|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Xolve
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
1445
   |
Posted - 2013.05.28 03:15:00 -
[1] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:Removing OGB will make CCP money in the long run.. especially since 95% of people won't unsub their alts.. just re-purpose them for the next lamest thing.
Bring your own, problem solved.
It makes literally ZERO sense from a business perspective for them to remove OGB, I mean sure, it will appeal to the whining masses; but boosts are used in roles outside of PvP- If you want to stay competitive do what you have to do. It's not like Shadow Cartel doesn't drop Triage in fights against people incapable of dropping Triage; why should people who actually paid for and trained an alt to fill that role have that time taken away from them because you're unwilling to do it?
This is coming from someone without a Leadership alt.
Inappropriate signature removed. Navigator. |
Xolve
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
1445
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 06:52:00 -
[2] - Quote
Agustice Arterius wrote:Couldn't that same argument have been applied to Learning Skills before they got rid of them? Back when we didn't know if we were going to get refunded skill points.
Technically, yeah it could have been; but CCP didn't lose 15 bucks a month per booster alt when they did away with learning skills; which was entirely my point.
Garviel Tarrant wrote:Bringing your own really isn't an option when you're solo roaming unless you are a massive faglord.
Tell me more about solo gameplay in an MMO; the only thing worse than that guy in highsec bashing his head against a wall of level 4 missions and deriving some sort of pleasure out of his little bubble of solo game play, are the massive 'faglords' who try and apply that principle to PvP.
If you want to solo, you're at a disadvantage and you know it- complaining about it just makes you look mentally deficient.
Inappropriate signature removed. Navigator. |
Xolve
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
1447
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 07:55:00 -
[3] - Quote
Garan Nardieu wrote:End result of killing small towers is usually another tower anchored in no time - they cost less then two tech 2 fitted cruisers these days.
Because dropping another tower, even offline is just completely out of the question right? People would never dare to steep to such level of meta-gaming 
Garan Nardieu wrote:Then again, trying to argue with you is not worth the effort. After all, I wouldn't expect a person who's average count on killmail is 30+ and most solo kills are done camping eggle gates in an arty loki (lemme guess, boosted?) to understand any argument being presented in this thread.
I'm in a small alliance, apparently we're pretty good at fleet PvP, even fighting near impossible odds that would make most people never even think of undocking. I'm not a solo PvPer and never claimed to be, I have no problems getting people to wreck towers with me though, just saying.
I'm rather curious as to how you can derive associated intellect from killboard statistics though- do explain.
Inappropriate signature removed. Navigator. |
Xolve
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
1447
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 08:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
Garan Nardieu wrote:Xolve wrote:I'm in a small alliance 1888 members is considered a small aliance  ?
It was sarcasm. You again- completely missed my point that the existence of OGB probably has more to do with the extra money it puts in CCP's pocket than anything; I just illustrated that it was a counterable tactic, and if you choose to do something about it or not, is entirely up to you.
I'm more of a smallish gang person myself, but I'm not going to let the oppurtunity to literally dunk several hundred people at a time pass me by; I get that a lot of you don't do the nullsec thing, and that's fine- Claiming that this is a 'play the game my way or not' card just says to me that you are yet ANOTHER in an endless squirming mass of unwashed morons that think solo pvp should be the bastion behind which CCP makes it's decisions.
Here's news for you friend- it wasn't ten years ago, it isn't today (that probably won't change).
If what you are looking for is challenging and engaging PvP either solo, or by small gang; it's out there you just have to dig for it. You're going to lose more than you kill, even the most accomplished of soloers have shown this true, time and time again. OGB are a crutch low-skilled PvPers use to try and make themselves appear better than they are. No amount of links can completely eliminate simple piloting errors otherwise experienced PvP pilots know to avoid/won't make.
Inappropriate signature removed. Navigator. |
Xolve
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
1447
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 08:59:00 -
[5] - Quote
Colt Blackhawk wrote:A loki boosted condor can kill a rapid light missile fitted not active tanked prophecy.
Deserves to die.
You know what makes loki boosted condor pilots mad; like really, really mad?
Phased Muon Sensor Dampener. Targeting Range Script.
You're Welcome!
Inappropriate signature removed. Navigator. |
Xolve
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
1447
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 09:14:00 -
[6] - Quote
Damar Rocarion wrote:Not actually true as kiting condor more often than not has his own damp (or two) which will get a lock first and probably render other ships targeting range fairly irrelevant as the condor can kite from 40km off. But in theory it can work.
It seemed more fitting and informative than 'Tonight's Headline- Big Ship dies to Small Ship while Support is nowhere to be found'. You gave an ambiguous example, I followed through with a ambiguous response.
We can sit here and play Paper, Rock, Scissors, Lizard, Spock all night, the result won't change. There is nothing inherently 'broken' about OGB, while some players might find it inconvenient or counter-intuitive to their preferred choice of aiming there pixels at other pixels and hoping the other pixels explode first. There are counters to them being there, which pretty much equates to if it's there, and you can do something about it- yet you choose not to: It's your fault.
The main drawbacks to removing OGB is, it directly takes money away from CCP's bottom line (which is more important than yours, mine or anyone elses chosen playstyle), and changing it would affect the game in other ways that you nerds often overlook, say for example, do you honestly expect to find a Rorqual in a belt helping out his miner bros in Null? While I would meet such an occasion with joy, I don't think it will (or should) ever happen.
Instead of 'removing' OGB, they could just nerf T3 boosting into the ground (or even remove the damn subsystem), and make Command Ships actually have a purpose other than being an anchor for certain fleet doctrines.
Inappropriate signature removed. Navigator. |
Xolve
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
1447
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 14:17:00 -
[7] - Quote
I liked the last 'blah blah blah nerf this' about titan bridges better.
This is already full of the same tryhards, spouting off the same tryhard excuses. They have links in x system, in y POS- but no, I won't do anything about it. Nobody likes shooting structures, except for a certain GoonSwarm FC I know, but if it makes terrorizing mine enemy that much easier, you bet your ass I will RF/Kill that tower.
They're only invulnerable if your laziness allows them to be, if you're a button pusher in a small gang, it's perfectly viable to be scanning on a second screen while you're being gang warped around a system/orbiting a button for 15 in FW.
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
You simply cannot be this thick.
I don't give a flying **** about fair. Eve isn't supposed to be fair. OGB's are a terrible mechanic that affects gameplay in a pretty adverse way. Nerf links and bring them on grid and i don't give a **** about people using them to dishonour whatever fight they want.
Fair doesn't matter. Good, fun gameplay does matter.
You do actually care about 'fair' you're just synonymously changing your argument to other words to dance around my counter point, they arn't invulnerable, they are easy to kill- and they take a significant investment from the player through either time or isk to attain. Just because you're a lazy player doesn't mean that person has a game-breaking advantage over anyone, 90% of the pilots in FW are terrible, and are using pirate implant sets and links to mask their badness as much as you let them.
Links don't make you a good player, certain ships should be obvious, everyone should be assumed to have links, and if there was ever a reason to get to know what you can comfortably engage in whatever it is you prefer to fly- this would be even more of a reason; but yeah- absolutely, they should nerf links because you're too lazy to sort out who lives where and flies what.
Inappropriate signature removed. Navigator. |
Xolve
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
1449
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 16:35:00 -
[8] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:They've made it pretty clear that as soon as they can hammer out the technical difficulties, it's going away. Those are going to be the most delicious tears Eve has ever seen. I can't wait for the, "OMG WILL U REIMBURSE MY SKILLSPOINTS?" threads. 
Just like they've been trying to hammer out the technical difficulties with POSes and Sovereignty, amirite?
Inappropriate signature removed. Navigator. |
Xolve
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
1449
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 20:09:00 -
[9] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:2. No i don't care about fair, i'm in Dread Cartel for fucks sake. A ship providing a 50% boost without requiring to be piloted; with absolutely minimal risk (Or no risk at all if its posed up) is terrible, terrible gameplay.
You mean Coward Cartel? 
Inappropriate signature removed. Navigator. |
Xolve
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
1450
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 22:53:00 -
[10] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:Xolve wrote:You mean Coward Cartel? Hmm.. how did this go.. kettle.. black.. something.. 
Hey man, you can spin whatever narrative you want if it makes you feel better about being a scrub, sweetheart.
Inappropriate signature removed. Navigator. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|