| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
125
   |
Posted - 2013.08.28 11:02:00 -
[1] - Quote
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:Second, I don't think you actually see what is going on underneath. Why does N3 have so many people willing to rent?
Because it's easier to live on your knees than stand up for yourself. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
125
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 12:25:00 -
[2] - Quote
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:What one man Corp do you belong to that holds sovereignty?
This is my only character. You can see that I am not in a one-man corp.
I find it ironic that a renter would challenge me to tell him what I have sovereignty over. I have sovereignty over myself. I think that's more than you can say.
Sgt Doakes XD wrote:What's wrong with renting? it means a ton of people are active, and thus targets.
There won't be a "big blue donut" for long because all power and prosperity is relative.
Justify it however you want, but we can all see pretty clearly what is happening and why. Renters are greedy for space wealth and are willing to surrender their dignity to get at it. It's a lot easier to pay an overlord to occupy your space for you than to fight for it yourself. If the overlord had any respect for his renters, he'd make them members of his corp or alliance. If the renters had any self-respect, there are many other options than paying an overlord half their lunch money to let them eat in peace. The saddest part is that you don't even get to eat in peace, since anyone can still come and camp your system.
Renters are basically slaves, and by choice. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
125
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 12:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:Since you don't know me... how did you come to that conclusion?
You're a space serf. There aren't many dots to connect.
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:Since you have no experience in a 0.0 corp... how do you know this?
The first corp I ever joined was a 0.0 corp, and a renter corp at that, although I didn't realize what that meant until right before I left. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
125
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 13:19:00 -
[4] - Quote
Din Chao wrote:Do you surrender your dignity when you go to work? Pay half your lunch money in taxes? Allow your country's military to protect your borders?
Do you eat in peace knowing that at any moment someone can kick down your door and take your stuff? And all you can reasonably expect is for the police to show up afterwards?
Is internet spaceships a job?
If you don't pay the government, they put you in a cage, and if you don't get your ass in that cage, they'll murder you. Is there some analog in that to internet spaceships?
I don't "allow" my country's military to do anything. They don't ask. In fact, before, during, or shortly after trying to stop them from doing . . . anything . . . they would probably blow my ass up. They have real spaceships. I do try to exert a measure of control over them by voting. What does this have to do with internet spaceships?
I do actually eat in peace knowing someone can kick my front door in at any moment. Them taking my "stuff" is the least of my worries. My objective in such a scenario is to live long enough to even CALL the police. I'm still wondering what this all has to do with indentured servitude in a massively multiplayer online roleplaying internet spaceships game.
You can't always choose your circumstances in real life. You can choose to be free in EVE or you can choose to be a sycophant or even a slave. See the difference? |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
125
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 14:22:00 -
[5] - Quote
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:Why? I pay nothing directly for being here, although my PI s taxed... at rates lower than Highsec.
Not all Corp are the same, so what did you realize?
It doesn't really matter what hands there are between you and your overlord. You are supporting the entity that is keeping you from exercising sovereignty in that space. If you are doing that willingly, willfully, then . . . what would you say that makes you?
I realized that man is something of a prisoner of his own inner nature, no matter the milieu.
Lucas Kell wrote:Oh and again I point out that you state this is your only char and it's never left an NPC corp, so STFU about things you don't understand nubbin.
^ somebody please help this guy.
Yeep wrote:Or you could grow up and realise you aren't the best in the world at everything and join a community that allows you to delegate the things you aren't so good at to people who specialise in them.
Did you mean to say "surrender your identity and personal sovereignty to the leaders of the group in exchange for a limited increase in resources and abilities"?
I don't have to be the best at everything. I just have to be good enough to get the job done, and striving to get better is one of the hallmarks of gaming. But, this isn't a game; is it?
"Look to the group.", "Don't shut yourself off from the group.", "The group has answers.", "Trust the people in your group." . . . you're starting to sound like a cult leader. That would certainly explain a lot about why the Goons are so unified and motivated.
Din Chao wrote:If you don't want the comparison to be made, then don't make it yourself.
I have no problem with you making such comparisons. I just thought that in that instance, the comparisons you made weren't very good. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
125
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 15:02:00 -
[6] - Quote
Din Chao wrote:Of course you don't. Because they don't support your argument. Just as I don't think your comparisons to slavery and indentured servitude are very good.
Your comparisons didn't support AN argument.
I didn't compare renters to slaves. I straight-up called renters slaves. They're space slaves.
Din Chao wrote:He's a liar, Lucas.
Why THE **** would I lie about a video game to a total stranger? Try again.
Mallak Azaria wrote:People are bad at diplomacy & making friends, so the correct course of action is for CCP to level the playing field for those that have bad people skills.
You have 30+ thousand "friends"? I think you should revisit the definition of the word "friend". I don't think you are completely grasping the concept. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
125
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 15:30:00 -
[7] - Quote
Yeep wrote:Except its not a limited increase, its a significant increase in some areas and an exponential increase in others. And you don't have to surrender any of your identity (Also what the **** is personal sovereignty? Is this you? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfVbiefMdNU).
So, joining a group will give me unlimited power? That's basically what you're saying.
Personal sovereignty . . . individual autonomy . . . inalienable authority over myself . . . is that a hard concept for you to grasp or are you just being facetious?
Yeep wrote:No, you don't have to be the best at everything but your refusal to outsource tasks you aren't good at removes your right to complain about them. I have no idea how my car works but if it broke I'd either find a friend who could fix it or pay someone to do it. I wouldn't sit around complaining that I can't go places as fast as other people.
What task am I refusing to outsource?
You could also pick up a book or go online and read or even take a class at your local college or vocational school and learn to fix the car yourself. What some of us are sitting around complaining about EVE Online is that there are virtually no circumstances under which we could fix the car ourselves.
Yeep wrote:Its generally called a society or a community.
Yes, and a society or community that has certain characteristics may be classified as a cult. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
127
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 23:40:00 -
[8] - Quote
Din Chao wrote:He's a liar, Lucas.
Lucas Kell wrote:You 100% definitely did lie though.
You said that's your only char, and you said you'd joined a 0.0 corp. Since that char as never been in anything other than an NPC corp one of those two comments MUST have been a lie.
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:Since you say this is your only character and it has never left the safety of an NPC in highsec, what would you know of the issue?
^ do you see how there's a group of you and only one of me, but that still doesn't make you right? Let me help you guys out: I have HAD other characters in the PAST. I don't not HAVE those characters anymore. This is the only character that I HAVE and play EVE with. How did being in a group bring you guys any closer to "winning" that point? I would even say that being in a group HURT your chances of arriving at the truth in that instance, because rather than look at yourselves and try to do better, you just echoed what the other members of the group were saying.
One of balancing dynamics in the real world between large numbers and small numbers is that if your large group doesn't have the truth on their side (or are using the wrong tactic or strategy), then they are just wrong in large numbers (or die in large numbers).
Another balancing dynamic is that, because the world is so large and time is always moving forward and things happen so quickly, it is nigh impossible for a group, even an enormous one like the United States of America or even China, to always defend everything they claim sovereignty over.
Another balancing dynamic is that my force, my horses, my bullets, my bombs, my VX nerve agent, can also kill my friends and even myself.
Another balancing dynamic is that I only know the things that I, an individual, have come to know/understand. Now, I can befriend someone to fix my car or pay someone or even learn to fix it myself, but I may end up stuck waiting in the rain on the side of the road if I haven't done that BEFORE my car breaks down.
There are probably a lot more such balancing dynamics in life. Maybe you could think of a few, or maybe you could try to predict what would happen if such dynamics were "nerfed" or "buffed". What would the world look like, then? |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
127
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 00:06:00 -
[9] - Quote
Yeep wrote:Holding space in Eve requires being [elite] because thats the bar that has been set by the people who currently hold it. They are able to set the bar that high because they employ a lot of people who are very good at individual things. You as an individual do not have the time to become as good at all the things so your options are be mediocre at a bunch of things or find some allies who are good at the things you are not.
There's a few problems with this argument.
1. I might actually BE elite.
2. The current sovereignty holders of a space might not have set the bar very high for taking their space. They may simply not have people who are good at the things they need to be good at. (I'm looking right at you, Test Alliance.)
3. You assume becoming good at activity X requires the same amount of time for both player A and player B, but maybe one is simply elite and gets better faster.
4. The main flaw in your argument is that I don't have to do ANYTHING better than the sovereignty holder. I only have to be capable of DISRUPTING what the sovereignty holder is doing to hold sovereignty. Is there a practical way to do that (within the game) given the current game mechanics besides resorting to brute force and sheer numbers? |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
128
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 10:24:00 -
[10] - Quote
Yeep wrote:You might be [elite], but if you were (and somehow managed to find your way back from the 1990s) you'd have no problem finding other superhuman pilots to fly with.
Why would I be looking for other "superhuman" pilots to fly with? |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
128
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 11:21:00 -
[11] - Quote
Yeep wrote:Sure you can. Bring a dread or a supercap in and attack one of the many targets the guy you quoted mentioned. Bring a battleship and shoot at them, it'll take longer but you'll get there in the end.
So, how long would you say is a reasonable amount of time for 1 person to be able to take down 1 structure that 1 other person put up?
Lucas Kell wrote:Yeah, structures generally can't be killed solo.
Then, why can they be deployed solo? Why can they be maintained solo?
I know you're going to say, "But, the whole corporation/alliance/coalition deploys and maintains the structure." No they [expletive deleted] don't, or else there would be no need for "Invulnerable" and "Reinforced". |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
130
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 12:07:00 -
[12] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:You honestly can't be stupid enough to think that it would be a good change to make a POS more easily damaged. It would in no way help the little guy, it would simply mean that solo roamers could get a bunch of structures into reinforce. Structures are designed to not get destroyed too quickly.
...
I've already stated, some stuff in MMOs you simply can't do alone.
Oh, I see. Lucas Kell, advocate for and defender of "the little guy". Is that why you've been running around on your alt(s) ganking noob mining barges? Are they somehow hurting "the little guy"? Are their Retreivers and Mackinaws a threat to "the little guy"? GTFOOH
Tell me what "little guy" has a POS up in the heart of sovereign null sec. Tell me what "little guy" built Mittaningrad. Tell me why this "little guy" needs to be able to repel all of the firepower in the entire galaxy for almost TWO DAYS, and tell me what he's going to do against that firepower once the reinforcement timer is up on his small tower.
Some stuff you can't do alone. Some stuff you SHOULDN'T BE ABLE to do alone, like hold multiple systems hostage for days without any effort or input on your part when there is a determined force working against you. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
130
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 23:04:00 -
[13] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Yet now you add reinforced mode. You as a small group can disrupt a POCO for 24 hours with very little time investment. No structure should be able to be completely destroyed in a single session as that would just mean everyone runs around when their enemy is offline destroying everything. That wouldn't be fun for anyone.
How is you blowing up a Mackinaw in high sec in 15 seconds any different? I'll tell you how: A Mackinaw is worth twice as much as a POCO gantry and the person flying it doesn't get extra warning or extra chances to save it. It's a double standard. Newbs play EVE Online. Null sec veterans play Farmville. We all know your argument is bullshit and that you really just like the system as it currently is because it gives you an unfair advantage. That's fine. But if you continue to shovel logical fallacies and bogus, self-motivated "justifications" for the system, we're probably going to shoot them down. Sorry. Your dogs don't hunt.
Lucas Kell wrote:The short of it is, you want to kill our stuff, but you don;t want to put the effort in. At the same time, you think we should have to put whole groups of pilots on 24 hour standby to guard every POCO. It's stupid and you bloody well know it is.
What effort was put in to putting the structure up? That should be a comparative effort that is used to decide how much effort is required to take it down. And you don't get to count a 4000 player battle for the system, because the effort on one side is cancelled out by the effort of the other side in that battle. What happens afterward is its own event.
If you're too unorganized or short sighted to figure out how to protect your space empire AT ALL TIMES, then you shouldn't have one. In the real world, the police, the military, the fire department, the hospital emergency room, and even the freakin' donut shop are on station ready to perform their duty 24 hours a day. Your house doesn't go into reinforced mode when it's burning down and no one is going to wait almost TWO DAYS to get their donuts and coffee after ordering them. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
133
|
Posted - 2013.08.30 12:23:00 -
[14] - Quote
Trii Seo wrote:Though, to be frank, a way for a solo player to damage alliance assets would be hilariously exploited. Large alliances would simply use it to roll over smaller entities, without giving them even a chance of survival.
Awwww, look. Another defender of "the little guy". |
| |
|