I believe you've missed the part where I was against expanding wardecs. But hey, whatever floats your boat. You want to resort to personal attacks, that's your problem. There's plenty of ways to provide protection without being a total **** to one side.

HTFU.

Get out of high-sec. It just is not the fault of high-sec players when they do not want to fight, but it is your own when you can always go into low- or null-sec and fight your wars there, free from all CONCORD fees, and where players want you to come and to fight.

Get out of high-sec. It just is not the fault of high-sec players when they do not want to fight, but it is your own when you can always go into low- or null-sec and fight your wars there, free from all CONCORD fees, and where players want you to come and to fight.

Buddy, the only person here who needs to "HTFU" is the guy insisting that the NPC corps are there for you to avoid a wardec, ....

Now you're just not listening. Nor paying attention to my corp in a subject where you probably should, ironically one of the few times corp would matter. I don't imagine I'm paying for any wardecs from E-UNI.

Oh, I am listening, but I am also waiting for the truth to sink into your head.

Obviously not because you keep insisting that I want to be able to wardec anyone freely when I at no point suggested that.

[quote=Natsett Amuinn]Buddy, the only person here who needs to "HTFU" is the guy insisting that the NPC corps are there for you to avoid a wardec, ....

There just need to be a reason.

Am I? Or am I telling you that you are wrong in your belief of a fair war-dec?

Tell me, when was EVE ever about fairness? At best does one get a fair chance on something. However, there has never been a guarantee on fair fights, fair costs, fair losses, or on anything else.

Please, if you think I am wrong then show me where.

If you stop looking at fairness to some degree, it throws out any argument out the window.

Wrong. The more likely answer is that there have to be other reasons, only fairness is not one of them.

Buddy, the only person here who needs to "HTFU" is the guy insisting that the NPC corps are there for you to avoid a wardec, YOU.

I lose something if I drop corp, pretty much everyone not in high sec does.

You on the other hand are a member of a one man corp, in a one corp alliance.

You're in no position to tell other to HTFU.

How about you learn to ******* play.

When you're talking about balance for example, fairness is pretty much the only reason for it. Balance happens because its unfair to pilots of other ships, or other classes if you go in reference to other games. Anyone could fly the unbalanced ships, but it forces you into a play style, which violates a sense of fairness. You can't ignore it when making a game if you want it to be any good. Otherwise you could use the excuse that "oh, its just superior technology." which would be the real world explanation for such a thing.

Don't let it get to you man. He's found a broken game mechanic (highsec) and exploits it to enrich himself, as is the way of New Eden - from cloaky/stabbed faction war to convo spam gatecamps to gsc smartbomb shield. In a game of "he who abuses broken mechanics first and hardest wins", that just makes him a good player.

Well played, Whitehound - thanks for pointing out yet another reason for supporting James 315 for CSM.

No. Ship balance is not about fairness, because we already have all different skill sets and we can fly different ships.

Ship balance is about the number of ships used in the game and the exact ruling by CCP when they consider a ship as imbalanced is entirely their decision.

How do you even get the idea that there is fairness involved in this? It is about CCP running a business and they are trying to keep it as rich in variety as possible so we can play with it as much and as long as possible without getting bored and thus keep paying them for it and in the end put food on their tables.

Better question is where did you get the idea that its about how many of a ship is being used and not about why the ship is being used so much?

In case you have not read it, James 315 uses it himself. Check his corp history. You will love supporting him!

explicit or implicit? but of an odd use of language there.

it's still the corp that you're paying to declare war upon, not the players. just because you pay extra because it's a larger corp with more members doesn't mean those members are going to stick around or that you have any rights on them, which you don't.

Firstly, because CCP has always made it about the numbers and secondly, because the ships have different roles.

Say, do you expect a fight between a logistic cruiser and a combat/attack cruiser to be fair? Is a fight between an assault frigate and an interceptor fair? ...

Have you ever considered that this is, perhaps, for comedic value, and to point out the irony of an utterly broken and pointless mechanic?

You're looking at it from the wrong standpoint.

No. You have the wrong standpoint. I only used it to show you that there is no fairness in balancing. QED.

No they won't change that.

They'll make it more worthwhile to be in a player corp.

And you'd be full of it because I'm looking at it from the standpoint actually used. Popularity of a ship has nothing to do with why balance changes are made. Its the reason why the ship is popular that gets looked at.

An assault frigate attacks an interceptor and fires shots at it. The interceptor then flies away, because it can. Should the interceptor pilot now pay the ammo of the assault frigate pilot? Afterall, you want the fight to be fair and the interceptor pilot bailed out while the assault frigate pilot has lost ammo in this.