - Quote
Afk Moon Goo wrote:when there is no way you can punish gatecampers Get some frien...
Right.
Nevermind. I support Malcanis and Psychotic Monk for CSM8. |
|
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 20:28:00 -
[701] - Quote
Karl Hobb wrote:Afk Moon Goo wrote:when there is no way you can punish gatecampers Get some frien... Right. Nevermind. Eve pvp shouldn't be about who can have more dudes. I'd rather be soloing or doing really small gangs than fleeting to gatecamp the gatecampers. But you said nevermind so you already know you're wrong and your post is just a joke. Nice joke dude 8/10 joke I laughed in real life. |
Lord Zim
2308
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 20:30:00 -
[702] - Quote
Afk Moon Goo wrote:because noone is fighting in nullsec because lol politics Wrong.
Afk Moon Goo wrote:and why fight when you can make easy money Wrong.
Afk Moon Goo wrote:I seemed to have touched a chord, moongoo seems to be really important for you and I can understand why. Considering I've been advocating moving away from moongoo as an alliance's primary source of income and onto bottom-up financing for a long time, no, you haven't touched squat. In fact, you couldn't be further from the truth.
Afk Moon Goo wrote:Yes gatecamp and instalocks are a bad designs when there is no way you can punish gatecampers Gatecamps and instalocks aren't "bad design", they're not even "a problem". I mean, next you'll try to claim that every lowsec system is camped.
Oh and PS: instalocking ships are usually pretty fragile. HTH.
Afk Moon Goo wrote:feel free to explain yourself tho, you seems confused maybe you should take some time to breath and think about your post I feel kinda bad for you when I'm reading your posts... Here's an interesting question for you, since you seem to be all about "making lowsec better": why should anyone go to lowsec? Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
1428
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 20:32:00 -
[703] - Quote
Afk Moon Goo wrote:I'd rather be soloing or doing really small gangs than fleeting to gatecamp the gatecampers. I don't seem to have a problem getting by low-sec gate-campers while solo roaming. You must just suck terribly. I support Malcanis and Psychotic Monk for CSM8. |
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 20:41:00 -
[704] - Quote
No you're wrong.
No you're wrong.
Lord Zim wrote: Considering I've been advocating moving away from moongoo as an alliance's primary source of income and onto bottom-up financing for a long time, no, you haven't touched squat. In fact, you couldn't be further from the truth.
Good so you agree with me that's nice.
Lord Zim wrote: Gatecamps and instalocks aren't "bad design", they're not even "a problem". I mean, next you'll try to claim that every lowsec system is camped.
Oh and PS: instalocking ships are usually pretty fragile. HTH.
It's a bad design, even if only person is getting instalocked per year it's still a bad design, keyword is "bad design".
Oh and PS: they are not alone, they are not taking any risk. HTH.
Lord Zim wrote: Here's an interesting question for you, since you seem to be all about "making lowsec better": why should anyone go to lowsec?
Lowsec should be smallgang pvp land, should give nice income for indy but we should still be able to chase them, should punish people for making big fleets, that's why anyone should go to lowsec. Do you even solo pvp or only know how to blob/hotdrop a.k.a elite pvp?
I'm telling you : Afk Moon Goo for CMS9, it's happening. |
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 20:47:00 -
[705] - Quote
Karl Hobb wrote:Afk Moon Goo wrote:I'd rather be soloing or doing really small gangs than fleeting to gatecamp the gatecampers. I don't seem to have a problem getting by low-sec gate-campers while solo roaming. You must just suck. I don't, most of the time I'm ok thanks for asking (ps : after reviewing you're killboard you don't seems to be relevant to this discussion but thanks for you're opinion mang) but it's still a bad design nonetheless. And again your just calling me names because you can't prove me wrong. *sigh* step it up.. |
Lord Zim
2308
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 20:49:00 -
[706] - Quote
Afk Moon Goo wrote:It's a bad design, even if only person is getting instalocked per year it's still a bad design, keyword is "bad design". So what would you do to fix it, then, and what would the ramifications be on other parts of EVE?
Afk Moon Goo wrote:Oh and PS: they are not alone, they are not taking any risk. HTH. EVE is all about counters, not just numbers. Think up something, or oh I dunno avoid that gate maybe? vOv
Afk Moon Goo wrote:Lowsec should be smallgang pvp land, should give nice income for indy but we should still be able to chase them, should punish people for making big fleets, that's why anyone should go to lowsec. Last I checked, it was a nice place for smallgang pvp, sucked for industry, and doesn't reward big fleets any more than it does anywhere else in the game. So, what exactly is wrong, and what do you propose to fix it? What will the ramifications be on the rest of the eve universe? Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
1428
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 21:00:00 -
[707] - Quote
Afk Moon Goo wrote:after reviewing you're killboard you don't seems to be relevant to this discussion but thanks for you're opinion mang After reviewing your killboard I find that you definitely have no idea what you're talking about, so thanks for your completely irrelevant opinion mang. I support Malcanis and Psychotic Monk for CSM8. |
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 21:04:00 -
[708] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote: So what would you do to fix it, then, and what would the ramifications be on other parts of EVE?
Pretty easy, add a scaling % for locktime depending on the numbers of ships at any lowsec gate, people can still camp and warp after but I'll give you more time to do ****.
Lord Zim wrote: EVE is all about counters, not just numbers. Think up something, or oh I dunno avoid that gate maybe? vOv
It's plain dumb, in lowsec you should die because you got outplayed not because people are camping a gate, up the skill-ceiling remove low risk high reward pvp.
Lord Zim wrote: Last I checked, it was a nice place for smallgang pvp, sucked for industry, and doesn't reward big fleets any more than it does anywhere else in the game. So, what exactly is wrong, and what do you propose to fix it? What will the ramifications be on the rest of the eve universe?
It's a nice place for smallgang pvp if you are a pirate because you have tons of targets thanks to fw. You can't really counter pirates, they will disengage if you bring more dudes and just come back after, allow bombs in low sec so dedicated small bombers gangs could annoy/deal with pirates camping gates. Make pi more profitable in ls, maybe remove p4 prod in hs it's not that difficult anyway to do pi in ls with mwd cloak trick or with a blockade, more people will go to lowsec, they'll be able to scale harder than highsec indys gg.
|
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 21:05:00 -
[709] - Quote
Karl Hobb wrote:Afk Moon Goo wrote:after reviewing you're killboard you don't seems to be relevant to this discussion but thanks for you're opinion mang After reviewing your killboard I find that you definitely have no idea what you're talking about, so thanks for your completely irrelevant opinion mang. I have no killboard on this character, you must be drunk or this is another joke lol nice joke 7/10 joke I giggled in front of my computer screen. |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
1428
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 21:08:00 -
[710] - Quote
Afk Moon Goo wrote:I have no killboard on this character, you must be drunk or this is another joke lol nice joke 7/10 joke I giggled in front of my computer screen. I can only conclude you have no killboard at all and no experience with any of the topics you take issue with, and must be drunk posting. 1/10 for the gimmicky alt, I guess.
E: This is rich:
Afk Moon Goo wrote:in lowsec you should die because you got outplayed not because people are camping a gate You got outplayed homie, they brought more friends. I support Malcanis and Psychotic Monk for CSM8. |
|
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 21:15:00 -
[711] - Quote
Karl Hobb wrote: I can only conclude you have no killboard at all and no experience with any of the topics you take issue with, and must be drunk posting. 1/10 for for the gimmicky alt, I guess.
keyword is "on this alt" I have 3 alts on my account, is that a problem good sir? You can only guess, maybe I'm the elitest pvper with relevant sov, you'll never know mang.
Karl Hobb wrote: You got outplayed homie, they brought more friends.
But that's for nullsec elite pvp, we are talking about low sec are you confused? |
Lord Zim
2308
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 21:22:00 -
[712] - Quote
Afk Moon Goo wrote:Pretty easy, add a scaling % for locktime depending on the numbers of ships at any lowsec gate, people can still camp and warp after but I'll give you more time to do ****. So your idea of "fixing gatecamps" (which isn't a problem) is to make any fights on lowsec gates suck more, and for the servers to spend even more CPU time on non-essential bull.
Interesting.
Afk Moon Goo wrote:It's plain dumb, in lowsec you should die because you got outplayed not because people are camping a gate, up the skill-ceiling remove low risk high reward pvp. Fly ships designed to move around unsupported, or bring a scout. vOv
Afk Moon Goo wrote:It's a nice place for smallgang pvp if you are a pirate because you have tons of targets thanks to fw. You can't really counter pirates, they will disengage if you bring more dudes and just come back after, allow bombs in low sec so dedicated small bombers gangs could annoy/deal with pirates camping gates. There are alternatives which work just as well as bombs. I suggest you use them.
Afk Moon Goo wrote:Make pi more profitable in ls, maybe remove p4 prod in hs it's not that difficult anyway to do pi in ls with mwd cloak trick or with a blockade, more people will go to lowsec, they'll be able to scale harder than highsec indys gg. PI is an insignificant minority of the term "industry" in EVE, and their exposure to danger is insignificantly small. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
1428
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 21:24:00 -
[713] - Quote
Afk Moon Goo wrote:You can only guess, maybe I'm the elitest pvper with relevant sov, you'll never know mang. All I know is that you're a few-hours-old character I can only conclude is talking about topics they obviously have no experience with since I have no other verifiable facts to work from.
Karl Hobb wrote:You got outplayed homie, they brought more friends. Afk Moon Goo wrote:But that's for nullsec elite pvp, we are talking about low sec are you confused? Not at all. There isn't any logical reason to artificially limit the size of a fleet based on system sec status. In fact, I'd say that's a very un-EVE-like concept. I support Malcanis and Psychotic Monk for CSM8. |
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 21:34:00 -
[714] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote: So your idea of "fixing gatecamps" (which isn't a problem) is to make any fights on lowsec gates suck more, and for the servers to spend even more CPU time on non-essential bull.
Interesting.
Why would they "suck" more ? It'll make 1vsx more fair, make smallgang vs smallgang more strategic and you probably have no idea how fast it is to make a server side division. Bad design = need to go, even if it's not a problem for you.
Lord Zim wrote: Fly ships designed to move around unsupported, or bring a scout. vOv
Doesn't change the fact that it's still a bad design, low skill requirement low risk high reward pvp. vOv
Lord Zim wrote: There are alternatives which work just as well as bombs. I suggest you use them.
Bombs could punish big fleets in low sec too, do you even read my posts? Sec status change might be a problem tho
Lord Zim wrote: PI is an insignificant minority of the term "industry" in EVE, and their exposure to danger is insignificantly small.
Pos change is coming, PI isn't changed, p3-p4 stuff should be ls only, it's a start. I'm not sure how to help lowsec miners, maybe remove belts and put roids in grav sites, that won't keep pirates from probing them tho.
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7247
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 21:36:00 -
[715] - Quote
Afk Moon Goo wrote:Why would they "suck" more ? It'll make 1vsx more fair, make smallgang vs smallgang more strategic and you probably have no idea how fast it is to make a server side division. Bad design = need to go, even if it's not a problem for you.
"engaging 20 dudes on my own should be undeniably in my favor" ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 21:38:00 -
[716] - Quote
Karl Hobb wrote: All I know is that you're a few-hours-old character I can only conclude is talking about topics they obviously have no experience with since I have no other verifiable facts to work from.
I'm a few-hours old character and I know more than you about accounts (yes you can have 3 alts per account, check the faq if you don't trust me) so I guess you just bought your account from craigslist.
Karl Hobb wrote:Not at all. There isn't any logical reason to artificially limit the size of a fleet based on system sec status. In fact, I'd say that's a very un-EVE-like concept. There is no artificial limitation, just less reward. Low risk, high reward pvp that's very un-EVE-like, but then again since you bought your account you must be new to this.
Afk Moon Goo for CSM9
|
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 21:40:00 -
[717] - Quote
Andski wrote:Afk Moon Goo wrote:Why would they "suck" more ? It'll make 1vsx more fair, make smallgang vs smallgang more strategic and you probably have no idea how fast it is to make a server side division. Bad design = need to go, even if it's not a problem for you.
"engaging 20 dudes on my own should be undeniably in my favor" "people jumping in my 20 dudes fleet should always die because we are camping" |
Lord Zim
2308
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 21:50:00 -
[718] - Quote
Afk Moon Goo wrote:Why would they "suck" more ? It'll make 1vsx more fair, make smallgang vs smallgang more strategic Because to make any inroads at all against your "instalock" problem, you would have to make every lock excruciatingly long, which'll have its impact on everything, even "small gang vs small gang".
And again, gatecamps isn't a problem. I've yet to die to a single gatecamp, and I flew to/from the hisec island in solitude multiple times a day for a long, long time. I just flew a ship designed to get around the "problem" of gatecamps. Only bads whine about gatecamps.
Afk Moon Goo wrote:and you probably have no idea how fast it is to make a server side division. Actually, yes, I do. It'll be more than you think.
Afk Moon Goo wrote:Doesn't change the fact that it's still a bad design, low skill requirement low risk high reward pvp. vOv No, what it doesn't change is the fact that you're complaining about not being able to get away from a gate which is camped, when everyone that's even remotely sensible would take precautions in the form of either using a ship designed to break through those gatecamps (and, incidentally, there's a lot of ships designed for that express purpose) or using a scout.
Afk Moon Goo wrote:Bombs could punish big fleets in low sec too, do you even read my posts? Sec status change might be a problem tho I'm going to just continue to point out the fact that there are alternatives which work just fine in lowsec, today, to bust up larger gatecamps, and it doesn't involve bombs or "moar numbers". Use them, instead of bitching about gatecamps (and showing us you don't want to adapt). Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
Lord Zim
2308
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 21:51:00 -
[719] - Quote
Afk Moon Goo wrote:Andski wrote:"engaging 20 dudes on my own should be undeniably in my favor" "people jumping in my 20 dudes fleet should always die because we are camping" "People who suck at eve and jump blind into a gatecamp in a ship which isn't designed for busting through gatecamps should be able to get away scot free. Even freighters." Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
1428
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 21:58:00 -
[720] - Quote
Afk Moon Goo wrote:yes you can have 3 alts per account I have no proof of you using more than one of those character slots.
Afk Moon Goo wrote:There is no artificial limitation, just less reward. I don't see how any of your propositions to deal with gate camping result in less reward for anyone. I support Malcanis and Psychotic Monk for CSM8. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 29 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |