Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 157 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 25 post(s) |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
18
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 19:57:00 -
[4321] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Aralyn Cormallen wrote:NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote: the lack of thoughtfulness... live on the forums... you probably aren't very smart... nobody can stand to be around you... absolutely garbage at the game... social life is restricted to the forums... what I see is pretty sad... you have nothing and have no one... we can all be thankful that we aren't you.
Impressive moral high ground I'm still deciding whether or not to report that as a personal attack, on the one hand it blatantly is, on the other hand I don't want to stoop to the kind of tactics people of his ilk use on the forums. Besides, it would only fuel his persecution complex. Let's just all strive to maintain civil discourse and avoid personal attacks - it certainly would make the forum a nicer, friendlier place. You should have addressed that in your post where you replied to NoLife NoFriends StillPosting's personal attack on another player with "Just ignore the trolls...this is what they all do..."
If you noticed I stopped responding to trolls who were calling me a "CODE alt" and what not. Often silence is the best answer. But yes, for the record, I am opposed to any form of verbal abuse on the forums. Please scroll back and you can see who has been initiating attacks on this thread and throughout the forums (*hint* not me) |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20665
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 19:58:00 -
[4322] - Quote
Anslo wrote:Confirming Jonah is a troll, but a fairly handsome one. Only fairly handsome? I'm disappointed. How goes it btw?
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
18
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 19:59:00 -
[4323] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Let's just all strive to maintain civil discourse and avoid personal attacks - it certainly would make the forum a nicer, friendlier place. Veers Belvar wrote:Just ignore the trolls...this is what they all do... *Ahem* Quote:Thankfully CCP is not listening to them and is taking proactive steps to rebalance suicide ganking, and end this crazy spree of empty freighter ganking. Please cite your source for this. Or are you making things up again?
As we heard from CODE agent Ima Wreckyou - 11 years of nerfs to suicide ganking. Every time there has been a sustained campaign of harm to highsec, CCP has looked into it and made adjustments. I would be shocked if CODE could just keep blowing apart ship after ship in Uedama without some kind of changes (not to mention the freighter changes which allowed for tankier freighters). |
Anslo
Scope Works
8673
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 19:59:00 -
[4324] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Anslo wrote:Confirming Jonah is a troll, but a fairly handsome one. Only fairly handsome? I'm disappointed. How goes it btw? Dunking nerds. Laughing at gankers. Bridging 50 thrashers onto high sec gate camps. Nbd.
|
Anslo
Scope Works
8673
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:02:00 -
[4325] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Anslo wrote:Confirming Jonah is a troll, but a fairly handsome one. Only fairly handsome? I'm disappointed. How goes it btw? Dunking nerds. Laughing at gankers. Bridging 50 thrashers onto high sec gate camps. Nbd.
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3896
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:04:00 -
[4326] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:I already made an argument for action. These guys obviously don't care about isk. They do care about time. Solution - make them grind more to be able to operate in highsec, which will make their ganks more selective. that's not an argument for action that's a suggestion
durr |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3896
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:04:00 -
[4327] - Quote
oh you're so banned imma report this watch me
e: **** |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20666
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:09:00 -
[4328] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: If you noticed I stopped responding to people I consider to be trolls because they don't agree with me
FTFY
So it's totally OK to respond to people that do agree with you, even if they're trolls making a personal attack on another player?
FYI most of what you consider to be attacks on your person are actually attacks on your belief that you are familiar with certain game mechanics, when you have consistently proven that you are not. Your beliefs make you appear foolish, ergo you get called a fool.
What NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote was aimed at me personally, not my beliefs. That is a personal attack. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |
Anslo
Scope Works
8673
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:11:00 -
[4329] - Quote
Wait what are you nerds even arguing about now? This doesn't look like the OP.
|
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5509
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:13:00 -
[4330] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:As we heard from CODE agent Ima Wreckyou - 11 years of nerfs to suicide ganking. Every time there has been a sustained campaign of harm to highsec, CCP has looked into it and made adjustments. I would be shocked if CODE could just keep blowing apart ship after ship in Uedama without some kind of changes (not to mention the freighter changes which allowed for tankier freighters).
And here we have it. 11 years of nerfs aren't enough for you. What will be?
The current situation is this: Ganks of empty freighters make the ganker lose money, time, and sec status. They are also vanisingly rare (you found 1; as Tippia pointed out, 2/3 of your "examples" weren't actually illegal aggression). Ganks of full freighters will always be profitable so long as ganking is possible. A solo hauler, properly fit and flown, will always win against a solo ganker, and often win against several gankers. Only an organized group of more than a dozen players has a chance of ganking a Freighter and every time they succeed, they risk their own freighter picking up the loot. Ganking ships are more expensive per unit alpha or per unit dps than they have ever been before. Sec Status losses now are not dependant on the gank being successful, the full hit happens the moment you open fire. Bumping to avoid gate guns (required only because increased costs have required a change in meta from alpha to dps) is trivially avoidable and quite possible to escape no matter how good the bumpers. Avoidance and escape also require much less effort than the bumpers put in.
What more could you possibly want? "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20666
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:14:00 -
[4331] - Quote
Anslo wrote:Wait what are you nerds even arguing about now? This doesn't look like the OP. TL;DR Veers Belvar wants Concord to punish bumping because it's the "same" as activating a warp scram, and for people who've survived a gank to be immune from bumping for 60 seconds, because according to him there's absolutely no way to get into warp while being bumped.
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |
Anslo
Scope Works
8673
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:17:00 -
[4332] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Anslo wrote:Wait what are you nerds even arguing about now? This doesn't look like the OP. TL;DR Veers Belvar wants Concord to punish bumping because it's the "same" as activating a warp scram, and for people who've survived a gank to be immune from bumping for 60 seconds, because according to him there's absolutely no way to get into warp while being bumped.
If you're in a bigger ship, and don't have an insta, yeah it's pretty tough actually. Ganking (imo) in general is just done to be a douche and get tears so, meh. You know my opinion on it all though vOv
Edit: I sense a disturbance now in the nerds...as if a thousand text walls were all now being written at once.
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3896
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:25:00 -
[4333] - Quote
Anslo wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Anslo wrote:Wait what are you nerds even arguing about now? This doesn't look like the OP. TL;DR Veers Belvar wants Concord to punish bumping because it's the "same" as activating a warp scram, and for people who've survived a gank to be immune from bumping for 60 seconds, because according to him there's absolutely no way to get into warp while being bumped. If you're in a bigger ship, and don't have an insta, yeah it's pretty tough actually. Ganking (imo) in general is just done to be a douche and get tears so, meh. You know my opinion on it all though vOv Edit: I sense a disturbance now in the nerds...as if a thousand text walls were all now being written at once. hmm 'pretty tough' sounds like a different thing than one hundred percent inescapable false imprisonment doesn't it jonah |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20666
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:25:00 -
[4334] - Quote
Anslo wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Anslo wrote:Wait what are you nerds even arguing about now? This doesn't look like the OP. TL;DR Veers Belvar wants Concord to punish bumping because it's the "same" as activating a warp scram, and for people who've survived a gank to be immune from bumping for 60 seconds, because according to him there's absolutely no way to get into warp while being bumped. If you're in a bigger ship, and don't have an insta, yeah it's pretty tough actually. Ganking (imo) in general is just done to be a douche and get tears so, meh. You know my opinion on it all though vOv It's tough solo yeah, a friend with webs is a decent counter though.
What are your thoughts, as a sworn enemy of James and his merry mauraders, on Concord treating bumping as the same as using an offensive module? We may not agree on a lot of things but you do make some insightful observations. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |
Anslo
Scope Works
8673
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:27:00 -
[4335] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:hmm 'pretty tough' sounds like a different thing than one hundred percent inescapable false imprisonment doesn't it jonah
Unless you have an insta which, let's be real, a lot of casual players don't know about. And even then, THAT's not a guarantee. Stop being an absolutist nerd.
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:It's tough solo yeah, a friend with webs is a decent counter though.
We actually tested that once when I was beyond smashed and thought it was a good idea to warp my carrier to a belt to ***** on a tackled AF. I got webbed to get into warp, but some nerd bumped me. All the webs in the world couldn't get me into warp. Carrier was safe, but I didn't get to *****. I was a sad Anslo.
Quote:What are your thoughts, as a sworn enemy of James and his merry mauraders, on Concord treating bumping as the same as using an offensive module? We may not agree on a lot of things but you do make some insightful observations. I mean what other path can people see with nothing being done to really give them a way to counter the bumps aside from hurrhurr change your play style? I despise that crap. If someone wants to mine, let em. Miners give me my ships and ammo, I love em. Why abuse em?
I said it a whiiiile ago, but if they could get a highslot module that works like a cyno to just keep them in place so they can't get bumped, I think it'd be a good balance. They can mine and go afk to tend to RL crap as it pops up, but concede to a wee bit of ore loss. But they sure as **** can know they won't be coming back bumped out of range.
Also, since going the pvp route and teaching bears and newbros a more positive spin on Eve, and learning from some of Eve's most 3LITE PEEVEEPEEURZ, I have this to say regarding bumpers:
lolscrubs
|
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
18
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:30:00 -
[4336] - Quote
Anslo wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Anslo wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Anslo wrote:Wait what are you nerds even arguing about now? This doesn't look like the OP. TL;DR Veers Belvar wants Concord to punish bumping because it's the "same" as activating a warp scram, and for people who've survived a gank to be immune from bumping for 60 seconds, because according to him there's absolutely no way to get into warp while being bumped. If you're in a bigger ship, and don't have an insta, yeah it's pretty tough actually. Ganking (imo) in general is just done to be a douche and get tears so, meh. You know my opinion on it all though vOv Edit: I sense a disturbance now in the nerds...as if a thousand text walls were all now being written at once. hmm 'pretty tough' sounds like a different thing than one hundred percent inescapable false imprisonment doesn't it jonah Unless you have an insta which, let's be real, a lot of casual players don't know about. And even then, THAT's not a guarantee. Stop being an absolutist nerd.
My scenario also involved 3 optimally fitted machariels using optimal bumping technique against a freighter. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3897
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:30:00 -
[4337] - Quote
Anslo wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Anslo wrote:If you're in a bigger ship, and don't have an insta, yeah it's pretty tough actually. Ganking (imo) in general is just done to be a douche and get tears so, meh. You know my opinion on it all though vOv
Edit: I sense a disturbance now in the nerds...as if a thousand text walls were all now being written at once. hmm 'pretty tough' sounds like a different thing than one hundred percent inescapable false imprisonment doesn't it jonah Unless you have an insta which, let's be real, a lot of casual players don't know about. And even then, THAT's not a guarantee. Stop being an absolutist nerd. one hundred percent inescapable false imprisonment is a thing that's true and a fact, everyone knows that |
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5510
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:31:00 -
[4338] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:hmm 'pretty tough' sounds like a different thing than one hundred percent inescapable false imprisonment doesn't it jonah
Benny I think it does. What you you think, other Benny? "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |
Anslo
Scope Works
8673
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:33:00 -
[4339] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:one hundred percent inescapable false imprisonment is a thing that's true and a fact, everyone knows that
I edited that post btw,. Seriously, brah, Jonah is actually being a classy poster and you're kind of just shitting it up. Why so upset, friend?
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3897
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:37:00 -
[4340] - Quote
Anslo wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:one hundred percent inescapable false imprisonment is a thing that's true and a fact, everyone knows that I edited that post btw,. Seriously, brah, Jonah is actually being a classy poster and you're kind of just shitting it up. Why so upset, friend? i'm playing to my strengths
got to go where the wind takes me
treading the open road on a solo quest to be perhaps the most greatest forums poster who ever lived
it's a hard road but
i believe in myself
it's like a one hundred percent conversational quest of improvement |
|
Anslo
Scope Works
8675
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:38:00 -
[4341] - Quote
You're a bad and you should feel bad.
E: No sperg...no rage...no grr carebear lover gb2 WoW...I'm confused, scared, and slightly turned on.
|
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5511
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:45:00 -
[4342] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:My scenario also involved 3 optimally fitted machariels using optimal bumping technique against a freighter.
Why do you get to assume a 3(well, actually over a dozen)v1 fight should be easy to escape for the 1? "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |
Devils Embrace
Spidercakes Baked Goods and Industriel Servises
52
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:46:00 -
[4343] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Ignorance is not a defence.
. You missed the point. Why am I not surprised. Sorry, Jonah but I don't consider you to be very smart. i don't think you are in a position to form a proper argument and its probably best if you just leave the thread because you are only creating useless spam in the thread, as usual. You failed to address the main issue of suicide gankers taking no meaningful risks, paying no significant costs or penalties while inflicting devastating losses on others while reaping potentially incredible profits within the comfort of high-sec. The fact that suicide gankers are primarily targeting newer players and casuals is a side issue. Just go.
Meaningful risks? You mean like Sec Status or something?
It's like they usually say about fantasy MMO's and men playing female characters: "If I'm going to spend alot of time watching this character, it might as well have a good looking ass". |
Anslo
Scope Works
8675
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:51:00 -
[4344] - Quote
I mean, gankers don't really risk much. They risk a Catalyst. Oh God. The horror. What else is there? Sec status means jack **** to them. What are they risking that matches the reward of the gank, be it drop or km?
Real talk, legit question, cause I don't know the answer lel.
|
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5511
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 20:54:00 -
[4345] - Quote
Anslo wrote:I mean, gankers don't really risk much. They risk a Catalyst. Oh God. The horror. What else is there? Sec status means jack **** to them. What are they risking that matches the reward of the gank, be it drop or km?
Real talk, legit question, cause I don't know the answer lel.
Since the reward is *entirely* player determined, who cares what they risk. (Also, a Catalyst today costs more to use in a gank than a Battleship cost to use in a gank before the insurance nerf)
Now let's flip your question. Without gankers, what do haulers risk? "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24371
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 21:05:00 -
[4346] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:What does need a tweak is the CODE abuse of various game mechanics (bumping, -10 sec status, etc...) to blow up empty ships, grief new players, and look for tears, not isk. CCP just needs to intelligently incentivize them to act more like rational suicide gankers who do it as a business. Why does it need to be tweaked? There is no abuse going on and all the mechanics in question are working as intended. The incentive to treat ganking as a business is already there GÇö after all, that's how it's done right now.
Quote:Which is irrelevant if you are part of CODE and have -10 sec status. No, it's not. There is nothing special or magical about those that suddenly makes game mechanics not apply to them. They're as relevant to them as to everyone else.
Quote:I already made an argument for action. These guys obviously don't care about isk. They do care about time. Solution - make them grind more to be able to operate in highsec, which will make their ganks more selective. Solution to what? You haven't defined the problem you're trying to solve yet. And why on earth should they have to suffer from more grinding for no good reason? They already care about ISK GÇö this is obvious to anyone who has actually looked at how they operate, and it has already been explained to you why this is the case. Why is it that you are so steadfastly determined to never have any kind of attachment to reality in your arguments?
Quote:My scenario also involved 3 optimally fitted machariels using optimal bumping technique against a freighter. GǪand as proven beyond any doubt, that scenario does not live up to the description of GÇ£100% impossible to escapeGÇ¥. And you have yet to demonstrate that, even if it were true, that is actually presents any kind of problem that needs to be solved. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |
Devils Embrace
Spidercakes Baked Goods and Industriel Servises
52
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 21:07:00 -
[4347] - Quote
Killing freighters can be done legally, just check out these guys
https://zkillboard.com/corporation/98107476/
It's like they usually say about fantasy MMO's and men playing female characters: "If I'm going to spend alot of time watching this character, it might as well have a good looking ass". |
Anslo
Scope Works
8675
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 21:08:00 -
[4348] - Quote
Devils Embrace wrote:Anslo i know you played for a few years now.... you seriously dont remember back when people used battleships to gank freighters? Before the insurance nerf? No I was too busy taking on a challenge.
Real talk though, I remember. Made isk off the insurance. They nerfed dat. I was happy. I still don't see it as even risk though. It may technically be more 'expensive,' but you're (not YOU but just in general) drawing a ******* parallel here saying that a few mil isk risk on a Cata is a fair match to a couple hundred mil dunked from a freighter.
It just doesn't match in my mind. I see it as low risk, low skill. Inb4 hurrhurr much planning such skill. Try taking 15 T3's and 4 guardians against 15 Archons and 20-30+ baltecs and WINNING before talking to me about a challenge requiring skill.
Nerds.
/me drops the mic.
|
Devils Embrace
Spidercakes Baked Goods and Industriel Servises
52
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 21:10:00 -
[4349] - Quote
Anslo wrote:Devils Embrace wrote:Anslo i know you played for a few years now.... you seriously dont remember back when people used battleships to gank freighters? Before the insurance nerf? No I was too busy taking on a challenge. Real talk though, I remember. Made isk off the insurance. They nerfed dat. I was happy. I still don't see it as even risk though. It may technically be more 'expensive,' but you're (not YOU but just in general) drawing a ******* parallel here saying that a few mil isk risk on a Cata is a fair match to a couple hundred mil dunked from a freighter. It just doesn't match in my mind. I see it as low risk, low skill. Inb4 hurrhurr much planning such skill. Try taking 15 T3's and 4 guardians against 15 Archons and 20-30+ baltecs and WINNING before talking to me about a challenge requiring skill. Nerds. /me drops the mic.
I would love to see the battle report on that. Honestly
It's like they usually say about fantasy MMO's and men playing female characters: "If I'm going to spend alot of time watching this character, it might as well have a good looking ass". |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24371
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 21:12:00 -
[4350] - Quote
Anslo wrote:Funny. I don't see gankers and grr carebear types using this argument when speaking against highsec. I see the opposite. So what is it? Rewards for bears and such should be nerfed? Or left alone cause it's 'player determined?' Both. You see, some of their rewards are player-determined and can be left alone just fine. Many others are mechanically determined and could stand to be nerfed due to the minute risks involved in acquiring them.
Quote:...did you just compare a Cata to a BS for ganking? Yes. It's an apt comparison since one was the cheap ganking tool of choice before the nerf, and the other was what replaced it in response to that nerf. How is this comparison odd to you?
Quote:Nice try brah. Stop being absolutist. I never said get rid of gankers. Not once. I said what do they risk? Haulers risk their load and income. Gankers risk...what? Time, ISK, income, future ability to operate. And even if those risks were low (they're not), so what? But it in the balance against the utterly minuscule risk that the haulers face, and it becomes fairly obvious that the risks the gankers face reduces the risk the haulers face to pitifully low levels. The haulers could do with a bit more risk, and a good way of making that happen is to take some of the pressure off of the gankers. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 157 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |