Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
StonerPhReaK
Herb Men
245
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 13:12:05 -
[31] - Quote
Just what i needed before work. Keep doin the saviors work code dudes and dudettes.
Signature Removal in Progress, Estimated time of completion? Neva
|
Blancandrin
Servants of the Shard
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 14:22:11 -
[32] - Quote
Hey - another vote for James315 as the 'Ultimate carebear'.
You've got to admire the 'New Order', they know their stuff: "When channels of information cannot be completely closed, they can be rendered useless by filling them with disinformation, effectively lowering their signal-to-noise ratio and discrediting the opposition by association with many easily disproved false claims."
Black Pedro wrote:I am not sure what you are hoping to accomplish. Somehow decrease the reputation of the New Order? Hope to get CODE. members upset that some anonymous forum alt called James 315 a 'carebear'? Your arguments are nonsensical and purely semantic in any case. If you feel better about yourself, please feel free to call James 315 and the New Order "Ultimate Carebears".
Ok, I'll try to make it clearer:
- I'm asserting James315's 'New Order' is not at risk of involuntary loss of acquired resources.
- The carebear thing is simply a rhetorical device to attract attention.
- Any decrease in reputation or upset is only 'collateral damage' and of no real consequence.
- I'm not suggesting any specific measures anti-ganking or vice-versa.
If you take the time to look past the disinformation you've got to admire the 'New Order' for basic truth and honesty. Despite a lot of goading, the 'New Order' associates have yet to provide a counter example to my assertion and have accepted the 'Ultimate carebear' label. They have tacitly acknowledged the truth of the assertion I've put.
---
If your interested in the previous SRP reference. A good follow-up article is SRP is killing Eve.
PS: Of course I'm an alt - this is Eve - why would I expose myself to James315 and 'New Order' hate, they do have a reputation... |
Azov Rassau
The Hornets Cartel
188
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 14:24:24 -
[33] - Quote
I think this is another "I'm bored so I'll start a thread about code in C&P" thread.
However, it's worth answering the OP because at least he elaborates (unlike Dryson's hilarious middle east/high sector theories).
Blancandrin wrote:there is no risk Everybody takes a risk whenever they undock. Everybody: gankers, awoxers, wardeccers, miners, Okra pilots, haulers, supreme leaders, pirates, incursion runners... It's always better if those risks are generated by players, of course.
There are already good solutions in-game. Yes, because creating these threads is like writing "I ate lasagna at lunch" on a paper and then throwing that paper into trash. Seraph IX Basarab sums it up in another thread:
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:I don't understand this point of making threads. When someone does something I don't like I shoot them. Then I ask myself are they still doing it? If yes, keep shooting. What's the problem? This brings me to my point: If you want to see more risks for gankers, then try to create that risk. In other words, be the change you want to see. A very simple yet effective example: There was this ganker called Currin Trading who used to spam some things in Local while flying his outlaw (-10) Thrasher to find a target to gank. I didn't like that, so I followed him with my insta-lock Skiff, predicted his route, tackled him in Poinen and let the facpo do the rest. Quite simple, isn't it? But effective! That's why I like to give this example. His gank operation was ruined, and I was only 0.2 seconds away from pointing his pod too (next time buddy, next time.. ).
I suggest you, for example, to sit at a gate in the Amarr-Jita route, and wait for the red blinkies, or hop on a Griffin and jam out Catalysts, or gank bumpers/gank scouts or any type of action like that. There are some people who do these already. By doing so, you simply create a risk for the gankers. A risk of failure. A risk of additional loss. This website by Astecus can help too, if you're interested.
I hope I brought a clear answer to your question. Tell me If I didn't. These were my opinions about this "risk for gankers" subject.
Omar Alharazaad wrote:Here we go again. And I'm out of popcorn. I'm out of popcorn since 2012.
Anti-Ganking Fun: www.gankerjamming.com
The Hornets Cartel recrute - rejoignez le fun et les ransoms!
|
Blancandrin
Servants of the Shard
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 14:37:29 -
[34] - Quote
Azov Rassau wrote:Lots of good stuff.
Thanks mate. I like your advice.
It goes part way, but what I'd really like is a mechanism where they are forced to lose stuff in some sort of involuntary manner. Not stuff they were planning on junking for some reason.
Any ideas?
Was the boredom that obvious? Sorry. |
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
2151
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 14:40:52 -
[35] - Quote
If being:
1. Well coordinated 2. Well supplied 3. Well informed 4. Skilled 5. Led by good FCs 6. Well versed in game mechanics 7. Backed up by friends
makes CODE. carebears, then, really, who in EvE isn't a carebear?
Relatively Notorious By Association
My Many Misadventures
A brief history of C&P Thunderdome
|
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
2151
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 14:43:44 -
[36] - Quote
Blancandrin wrote:It goes part way, but what I'd really like is a mechanism where they are forced to lose stuff in some sort of involuntary manner. Not stuff they were planning on junking for some reason.
Any ideas? Entertaining your notion here for a moment, what additional form of loss would you propose for suicide gankers? They've already lost their ship (without insurance), approximately 50% of their fitted modules (depending on how well they've paid the loot fairy and how quick AG folks are to loot blue wrecks), and are already severely restricted while operating in hisec (at least the -10s are).
What more could your realistically ask of them?
Relatively Notorious By Association
My Many Misadventures
A brief history of C&P Thunderdome
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
3055
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 14:45:12 -
[37] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Apparently doing well and having a viable business plan makes you a carebear? It's like how that one guy insists that because I don't lose ships for several months at a time I am bad at pvp. Must be really bad at wars if that's the case cause I haven't lost a ship to a war target since June 2012.
Seriously though taking risks and being consistently successful in spite of those risks means you're good at what you are doing It does not mean that those risks are nonexistent.
These kinds of "You have accounted for and taken steps to mitigate all the risks involved, therefore there are no risks involved!" arguments are not logically sound. |
Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
2461
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 14:45:59 -
[38] - Quote
Blancandrin wrote:Azov Rassau wrote:Lots of good stuff. Thanks mate. I like your advice. It goes part way, but what I'd really like is a mechanism where they are forced to lose stuff in some sort of involuntary manner. Not stuff they were planning on junking for some reason. Any ideas?
Was the boredom that obvious? Sorry.
Those bits are already in place though. You or those who wish to inflict loss on them need to make it happen. In the ordinary course of their operations this is unlikely, due to the reasons already posted. It's going to take a cunning and well executed plan to make it happen, but it's not outside the realm of possibility.
Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.
|
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
1411
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 14:51:01 -
[39] - Quote
Blancandrin wrote:- I'm asserting James315's 'New Order' is not at risk of involuntary loss of acquired resource
As I explained above no one in this game, from the Mittani on down to the lowliest highsec mining corporation is subject to involuntary loss of acquired resources. Stuff in stations and ISK are safe from other players and always have been. Why should the New Order be any different?
Blancandrin wrote:- The carebear thing is simply a rhetorical device to attract attention.
It is not. If you have some time read Manifesto I and Manifesto II by the Saviour (or listen Sasha excellent audio recording of Manifeso II) to see where the New Order is coming from. It is very much based on ideology that carebear-ism, the risk-averse kind anyway, is detrimental to this game. The New Order is a player initiated effort to counter those who wish to see risk drained out of this competitive PvP sandbox game.
Blancandrin wrote:
- Any decrease in reputation or upset is only 'collateral damage' and of no real consequence.
No one cares what an anonymous forum alt says. After three-years The New Order is used to scorn and attacks. Don't worry about that.
Blancandrin wrote: If you take the time to look past the disinformation you've got to admire the 'New Order' for basic truth and honesty. Despite a lot of goading, the 'New Order' associates have yet to provide a counter example to my assertion and have accepted the 'Ultimate carebear' label. They have tacitly acknowledged the truth of the assertion I've put.
You can label the New Order whatever you want. I have explained clearly to you why you are incorrect, but you are welcome use whatever terms you need to soothe your ego.
Let me try one last time. The New Order has made it their mission to affect the gameplay of classic highsec carebear, that is players who do not wish their gameplay disturbed. Since CCP has made it a feature of the game that such play is impossible - that everyone-is-at-risk thing we started off discussing - the New Order is actually just enforcing the risk vs. reward design of the game.
So you see, the New Order always wins. Either they blow up these carebears affecting their game, or force these carebears to change how they play they game, taking precautions and actually interacting with other players. Interestingly, this is exactly why CCP has enabled suicide ganking in highsec - to force players to adjust their gameplay to account for the risk from other players, presumably because they think this makes for a better and more interesting game.
Seems like everyone, not just the New Order, wins.
What this has to do with the title of "Ultimate Carebear" you have created is still beyond me.
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
24828
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 14:52:05 -
[40] - Quote
Azov Rassau wrote:There was this ganker called Currin Trading who used to spam some things in Local while flying his outlaw (-10) Thrasher to find a target to gank. I didn't like that, so I followed him with my insta-lock Skiff, predicted his route, tackled him in Poinen and let the facpo do the rest. Quite simple, isn't it? But effective! That's why I like to give this example. His gank operation was ruined, and I was only 0.2 seconds away from pointing his pod too (next time buddy, next time.. ) Heh this is amusing on another level if you're familiar with who Currin Trading is.
Civilized behaviour is knowing that violence is barbaric, but paying other people to do it is business.
Nil mortifi sine lucre.
|
|
Azov Rassau
The Hornets Cartel
192
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 15:17:44 -
[41] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Heh this is amusing on another level if you're familiar with who Currin Trading is. Yeah, I do know (confirmed by his Biography too), but after all, what really matters is the main philosophy of that simple engagement example: if you don't like them, shoot them.
Anti-Ganking Fun: www.gankerjamming.com
The Hornets Cartel recrute - rejoignez le fun et les ransoms!
|
Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
2462
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 16:06:31 -
[42] - Quote
^ shoot the things they don't want you to shoot also. Unintended losses? Gank that bowhead! Espionage to find out who they is, and get all sexy with their hauler alts. Beat them at their own game. Ultimately though you are going to have to exert at least as much effort and exercise at least as much intelligence to inflict meaningful loss on them. This means dedication, coordination and collaboration. Without it nothing of consequence will happen. It's not on CCP to change things in this matter, it's up to the players who actually care enough to implement a change through force. (and by force I'm not talking just physical)
Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
3057
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 16:35:09 -
[43] - Quote
No CCP must alter the game to penalize people for doing things I arbitrarily think are bad. |
Bellatrix Invicta
The Conference Elite CODE.
173
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 16:41:34 -
[44] - Quote
Yes yes yes. Welcome back from your "hiatus". Now, before you do anything more foolish than you already have (good luck), we should talk about your permit.
Or rather, your lack thereof. Why do you not have a permit?
If you think you've won, think again.
The CODE always wins.
|
Anne Dieu-le-veut
Natl Assn for the Advancement of Criminal People
218
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 17:23:46 -
[45] - Quote
Bronson Hughes wrote:Blancandrin wrote:It goes part way, but what I'd really like is a mechanism where they are forced to lose stuff in some sort of involuntary manner. Not stuff they were planning on junking for some reason.
Any ideas? Entertaining your notion here for a moment, what additional form of loss would you propose for suicide gankers? They've already lost their ship (without insurance), approximately 50% of their fitted modules (depending on how well they've paid the loot fairy and how quick AG folks are to loot blue wrecks), and are already severely restricted while operating in hisec (at least the -10s are). What more could your realistically ask of them?
You don't really expect an answer, do you? |
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
2154
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 17:33:07 -
[46] - Quote
Anne Dieu-le-veut wrote:Bronson Hughes wrote:Blancandrin wrote:It goes part way, but what I'd really like is a mechanism where they are forced to lose stuff in some sort of involuntary manner. Not stuff they were planning on junking for some reason.
Any ideas? Entertaining your notion here for a moment, what additional form of loss would you propose for suicide gankers? They've already lost their ship (without insurance), approximately 50% of their fitted modules (depending on how well they've paid the loot fairy and how quick AG folks are to loot blue wrecks), and are already severely restricted while operating in hisec (at least the -10s are). What more could your realistically ask of them? You don't really expect an answer, do you? I rarely let my expectations dampen my curiosity. I'd genuinely like to hear what he had in mind; whether I get to or not is entirely up to him and I'm okay with that.
Relatively Notorious By Association
My Many Misadventures
A brief history of C&P Thunderdome
|
Blancandrin
Servants of the Shard
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:04:25 -
[47] - Quote
Bellatrix Invicta wrote:Yes yes yes. Welcome back from your "hiatus". Now, before you do anything more foolish than you already have (good luck), we should talk about your permit.
Or rather, your lack thereof. Why do you not have a permit?
Do you sell hunting permits? How much for 'New Order' shareholders, mining permit holders, agents and alts?
Seriously, according to your code, I rarely do things where I need you permit. |
Blancandrin
Servants of the Shard
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:12:12 -
[48] - Quote
I'm really impressed by quality of the posts and time you have spent - thanks guys.
If your interested, I think the best way to introduce a bit more risk for James315 and his 'New Order' is to target the source of their funds. When I last played, you'd simply target the industrial base (POS, Moons, Miners etc etc). There was a direct link which seems to be missing with James315 and his 'New Order'. Still the obvious targets are the published shareholders and permit holders.
As far as game mechanisms go, nothing to the game play mechanism, but it would be really interesting to access individual/corp net worth and look at isk transfers between players/corps/alliances. (Or maybe not, perhaps a little too incriminating.)
I'm going back into the game.
Thanks all |
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
2163
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:52:25 -
[49] - Quote
Blancandrin wrote:I'm really impressed by quality of the posts and time you have spent - thanks guys.
If your interested, I think the best way to introduce a bit more risk for James315 and his 'New Order' is to target the source of their funds. When I last played, you'd simply target the industrial base (POS, Moons, Miners etc etc). There was a direct link which seems to be missing with James315 and his 'New Order'. Still the obvious targets are the published shareholders and permit holders.
As far as game mechanisms go, nothing to the game play mechanism, but it would be really interesting to access individual/corp net worth and look at isk transfers between players/corps/alliances. (Or maybe not, perhaps a little too incriminating.)
I'm going back into the game.
Thanks all So, basically figure out who's supplying them and wardec them or suicide gank them?
Why don't you do that? Or find folks who want to?
Relatively Notorious By Association
My Many Misadventures
A brief history of C&P Thunderdome
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
3062
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:08:27 -
[50] - Quote
Just target permit holders. Make it more dangerous to hold a permit than it is not to have one. |
|
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite CODE.
1508
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 06:04:42 -
[51] - Quote
Blancandrin wrote:I'm really impressed by quality of the posts and time you have spent - thanks guys.
If your interested, I think the best way to introduce a bit more risk for James315 and his 'New Order' is to target the source of their funds. When I last played, you'd simply target the industrial base (POS, Moons, Miners etc etc). There was a direct link which seems to be missing with James315 and his 'New Order'. Still the obvious targets are the published shareholders and permit holders.
As far as game mechanisms go, nothing to the game play mechanism, but it would be really interesting to access individual/corp net worth and look at isk transfers between players/corps/alliances. (Or maybe not, perhaps a little too incriminating.)
I'm going back into the game.
Thanks all Ok, let us all wait until someone else is targeting them.....
Still waiting....
SOMEONE DO SOMETHING?!?!
the Code ALWAYS wins
Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
|
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
1412
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 06:17:59 -
[52] - Quote
Blancandrin wrote:I'm really impressed by quality of the posts and time you have spent - thanks guys.
If your interested, I think the best way to introduce a bit more risk for James315 and his 'New Order' is to target the source of their funds. When I last played, you'd simply target the industrial base (POS, Moons, Miners etc etc). There was a direct link which seems to be missing with James315 and his 'New Order'. Still the obvious targets are the published shareholders and permit holders.
As far as game mechanisms go, nothing to the game play mechanism, but it would be really interesting to access individual/corp net worth and look at isk transfers between players/corps/alliances. (Or maybe not, perhaps a little too incriminating.)
I'm going back into the game.
Thanks all Have fun.
You don't need a mechanism to see who is transferring ISK to the New Order as James 315 posts it for the world to see: http://www.minerbumping.com/p/shareholders.html
Clearly some of those are alts you will have trouble identifying, but the problem you are going to have is that the New Order has support from a broad range of the population - many people from many backgrounds support the goals of the New Order. You will not find a simple target providing most of the funds.
Further, I think you overestimate the value of that donated ISK. Even a glance at the killboard shows 1.7T in losses for CODE. while James 315 has only paid out ~650B, and that SRP is open to everyone, not just alliance members. Many (most?) established gankers tend to fund their own ganking so if the SRP when away, it would not be crippling. It would hurt sure, and would make it harder for new players to take up the cause, but stopping it would not kill the New Order.
Ganking permit holders would help more than it would hurt the New Order. Having a permit does not make you safe from ganks - you also need to follow the Code which pretty much makes you ungankable. Agents will gank permit holders that are blatantly AFK so you are just doing thier work for them. Besides, permit income is a drop in the bucket compared to other sources so it is not really a viable target.
I think it is impossible to beat an organization who defines its goal as basically to make highsec a more interesting place on thier terms. They gank they win, you fight back they win. However, you could beat them on you own terms if you set a goal to stop the ganks. However, you will quickly find yourself in the situation of spending your playtime defending the ISK-making efforts of strangers for no compensation. If you find that fun, there is a community of people who try to do this, but realize that you will never completely succeed. It will be like Faction Warfare where you will have wins and losses, but the fundamental game is such that you will never have complete victory.
At this point complete victory is impossible unless you get CCP to change the game. Even if James 315 left, the Code is just basically an idea with a bunch of momentum behind it that it would carry on for a long time. You could try to infiltrate the CODE. Alliance and metagame a failure there, but even then they don't control the website or SRP assets and James 315 keeps the New Order itself at an arms length from the alliance. It's probably best though to just enjoy the New Order as the content they are - fight them, join them, or just read the website. |
Blancandrin
Servants of the Shard
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:56:24 -
[53] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:
I think it is impossible to beat an organization who defines its goal as basically to make highsec a more interesting place on thier terms. They gank they win, you fight back they win. However, you could beat them on you own terms if you set a goal to stop the ganks. However, you will quickly find yourself in the situation of spending your playtime defending the ISK-making efforts of strangers for no compensation. If you find that fun, there is a community of people who try to do this, but realize that you will never completely succeed. It will be like Faction Warfare where you will have wins and losses, but the fundamental game is such that you will never have complete victory.
At this point complete victory is impossible unless you get CCP to change the game. Even if James 315 left, the Code is just basically an idea with a bunch of momentum behind it that it would carry on for a long time. You could try to infiltrate the CODE. Alliance and metagame a failure there, but even then they don't control the website or SRP assets and James 315 keeps the New Order itself at an arms length from the alliance. It's probably best though to just enjoy the New Order as the content they are - fight them, join them, or just read the website.
This is so addictive, I feel I've got to honour the time you've sent on your reply.
I never said I wanted 'New Order' to be defeated or go away. I only said I wanted them to have some more risk. Clearly Eve is not a zero sum game. Your gain is not necessarily my loss etc. There can be multiple winners and not necessarily any losers. Personally, James315 and his 'New Order' have very little effect on my game play - they are only interesting because they are new to me and might present an opportunity for ...
If we go back to the beginning of this topic, another possible explanation of my feeling of unease could be purely cultural. The some of the methods used by James315 and his 'New Order' are a little too close to picking on the weak and helpless. In real life I would tell: you to back off mate, pick on someone your own size. I've already given several hundred million isk to some of your victims and will probably continue to help those who seem worthy.
I'll never beat you and I don't want to try. Similarly you'll never beat me even if you try. We have different victory conditions and this is how it should be.
I'm really going back to the game this time, unless you write more good stuff. |
Auscent Issier
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:58:25 -
[54] - Quote
Too large crap/post ratio on this threads.
Eve is about money. Simple.
CCP says what those who listen want to hear. CCP develops what those who play want to see (stress that I said see, not play), and CCP allows what those who stay are able to bear. Simple as that, numbers.
Get the examples of player made Universe given which are always the same, and always people who history shows have been there from all EVE public history, since ever. Apparently they are above the idea of people having to lose what they got. |
Bellatrix Invicta
The Conference Elite CODE.
174
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:43:21 -
[55] - Quote
Blancandrin wrote:Bellatrix Invicta wrote:Yes yes yes. Welcome back from your "hiatus". Now, before you do anything more foolish than you already have (good luck), we should talk about your permit.
Or rather, your lack thereof. Why do you not have a permit? Do you sell hunting permits? How much for 'New Order' shareholders, mining permit holders, agents and alts? Seriously, according to your code, I rarely do things where I need you permit.
If you fly in highsec you need a permit. Full stop. I don't care WHAT you're doing, if you're doing it in highsec without a permit, you're doing it illegally and your ship will be destroyed.
If you think you've won, think again.
The CODE always wins.
|
Faylee Freir
Defining Harassment Slaver's Union
136
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:27:42 -
[56] - Quote
This is fun. Have you never seen a freighter go suspect when looting a wreck? How many of you anti-gankers and cry babies have the stones to do that in a freighter? Is that not enough risk? Will the tears only stop when you can operate in complete safety without fear of loss? Pathetic.
HTFU
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |