You probably didn't read the forums much back then because I have always spoke in negative in general discussion. I speak pleasant in the rookie section for people who need help (like the former you) and I post debate worthy trivia in out of pod experience. I even have a new and improved helpful signature for whoever bothers to click it.



About those caracals... we got a couple of really good fights and it was fun while it lasted. But, that was an excersize in "team work in cheap ships" over expensive ships and null sec blobs. A blob of noobs in remote sensor dampening caracals burning away from a target lobbing missiles at 100km is far from 1v1 PVP. The two ideas are just not related.

Those are decent stats and you look like you are having fun.
However....
This is not avocation for "PVP is alive and well" because your solo kills are just you moping up frigs in a neut Coercer. How else could those fights have ended? Would you expect to win against a Coercer (or other properly fitted destroyer) in a frigate? I would not. Would you?

Once you could warp to a belt in low sec and actually find a fight with confidence that there would be no cyno or local spike. It was like the exact mirror opposite to what you expect to happen now.



So no, I disagree, things have changed a great deal in EVE and PVP has not always been this way.

No, but we did still take fights against stronger forces and expoiting our advantages to get a few kill. Exactly like solo pvpers do.

Solo PvP in EVE has always been something that happened in spite of the game mechanics rather than directly because of them. The game's designed around small gangs and large fleets. Any solo PvP you happen to find is a product of your own intelligence, persistence, and imagination. Having deep pockets helps too.

Have you accounted for EM dealing Redeemers and your average run of the mill leadership bonuses?

Because the forums are far less boring of course.

So give us folks a break when we say "PVP is dead", because our idea of what PVP is, is not the same as yours. We would be happy with a place where we could 1v1 all day long in various ships without getting hot-dropped by capitals or guardians. A place where we could leroy a megathron into a small gang in a belt without a local spike of 20 entering system. We are interested in another form of "solo PVP" that seems to go beyond your meager desires for self elevation and disillusionment. We just want to have a little fun when we come home from work without having to wait so long, and fight actual opponents in the process. We don't want to take down entire BLOPs fleets, we just want some reasonable good fights with real pvp'ers.

lol at everyone in this thread who thinks solo pvp being alive and well means you would regularly see pilots going solo against superior ships in superior numbers with competent pilots and coming out on top anyway.

That's a really interesting point, so I did the math to confirm it. How could that Arby take 15,225 damage?

The Arby as set up has 11,569 hit points according to EFT, so we have 3656 unaccounted-for hit points on the killmail.

But we still haven't considered passive shield recharge, which can be significant over extended periods of time.

The fight lasted ~15 minutes, and EFT says the Arby's passive shield recharge is 4 DPS at a zero-resist profile. This multiplies out to 3600 hit points repaired by shields during the fight.

If you add the Arby's buffer to the shield recharge value, you get 15,169, well within the margin of error and actually eerily close to 15,225. However, EFT's number is for peak recharge, and the Arby was probably pretty far from peak recharge most of the time, making it unlikely that it tanked a full 3600 hit points from just passive shield recharge.

I'm left unsure of what to believe. Maybe someone can point to an error in my analysis, or an alternative explanation for the large-ish amount of damage taken by the Arby.

it means that it is now a hunt for the brain damage lol fail vegetables of this MMORPG

I thought of writing an essay on how delusional OP's fantasies are, but you summarized the important parts.

Winning is a result of two non-exclusive conditions- you are superior (either experience, skills, equipment), or the other party makes a mistake.

So yeah, you can devalue every single kill (or any victory in history of mankind) by saying "but the loser was stupid, new and in a failfit and should have done X". Yes, every killmail in existence.

People like you don't seem to understand the difference between "I defeated an opponent because I was superior" and "I defeated a stupid and unworthy opponent because I was of moderate to average intelligence".

You don't seem to understand that those both mean the exact same thing, and you are just distracted by relative descriptives and your personal messias-complex.

Oh I see, so you do think that you can put an Olympian up against the kids in the special Olympics, that we would be entertained by watching that contest and that when the Olympian beats that boy with down-syndrome that makes the gold medalist his "better".



Amazing the kind of personalities you meet one these forums LOL. You sir have a very interesting and disturbing perspective on "reality".

RvB !

YMMV.

Why are you siting cheaters who are getting dropped by their name brands and persecuted as a measure of "contest"?


Here let me let me help you

^ contest. Fun to watch and fun to participate in.