Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [30] 40 .. 47 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
45
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 21:14:47 -
[871] - Quote
Dark Lord Trump wrote:
Ganking isn't free ISK either. It merely capitalizes on the extreme risk that someone takes when they fit triple cargo expanders and fills their hold with PLEX while autopiloting through Uedama. If everyone got a clue and stopped doing dumb things with freighters, gankers would probably find themselves harder up for cash.
Everyone is not going to get a clue. Eve has been out for how long? You think people would have a clue by now. I know you think auto-piloters are the only ones getting hit but my twitch videos show that I know how to fly in all security statuses. I was in a triple iStab faction fit providence and some random mach on a gate still had no problem bumping my freighter. I was running another character in a mach and still could not prevent from being bumped for 10min. Empty cargo too.
Many try to claim that is the reason for this post but that was months ago ... Look at the dates on my videos and you will see that I have been raping code long before that freighter got popped.
Anyone trying to say that only over-loaded auto-piloting freighters are the problem is sadly mistaken. |
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
45
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 21:22:33 -
[872] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:
High-sec is simply a place where things are meant to be REALATIVELY safer than in low-sec... which is RELATIVELY safe than 0.0 space.
No... morality and ethical (in-game or RL) arguments are not usable. Give a gameplay reasons why a lack of effort and diligence from one person should trump the efforts of many.
Please show me where any corp runs a day-in / day-out gank squad in low or null sec. I assure you that on an average day, those jita gankers are wrecking boat loads of more isk without resistance than all of lowsec faction warfare. Sure you can get a major cap battle from time to time that dumps a tons of isk in lowsec but its not frequent enough to compare to all the freighter / Jump-Freighter losses. Highsec is getting absoutely raped by these gank teams...
again Kusion alone 10 trillion vs 31bil ... KarmaFleet: 5 trillion vs 12billion ... check for yourself on zkill. |
Wander Prian
Art Of Explosions Hole Control
392
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 21:22:44 -
[873] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote:Dark Lord Trump wrote: The entire point of being an outlaw is that you don't follow the laws. In turn, you forfeit CONCORD protection and are pursued by the faction police. Being effectively locked out by gates that instantly scram and web you while the faction police warps in to finish you off is stupid. You want justice, go get it yourself. Find some ganker staging system, probe down their instaundock, and drop some instalockers or smartbombing battleships there and get some justice against the "invincible" gankers.
Ganking isn't free ISK either. It merely capitalizes on the extreme risk that someone takes when they fit triple cargo expanders and fills their hold with PLEX while autopiloting through Uedama. If everyone got a clue and stopped doing dumb things with freighters, gankers would probably find themselves harder up for cash.
Im just playing by the mechanics of EVE ... Highsec means keep the damn criminals from taking over. Thats why they live in lowsec as criminals.
Then you should not be able to leave highsec without being a criminal either as you don't have any reason to go there, as only criminals live in low or null. I'm just working from your interpretation of the mechanics by the way. That would only be balanced and fair.
Wormholer for life.
|
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
45
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 21:27:53 -
[874] - Quote
Wander Prian wrote:
Then you should not be able to leave highsec without being a criminal either as you don't have any reason to go there, as only criminals live in low or null. I'm just working from your interpretation of the mechanics by the way. That would only be balanced and fair.
We have already discussed this in previous posts but you just love hanging on to this idea for some reason. Criminals lose their privledges, not law-abiding pilots. Plus, I highly doubt CCP wants to keep more people from moving into low and null sec. If anything they want more people to operate in those security spaces. Fortunately, the OP pushes people who want to protect their security status to nullsec so that they wouldnt have to do any repairing of their security status to come back into highsec. |
Wander Prian
Art Of Explosions Hole Control
393
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 21:50:18 -
[875] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote:Wander Prian wrote:
Then you should not be able to leave highsec without being a criminal either as you don't have any reason to go there, as only criminals live in low or null. I'm just working from your interpretation of the mechanics by the way. That would only be balanced and fair.
We have already discussed this in previous posts but you just love hanging on to this idea for some reason. Criminals lose their privledges, not law-abiding pilots. Plus, I highly doubt CCP wants to keep more people from moving into low and null sec. If anything they want more people to operate in those security spaces. Fortunately, the OP pushes people who want to protect their security status to nullsec so that they wouldnt have to do any repairing of their security status to come back into highsec.
