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) |
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
13
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 14:50:36 -
[7501] - Quote
Omna Mais au contraire, mon cher ami!
I have in no way suggested my argument is driven by consensus.
"This is the best deal afk cloaky camper lovers can get:
"Introducing command burst style charges to cloaks (equivalent of a 5 hour timer). Effects 0-sec on a daily basis. Order of magnitude indicated:
100ds less afk cloaky camped systems (a double digit % reduction) 10s afk cloaky campers killed due to human error (becoming uncloaked after 5 hours and probbed down) 1000nds more ships in space 100ds more ratters (and others) killed. Higher bounty revenue (double digit % increase)"
" 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
Art Of Explosions Hole Control
284
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 15:49:09 -
[7502] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Omna Mais au contraire, mon cher ami!
I have in no way suggested my argument is driven by consensus.
"This is the best deal afk cloaky camper lovers can get:
"Introducing command burst style charges to cloaks (equivalent of a 5 hour timer). Effects 0-sec on a daily basis. Order of magnitude indicated:
100ds less afk cloaky camped systems (a double digit % reduction) 10s afk cloaky campers killed due to human error (becoming uncloaked after 5 hours and probbed down) 1000nds more ships in space 100ds more ratters (and others) killed. Higher bounty revenue (double digit % increase)"
Wait, did you just admit that your idea is just something you came up with and that it has zero evidence or fact to back it up?
Thank you for confirming that. We can just isn't l ignore your ideas from now on as works of fiction.
Wormholer for life.
|
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
13
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 15:54:14 -
[7503] - Quote
Ratpack "We can't just isn't I ignore"
Functional literacy is a worthy goal, my dearest friend
I am sure both your reading comprehension and writing skills will surpass basic thresholds one day soon!
" 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
Art Of Explosions Hole Control
284
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 16:20:45 -
[7504] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Ratpack "We can just isn't I ignore"
Functional literacy is a worthy goal, my dearest friend
I am sure both your reading comprehension and writing skills will surpass basic thresholds one day soon!
At least I retain the ability to see my errors, admit it and fix them. You on the other hand are slaved by your enormous ego which stops you from seeing and admitting your mistakes as well as listening to the echo-chamber in the empty space between your ears.
Wormholer for life.
|
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
13
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 16:22:14 -
[7505] - Quote
Ratpack You have the right to your opinion as always, my dearest friend.
Anywho, as we shift back on topic:
"This is the best deal afk cloaky camper lovers can get:
"Introducing command burst style charges to cloaks (equivalent of a 5 hour timer). Effects 0-sec on a daily basis. Order of magnitude indicated:
100ds less afk cloaky camped systems (a double digit % reduction) 10s afk cloaky campers killed due to human error (becoming uncloaked after 5 hours and probbed down) 1000nds more ships in space 100ds more ratters (and others) killed. Higher bounty revenue (double digit % increase)"
" 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
Art Of Explosions Hole Control
284
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 16:33:03 -
[7506] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Ratpack You have the right to your opinion as always, my dearest friend.
Anywho, as we shift back on topic:
"This is the best deal afk cloaky camper lovers can get:
"Introducing command burst style charges to cloaks (equivalent of a 5 hour timer). Effects 0-sec on a daily basis. Order of magnitude indicated:
100ds less afk cloaky camped systems (a double digit % reduction) 10s afk cloaky campers killed due to human error (becoming uncloaked after 5 hours and probbed down) 1000nds more ships in space 100ds more ratters (and others) killed. Higher bounty revenue (double digit % increase)"
Again, repeating your fantasy does not make it real no matter how much you hope. I'd suggest medication to cure those delusion as they seem to be controlling you.
Wormholer for life.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5443
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 16:58:46 -
[7507] - Quote
I have yet to see Brokk/Jerghul give a serious reply to the concept that local kills content. A roaming gang comes through, because of local people dock up and stay docked until that gang leaves. Guy comes into system and cloaks up, because his presence is seen in local, people dock up and stay docked up.
Without local this would not, and could not happen.
Now, maybe simply removing local is too much, but the notion that removing AFK cloaking and there will be an explosion of content is just erroneous nonsense being spewed by a sockpuppet.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5443
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 17:03:18 -
[7508] - Quote
Wander Prian wrote:Jerghul wrote:Ratpack You have the right to your opinion as always, my dearest friend.
Anywho, as we shift back on topic:
"This is the best deal afk cloaky camper lovers can get:
"Introducing command burst style charges to cloaks (equivalent of a 5 hour timer). Effects 0-sec on a daily basis. Order of magnitude indicated:
100ds less afk cloaky camped systems (a double digit % reduction) 10s afk cloaky campers killed due to human error (becoming uncloaked after 5 hours and probbed down) 1000nds more ships in space 100ds more ratters (and others) killed. Higher bounty revenue (double digit % increase)"
Again, repeating your fantasy does not make it real no matter how much you hope. I'd suggest medication to cure those delusion as they seem to be controlling you.
Do we have any reason to believe any of this? First off my guess is we'd have zero AFK cloakers killed as it would simply stop. As for the 1000's more ships in space, I find this an example of the Big Lie (I would expect no less from a sockpuppet). Tell a big enough lie and everyone starts debating the size of the lie vs. pointing out the lie itself. What we have here is nothing other than a liar running around displaying his fantasies.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5443
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 17:05:40 -
[7509] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Jerghul wrote:Omnathious Au contraire, my dear friend.
My analytical approach assumes CCP will in fact make much more intrusive nerf to the cloaking modules.
As should have been clear in "This is the best deal afk cloaky camper lovers can get". The actual deal will very likely be far worse.
Again, you still act as if you have support for this. Also repeating the same bad idea doesn't make it a good idea. It just makes it a bad idea being repeated.
And yet another technique. Tell a lie often enough and soon people start to accept it.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
712
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 17:11:15 -
[7510] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Do we have any reason to believe any of this? First off my guess is we'd have zero AFK cloakers killed as it would simply stop. As for the 1000's more ships in space, I find this an example of the Big Lie (I would expect no less from a sockpuppet). Tell a big enough lie and everyone starts debating the size of the lie vs. pointing out the lie itself. What we have here is nothing other than a liar running around displaying his fantasies.
Of course not. The fact that I gave a perfectly valid solution to protect from AFK cloaking and asked how often Jerghul's ratters/miners follow it, then he point-blank stopped replying to me says volumes.
That's the advantage of debating online, I guess. When you're proven wrong you can just stop replying. |
|
Wander Prian
Art Of Explosions Hole Control
286
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 17:13:52 -
[7511] - Quote
Sonya Corvinus wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Do we have any reason to believe any of this? First off my guess is we'd have zero AFK cloakers killed as it would simply stop. As for the 1000's more ships in space, I find this an example of the Big Lie (I would expect no less from a sockpuppet). Tell a big enough lie and everyone starts debating the size of the lie vs. pointing out the lie itself. What we have here is nothing other than a liar running around displaying his fantasies. Of course not. The fact that I gave a perfectly valid solution to protect from AFK cloaking and asked how often Jerghul's ratters/miners follow it, then he point-blank stopped replying to me says volumes. That's the advantage of debating online, I guess. When you're proven wrong you can just stop replying.
He cannot answer it as it would require him to admit being wrong and he just cannot do that as the lord and savior of nullbears everywhere
Wormholer for life.
|
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
13
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 17:24:15 -
[7512] - Quote
Sonya Sister, dearest
I have in fact responded to your query quite a number of times in my 500+ posts in this thread. A quick recap
I have no idea of the %, but it is far less than 100% Null-sec uses peak time for epic PvP, not wormhole hybrid PvE/PvP Duplicating the wormhole lifestyle is not desirable in nullsec as most players find it extremely unappealing. Players opt for not undocking ahead of adapting wormhole techniques You cannot change players without rendering nullsec as dead or deader than wormhole space. You cannot remove local without rendering nullsec as dead or deader than wormhole space. Lots of game mechanisms can be introduced to assure that null-sec ratters are pvp ready You do not like any of them. As lengthy discussions have shown.
Today's youth. *Sigh*
" 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
Art Of Explosions Hole Control
288
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 17:24:56 -
[7513] - Quote
Jerghul
The only difference between our posts is that I call out your bullshit and say what I think about you and your ideas directly. You on the other hand keep spewing bullshit like the rest of us breath and think you are above everyone else with your thinly veiled insults.
Don't start something if you cannot handle the counter-attack.
Wormholer for life.
|
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
13
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 17:31:40 -
[7514] - Quote
Ratpack My dearest friend.
Has any of my posts ever suggested that I care in the slightest what you think about me?
I do care about keeping the thread on topic. And while I can happily repost to keep the thread on track, it is a bit annoying to have to cut through the adhom chaff on a continual basis.
Its been quite some time since you have had any constructive thoughts on the thread topic. I always respond seriously to comments with actual merit. At least for the first several times they are repeated.
Though my being dismissive at times is of course in part a generational thing. Reading was different in the olden days. We tend to remember what we read and find it vexing when the younguns do not.
" 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)
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5447
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 17:33:13 -
[7515] - Quote
I thought we were waiting for moderators.
Just can't stick to your word.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
713
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 17:33:39 -
[7516] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Sonya Sister, dearest
I have in fact responded to your query quite a number of times in my 500+ posts in this thread. A quick recap
I have no idea of the %, but it is far less than 100% Null-sec uses peak time for epic PvP, not wormhole hybrid PvE/PvP Duplicating the wormhole lifestyle is not desirable in nullsec as most players find it extremely unappealing. Players opt for not undocking ahead of adapting wormhole techniques You cannot change players without rendering nullsec as dead or deader than wormhole space. You cannot remove local without rendering nullsec as dead or deader than wormhole space. Lots of game mechanisms can be introduced to assure that null-sec ratters are pvp ready You do not like any of them. As lengthy discussions have shown.
Today's youth. *Sigh*
Looks like you simply joined a crappy group of players. I'd advise you pick a better corp if this is your experience.
If that % is less than 100%, you need to kick people from your corp and find better players.
And why do you keep mentioning PvE in WHs? Barely any WHers PvE compared to nullseccers. NS in its current form is carebear PvE with a few large fleet battles mixed in. If you want small gang PvP (which is the only non-trolling thing I believe you've said in the last few pages), leave null. It's not designed for that. You want WHs or lowsec. |
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
13
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 17:39:47 -
[7517] - Quote
Sonya Sister, dearest.
Its not about me. I have mentioned that many times already. I will admit to ratting recently as I like crimson harvest. But it generally is not my cup of tea at all. Nor is it about using peak times for PvE (which is the underlying assumption of your suggestion).
afk cloaky camping kills content in nullsec. It keeps ships docked up and much safer than they could ever be undocked (barring being afk and cloaked of course).
" 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)
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5447
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 17:43:44 -
[7518] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Ratpack My dearest friend.
Has any of my posts ever suggested that I care in the slightest what you think about me?
I do care about keeping the thread on topic. And while I can happily repost to keep the thread on track, it is a bit annoying to have to cut through the adhom chaff on a continual basis.
Its been quite some time since you have had any constructive thoughts on the thread topic. I always respond seriously to comments with actual merit. At least for the first several times they are repeated.
Though my being dismissive at times is of course in part a generational thing. Reading was different in the olden days. We tend to remember what we read and find it vexing when the younguns do not.
And ad hominem is an attack simply on the person. Pointing out you are using fabrications is not an ad hominem. Calling you a fabricator is also not an ad hominem either.
You are talking about an explosion of content when there is every reason to believe that there will not be such an explosion because the reason for AFK cloaking and people docking up generally is still there: local.
Why is AFK cloaking effective: Local. Players see the AFK cloaker in local and know he is there with 100% certainty. So the easy and most often used strategy is to dock up.
When else to people dock up? When a roaming gang comes through. Intel channels, which rely on local, and local in any given system give the inhabitants plenty of warning that hostiles are present and to get safe.
So your little fabrication of:
No more AFK cloaking => Massively more ships in space => Massively more content.
is, at best dubious, because local is still there to kill that content.
Local is the content killer. Local causes people to dock up when hostiles are present. Local is what makes AFK cloaking so efficacious. Replacing local with another means of gathering intel that can be attacked could be a better path to providing more content.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
713
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 17:47:11 -
[7519] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Sonya Sister, dearest.
Its not about me. I have mentioned that many times already. I will admit to ratting recently as I like crimson harvest. But it generally is not my cup of tea at all. Nor is it about using peak times for PvE (which is the underlying assumption of your suggestion).
afk cloaky camping kills content in nullsec. It keeps ships docked up and much safer than they could ever be undocked (barring being afk and cloaked of course).
OK, At the risk that you're simply trolling still, I'm going to actually answer seriously. It keeps ships docked because carebears have taken over null. Change that attitude, don't nerf the game.
Getting rid of local changes that attitude. Why would someone stay docked if they didn't have reliable local? A properly run corp/alliance (read, standardized ship naming convention, requirements to be in fleet and on comms, required group PvE-ing when multiple people are online) having no local is just as safe as the game is now. It just takes...effort by PvE-ers.
That's the heart of the issue. I'm advocating for changes that force attitude changes of carebears. You're advocating for nerfs to game mechanics to protect carebears more. In a PvP-centric game, why would I endorse changes that do nothing but buff risk free PvE? |
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
13
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 17:50:57 -
[7520] - Quote
Ratpack We will just have to await the moderators verdict on that.
Anywho.
"Introducing command burst style charges to cloaks (equivalent of a 5 hour timer). Effects 0-sec on a daily basis. Order of magnitude indicated:
100ds less afk cloaky camped systems (a double digit % reduction) 10s afk cloaky campers killed due to human error (becoming uncloaked after 5 hours and probbed down) 1000nds more ships in space 100ds more ratters (and others) killed. Higher bounty revenue (double digit % increase)"
Removing local without replacing it with other real time information mechanisms will leave null-sec as dead or deader than wormhole space. The perception of safety can only be fostered under that condition. Players will undock far less often if the perception of safety is missing.
Removing local kills content so effectively it would render afk cloaky camping redundant.
" 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)
|
|
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
13
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 17:57:57 -
[7521] - Quote
Sonya I don't buy "the players are broken" argument. We will have to agree to disagree on this point.
Sure there is a high degree of entitlement in Eve.
I am not suggesting it be catered to and would happily see bounties nerfed to keep isk/tick after subtracting ship loses stable - or even decreased.
I want more ships in null-sec space so players have the opportunity to screw up and lose the ships they are flying.
" 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)
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
713
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 18:01:58 -
[7522] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Sonya I don't buy "the players are broken" argument. We will have to agree to disagree on this point.
Sure there is a high degree of entitlement in Eve.
I am not suggesting it be catered to and would happily see bounties nerfed to keep isk/tick after subtracting ship loses stable - or even decreased.
I want more ships in null-sec space so players have the opportunity to screw up and lose the ships they are flying.
Your idea would have the exact opposite effect. Getting rid of local and training players to be less carebearish gets more ships in space.
I still have a hard time believing you want more PvP targets, given your idea makes PvE-ing in null even safer than it already is. If you really wanted to have a lot of targets for small gang hunting, you'd move to LS or to a WH with a null or low static. You'd have more targets than you know what to do with. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5448
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 18:04:59 -
[7523] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Ratpack We will just have to await the moderators verdict on that.
Anywho.
"Introducing command burst style charges to cloaks (equivalent of a 5 hour timer). Effects 0-sec on a daily basis. Order of magnitude indicated:
100ds less afk cloaky camped systems (a double digit % reduction) 10s afk cloaky campers killed due to human error (becoming uncloaked after 5 hours and probbed down) 1000nds more ships in space 100ds more ratters (and others) killed. Higher bounty revenue (double digit % increase)"
Removing local without replacing it with other real time information mechanisms will leave null-sec as dead or deader than wormhole space. The perception of safety can only be fostered under that condition. Players will undock far less often if the perception of safety is missing.
Removing local kills content so effectively it would render afk cloaky camping redundant.
So you have no meaningful response other than to spam your earlier post.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
13
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 18:21:07 -
[7524] - Quote
Sonya That is demonstratably wrong.
You are describing a wormhole like environment that players in general find extremely unappealing.
I want to increase the total number of ship hours in null-sec space.
Increase total ship hours Decrease ships lost per ship hour Increase total ships lost Decrease bounties to keep total net isk revenue stable (revenue a function of ship hours ratting)
Ratpack You may want to read that last post of mine another time or two.
" 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)
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
713
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 18:33:00 -
[7525] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Sonya That is demonstratably wrong.
You are describing a wormhole like environment that players in general find extremely unappealing.
I want to increase the total number of ship hours in null-sec space.
Increase total ship hours Decrease ships lost per ship hour Increase total ships lost Decrease bounties to keep total net isk revenue stable (revenue a function of ship hours ratting)
Ratpack You may want to read that last post of mine another time or two.
They don't find it unappealing, they have never tried it. The complexity of the game in general is unappealing until you get over the NPE. The typical NSer needs to go through the NPE for WH type living. I've yet to find someone who I introduced WH PvP to who didn't love it. Have you?
Also, NS is about empire building. Why should you get intel for free? Build an array that gives you intel as well as gives you the ability to disrupt cloaked ships. If I can take out that array you shouldn't have a right to the intel local gives you. |
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
13
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 18:41:03 -
[7526] - Quote
Sonya They have not tried it because they find wormhole space unappealing.
Ultimately, that answers why consistent real time information has to be free for individual pilots in nullsec.
The alternative is rendering null sec as dead, or deader than wormhole space.
But to sum up. Our differences seem to be philosophical.
I want more ships undocked in nullsec. You do not want that.
" 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)
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
713
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 18:57:51 -
[7527] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Sonya They have not tried it because they find wormhole space unappealing.
Ultimately, that answers why consistent real time information has to be free for individual pilots in nullsec.
The alternative is rendering null sec as dead, or deader than wormhole space.
But to sum up. Our differences seem to be philosophical.
I want more ships undocked in nullsec. You do not want that.
How do they know it's unappealing if they haven't tried it? There was a time back in the day I had never left high sec. How would I know if I found low, null or WHs appealing or not until I tried it?
More ships undocked isn't the goal. More ships that you can get into fights with is the goal. Your idea simply puts PvE ships on the field that have absolutely no chance of being caught. So, less fights, more resources pouring into the market, and noone to buy them since less ships are exploding. That's not exactly good for the game. |
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
13
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 19:06:04 -
[7528] - Quote
Sonya I find worms unappealing. Without actually ever tasting one.
We can try again. Wormhole space does not appeal to most Eve players, so they have not tried it.
Yay semantics. Words mean something.
More ships undocked may not be your goal. But it is my goal.
Because each ship in space can be caught if hunted. All that is needed is for the pilot to screw up.
I am operating with a 3% screw up rate. The more ships in space, the more pilots will screw up.
Human error is the supreme content provider in null-sec.
Its ok that you do not understand it. And then of course it follows that you cannot understand my argument.
" 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)
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5451
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 19:25:13 -
[7529] - Quote
Sonya Corvinus wrote:Jerghul wrote:Sonya They have not tried it because they find wormhole space unappealing.
Ultimately, that answers why consistent real time information has to be free for individual pilots in nullsec.
The alternative is rendering null sec as dead, or deader than wormhole space.
But to sum up. Our differences seem to be philosophical.
I want more ships undocked in nullsec. You do not want that. How do they know it's unappealing if they haven't tried it? There was a time back in the day I had never left high sec. How would I know if I found low, null or WHs appealing or not until I tried it? More ships undocked isn't the goal. More ships that you can get into fights with is the goal. Your idea simply puts PvE ships on the field that have absolutely no chance of being caught. So, less fights, more resources pouring into the market, and noone to buy them since less ships are exploding. That's not exactly good for the game.
Exactly we want more content, not just ships undocked avoiding each other.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
714
|
Posted - 2016.11.01 19:27:00 -
[7530] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Sonya I find worms unappealing. Without actually ever tasting one.
We can try again. Wormhole space does not appeal to most Eve players, so they have not tried it.
Yay semantics. Words mean something.
More ships undocked may not be your goal. But it is my goal.
Because each ship in space can be caught if hunted. All that is needed is for the pilot to screw up.
I am operating with a 3% screw up rate. The more ships in space, the more pilots will screw up.
Human error is the supreme content provider in null-sec.
Its ok that you do not understand it. And then of course it follows that you cannot understand my argument.
How do you know it's unappealing space? What criteria are you using to make any of these decisions? Be specific please. You're one of those people who immediately puts salt on their food at a restaurant before tasting it first, aren't you?
Human error isn't a hard counter to an in-game mechanic. AFK cloaking is a hard counter to the 100% safe intel of local. Stop pretending this is about you hunting and not about you wanting to be able to escape hunters 100% of the time in null. |
|
|
|
|
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 |