I love hanging on to it as you somehow keep suggesting that there needs to be a limitation on who can access what kind of space.
You are the one that suggested that "only criminals live in lowsec" and simply by using your interpredation of the rules, only criminals should be allowed into lowsec. See how stupid it is? If you limit some people from accessing certain types of space, the same rules need to apply the other way as well. You shouldn't have the right to reap the rewards of lowsec if you aren't willing to go criminal.
Wormholer for life.
|
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
45
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 21:53:46 -
[876] - Quote
Wander Prian wrote: You are the one that suggested that "only criminals live in lowsec" and simply by using your interpredation of the rules, only criminals should be allowed into lowsec. See how stupid it is? If you limit some people from accessing certain types of space, the same rules need to apply the other way as well. You shouldn't have the right to reap the rewards of lowsec if you aren't willing to go criminal.
If you would like to generate a separate forum post to address your issue of keeping non-criminals out of low and null sec than by all means do so. This does not change what is proposed in the OP. The "only criminals..." comment should be considered a stereotype to describe the majority. |
Dark Lord Trump
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
370
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 22:01:05 -
[877] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote:Wander Prian wrote: You are the one that suggested that "only criminals live in lowsec" and simply by using your interpredation of the rules, only criminals should be allowed into lowsec. See how stupid it is? If you limit some people from accessing certain types of space, the same rules need to apply the other way as well. You shouldn't have the right to reap the rewards of lowsec if you aren't willing to go criminal.
If you would like to generate a separate forum post to address your issue of keeping non-criminals out of low and null sec than by all means do so. This does not change what is proposed in the OP. The "only criminals..." comment should be considered a stereotype to describe the majority. The point is that what you propose is stupid, and he's using an example that runs on similar logic to highlight its absurdity.
I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
|
NightmareX
Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition
738
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 22:01:55 -
[878] - Quote
Dark Lord Trump wrote:So if you make it harder, I can do less ganks, and since apparently ganking is an infinite faucet of ISK for gankers, I make less money. If CCP halved the amount of minerals in highsec ore, that would mean miners make less. That's a nerf. If freighters suddenly had their cargoholds halved, they'd make less money moving things since they can't fit as much. That's also a nerf. So why, pray tell, is allowing me less ganks not a nerf but a "balance?" Making things harder isn't forcing you to do any less ganking. It just make you work a little harder for each crime you do. And do work for your action is something that everyone has to face.
Yeah, the gankers can just fit up a ship, undock and do the gank, and rince and repeat forever without any work at all as all of his gank ships are already fitted in the station.
So balancing this out is a good idea.
Remember, no risk = no reward. Alot of risk = slot of reward. That's EVE.
Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:
1: Asteroid Madness
2: Clash of the Empires
3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
|
Dark Lord Trump
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
370
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 22:04:40 -
[879] - Quote
NightmareX wrote:Dark Lord Trump wrote:So if you make it harder, I can do less ganks, and since apparently ganking is an infinite faucet of ISK for gankers, I make less money. If CCP halved the amount of minerals in highsec ore, that would mean miners make less. That's a nerf. If freighters suddenly had their cargoholds halved, they'd make less money moving things since they can't fit as much. That's also a nerf. So why, pray tell, is allowing me less ganks not a nerf but a "balance?" Making things harder isn't forcing you to do any less ganking. It just make you work a little harder for each crime you do. And do work for your action is something that everyone has to face. Yeah, the gankers can just fit up a ship, undock and do the gank, and rince and repeat forever without any work at all as all of his gank ships are already fitted in the station. So balancing this out is a good idea. Remember, no risk = no reward. Alot of risk = slot of reward. That's EVE. If I have to repair my sec status after every gank/every X ganks, that takes time away from ganking, and I only have so much time to play. Ergo, I am forced to gank less. It's also balanced. The gankers ARE the risk, and they wouldn't get nearly as much reward if people didn't autopilot 10bil freighters through known gank systems.
I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
|
NightmareX
Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition
738
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 22:10:21 -
[880] - Quote
Dark Lord Trump wrote:NightmareX wrote:Dark Lord Trump wrote:So if you make it harder, I can do less ganks, and since apparently ganking is an infinite faucet of ISK for gankers, I make less money. If CCP halved the amount of minerals in highsec ore, that would mean miners make less. That's a nerf. If freighters suddenly had their cargoholds halved, they'd make less money moving things since they can't fit as much. That's also a nerf. So why, pray tell, is allowing me less ganks not a nerf but a "balance?" Making things harder isn't forcing you to do any less ganking. It just make you work a little harder for each crime you do. And do work for your action is something that everyone has to face. Yeah, the gankers can just fit up a ship, undock and do the gank, and rince and repeat forever without any work at all as all of his gank ships are already fitted in the station. So balancing this out is a good idea. Remember, no risk = no reward. Alot of risk = slot of reward. That's EVE. If I have to repair my sec status after every gank/every X ganks, that takes time away from ganking, and I only have so much time to play. Ergo, I am forced to gank less. It's also balanced. The gankers ARE the risk, and they wouldn't get nearly as much reward if people didn't autopilot 10bil freighters through known gank systems. Ehh, it seem to me that you have absolutely no clues what so ever what you are talking about. You barely lose sec status for ganking ships. It's the podding that hurts. You can gank many times before you will go towards the outlaw status. Then it might be an idea to maybe fix that as long as you want to avoid getting problems with the faction police.
Also, you can buy security tags that fixes you sec status fast. So you have 2 options. 1. Buy tags and get out of the sec status dilemma easily but the expensive way, or npc it back the hard but cheap way.
Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:
1: Asteroid Madness
2: Clash of the Empires
3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
|
|
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
46
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 22:13:31 -
[881] - Quote
Dark Lord Trump wrote:Erich Einstein wrote:Wander Prian wrote: You are the one that suggested that "only criminals live in lowsec" and simply by using your interpredation of the rules, only criminals should be allowed into lowsec. See how stupid it is? If you limit some people from accessing certain types of space, the same rules need to apply the other way as well. You shouldn't have the right to reap the rewards of lowsec if you aren't willing to go criminal.
If you would like to generate a separate forum post to address your issue of keeping non-criminals out of low and null sec than by all means do so. This does not change what is proposed in the OP. The "only criminals..." comment should be considered a stereotype to describe the majority. The point is that what you propose is stupid, and he's using an example that runs on similar logic to highlight its absurdity.
I dont expect everyone to agree. People have their own agendas. Try to keep things constructive instead of just throwing out generalized negative comments. |
NightmareX
Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition
738
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 22:15:22 -
[882] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote:I dont expect everyone to agree. People have their own agendas. Try to keep things constructive instead of just throwing out generalized negative comments. He didn't even had any valid arguments on why it's stupid according to him either. The only thing i have seen as argument from one of them is that it gets harder to do gank. Yeah, but i mean, you have to work for everything in EVE, so why shouldn't criminals works for what they do, lol?
Not only that, but ANY criminals in high sec should work harder than any law abiding players in high sec, because they are breaking the rules of high sec.
Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:
1: Asteroid Madness
2: Clash of the Empires
3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
|
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
46
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 22:19:56 -
[883] - Quote
Dark Lord Trump wrote: If I have to repair my sec status after every gank/every X ganks, that takes time away from ganking, and I only have so much time to play. Ergo, I am forced to gank less. It's also balanced. The gankers ARE the risk, and they wouldn't get nearly as much reward if people didn't autopilot 10bil freighters through known gank systems.
Use some of that dank isk you make from ganking to buy tags instead of mission running. If you are ganking in a way that is not profitable to you, then buy plex. You can also enjoy plenty of the other PVP experiences in EVE such as lowsec faction warfare, pirating in lowsec, etc until you can afford to buy more tags and come back to highsec and gank some more. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18715
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 22:42:48 -
[884] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote: out of control ganking teams in Jita
What out of control ganking teams? |
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
46
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 22:52:42 -
[885] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
What out of control ganking teams?
KarmaFleet Gimme Da Loot Kusion - moved from Uedama recently. Not sure if its permanent but he runs out of here a lot now. etc
See their zkillboard isk destroyed vs isk lost.
Im only taking into account those near Jita. Not sure of any major operations near Amarr or elsewhere.
Jita V - Moon 17 station - Feel free to jump in-game and follow them around for a day.
I want to note that many have mistaken this as a temporary burn jita event but zkill will quickly show that is false. |
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
46
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 22:55:09 -
[886] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
Why don't you just shoot them rather than beg CCP to destroy an entire playstyle?
CCP could always increase the drop-rate of tags to something that they find fair. Market control of these tags is an intended dynamic though about by the OP. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18715
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 23:00:34 -
[887] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote:baltec1 wrote:
What out of control ganking teams?
KarmaFleet Gimme Da Loot Kusion - moved from Uedama recently. Not sure if its permanent but he runs out of here a lot now. etc See their zkillboard isk destroyed vs isk lost. Im only taking into account those near Jita. Not sure of any major operations near Amarr or elsewhere. Jita V - Moon 17 station - Feel free to jump in-game and follow them around for a day. I want to note that many have mistaken this as a temporary burn jita event but zkill will quickly show that is false.
So how do you explain the fact that ganking is currently at its lowest point in history?
|
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
47
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 23:13:18 -
[888] - Quote
Well I did give Kusion a really hard time in Uedama - twitch.tv/agsperry/videos/all/. I took like 95% (check zkill) of all his isk in a three day period and then he took a few months off after that.
These gankers also seem to be coming together in Jita V - Moon 17 and working as a large fleet to focusing exclusively on freighters. You can still see poddington and others going after miners occasionally but there is a good amount of them sitting idle in station when to many of them are online. (No need to lose any more ships than you have too.)
I wish I had a concrete answer for you but Kusion taking a few months off will definitely lower that statistic. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18715
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 23:28:40 -
[889] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote:Well I did give Kusion a really hard time in Uedama - twitch.tv/agsperry/videos/all/. I took like 95% (check zkill) of all his isk in a three day period and then he took a few months off after that. These gankers also seem to be coming together in Jita V - Moon 17 and working as a large fleet to focusing exclusively on freighters. You can still see poddington and others going after miners occasionally but there is a good amount of them sitting idle in station when to many of them are online. (No need to lose any more ships than you have too.) I wish I had a concrete answer for you but Kusion taking a few months off will definitely lower that statistic.
More than half the ganks that happened in 2013 are not happening today. Clearly ganking is not out of control, its getting strangled. |
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
47
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 23:38:45 -
[890] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
More than half the ganks that happened in 2013 are not happening today. Clearly ganking is not out of control, its getting strangled.
Trying to prove the nature of ganking with one statistic that deals with CONCORD kills is not exactly ethical statistics. We all know that when alphas were introduced, the player base increased largely and alphas were getting wiped out in herds. Player numbers have also been steadily decreasing over the years. That statistic does not say anything about ganking and how it's trending. |
|
Wander Prian
Art Of Explosions Hole Control
393
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 23:43:23 -
[891] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote:baltec1 wrote:
More than half the ganks that happened in 2013 are not happening today. Clearly ganking is not out of control, its getting strangled.
Trying to prove the nature of ganking with one statistic that deals with CONCORD kills is not exactly ethical statistics. We all know that when alphas were introduced, the player base increased largely and alphas were getting wiped out in herds. Player numbers have also been steadily decreasing over the years. That statistic does not say anything about ganking and how it's trending.
Show us the numbers you are referring to. Show us the proof.
Wormholer for life.
|
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
47
|
Posted - 2017.03.01 00:00:11 -
[892] - Quote
Wander Prian wrote:Erich Einstein wrote:baltec1 wrote:
More than half the ganks that happened in 2013 are not happening today. Clearly ganking is not out of control, its getting strangled.
Trying to prove the nature of ganking with one statistic that deals with CONCORD kills is not exactly ethical statistics. We all know that when alphas were introduced, the player base increased largely and alphas were getting wiped out in herds. Player numbers have also been steadily decreasing over the years. That statistic does not say anything about ganking and how it's trending. Show us the numbers you are referring to. Show us the proof. I have provided my proof many times. Stop ignoring the trillions in isk lost on zkill ganker reports. Kushion's 10 trillion destroyed vs. 31bil lost satisfies me many times over. |
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
47
|
Posted - 2017.03.01 00:02:06 -
[893] - Quote
Removed |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
27890
|
Posted - 2017.03.01 00:03:33 -
[894] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote:Trying to prove the nature of ganking with one statistic that deals with CONCORD kills is not exactly ethical statistics. Why not? The number of people that Concord kill has a direct relationship with how much suicide ganking is going on. They kill all of the active aggressors involved in a suicide gank, and those kills are recorded.
The suicide ganking figures are probably lower than the graph suggests, a percentage of the people that Concord kill are people making silly mistakes.
Quote:We all know that when alphas were introduced, the player base increased largely and alphas were getting wiped out in herds. Citation needed for alphas getting wiped out in herds.
Quote:Player numbers have also been steadily decreasing over the years. That is irrelevant to the graph supplied, and the claim that Baltec1 is making. If you want to add PCU numbers to it, the data is freely available via Eve-offline.net. Go for it.
Quote:That statistic does not say anything about ganking and how it's trending. It records a statistic over a time period, and that statistic has a relationship with suicide ganking. The fact that the 6 month rolling average is considerably lower than it was 4 years ago is a trend, a downwards one that demonstrates Concord are killing less people than they did 4 years ago, which suggests that there are less suicide ganks happening now than there were then.
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
New Player FAQ
Feyd's Survival Pack
|
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
3790
|
Posted - 2017.03.01 00:07:20 -
[895] - Quote
That saves me some time lol.
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"
Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
|
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
47
|
Posted - 2017.03.01 00:11:27 -
[896] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Erich Einstein wrote:Trying to prove the nature of ganking with one statistic that deals with CONCORD kills is not exactly ethical statistics. Why not? The number of people that Concord kill has a direct relationship with how much suicide ganking is going on. They kill all of the active aggressors involved in a suicide gank, and those kills are recorded. The suicide ganking figures are probably lower than the graph suggests, a percentage of the people that Concord kill are people making silly mistakes. Quote:We all know that when alphas were introduced, the player base increased largely and alphas were getting wiped out in herds. Citation needed for alphas getting wiped out in herds. Quote:Player numbers have also been steadily decreasing over the years. That is irrelevant to the graph supplied, and the claim that Baltec1 is making. If you want to add PCU numbers to it, the data is freely available via Eve-offline.net. Go for it. Quote:That statistic does not say anything about ganking and how it's trending. It records a statistic over a time period, and that statistic has a relationship with suicide ganking. The fact that the 6 month rolling average is considerably lower than it was 4 years ago is a trend, a downwards one that demonstrates Concord are killing less people than they did 4 years ago, which suggests that there are less suicide ganks happening now than there were then. One thing that is obvious on the graph is Burn X events, massive spikes of Concord kills and a sizeable bump in the 6 month average. So many things wrong with your post that I'm not even going to reply to it. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
27890
|
Posted - 2017.03.01 00:16:54 -
[897] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote:So many things wrong with your post that I'm not even going to reply to it. Please, do feel free to enlighten me.
What is wrong with my post? Flippant dismissal without explanation is kinda rude.
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
New Player FAQ
Feyd's Survival Pack
|
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
47
|
Posted - 2017.03.01 00:33:34 -
[898] - Quote
I'm not going to repeat myself and me explaining statistics to you don't not benefit the OP in any way. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
27890
|
Posted - 2017.03.01 00:47:44 -
[899] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote:I'm not going to repeat myself and me explaining statistics to you don't not benefit the OP in any way.
So... you've got nothing then.
What does that graph represent, in terms of data recorded? What do you think that the data points show? Is there a relationship between how many people Concord kill, how many people are actively participating in suicide ganking, and how much of it they are doing? If not, why not?
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
New Player FAQ
Feyd's Survival Pack
|
Quinn Hatfield
The Scope Gallente Federation
92
|
Posted - 2017.03.01 02:34:44 -
[900] - Quote
*crickets*
I don't burn bridges, I merely steal a bolt a day.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [30] 40 .. 47 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |