| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 [40] 50 60 70 .. 75 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Hiasa Kite
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
183
   |
Posted - 2015.02.11 02:43:01 -
[1171] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:Whats to explain? The point of my logic is to paint you guys into a corner. You all argue that risk should be part of the game. Then you argue that tactics like freighter webbing are perfectly fine even though they completely nullify the risk.
Dropping your risk to effecively zero does not magically lower risk for any other player.
Quote:Here this is really simple. I will put this in terms of equivalency.
Any ship able to achieve 100% resists on any HP value would be unkillable.
This ship would be 100% safe.
This ship if allowed to fly in game would be game breaking.
True.
Quote:Your argument is that based on your tactics that it is impossible to kill a freighter.
This is equivalent to making it game breaking.
False.
In this scenario you can still screw up and die. That's not possible with a literally invulnerable ship.
People to vote for CSM X(in order): Sabriz Adoudel, Cagali Cagali, Steve Ronuken, Manfred Sideous, Mike Azariah, Gorski Car
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
14932
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 02:44:27 -
[1172] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:
Man you guys sure LOOOOVE to exaggerate. I have "demanded" exactly zero things be changed in this game.
Apart from the constant calls for "more consequences for busy gank systems from faction navies" AKA, more NPC protection.
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Well if I thought I lost this argument days ago I would have stopped.
Yea well you haven't.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Valterra Craven
439
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 02:45:11 -
[1173] - Quote
Hiasa Kite wrote:
Therefore, if both arguments hold true, webbing mechanics make a player PVP safe and therefore are game breaking.
This is the core of our disagreement, so I'm going to carefully explain why PvP safe areas are game breaking for EvE and why a player able to make himself completely safe is fine.[/quote]
You typed a lot of words for no reason. Motivations, efficiency, etc have absolutely zero bearing on the fact that an unkillable ship is game breaking.
Its funny how I am the one that is accused of making "pants on head" arguments. Especially given everything that's been said by the pro-gankers arguing that having zero risk in this game would be game breaking, but that a ship using the right tactics to achieve zero risk is not. Go figure. |
Hiasa Kite
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
184
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 02:46:17 -
[1174] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:Hiasa Kite wrote:Quote:Therefore, if both arguments hold true, webbing mechanics make a player PVP safe and therefore are game breaking. This is the core of our disagreement, so I'm going to carefully explain why PvP safe areas are game breaking for EvE and why a player able to make himself completely safe is fine. You typed a lot of words for no reason. Motivations, efficiency, etc have absolutely zero bearing on the fact that an unkillable ship is game breaking. Its funny how I am the one that is accused of making "pants on head" arguments. Especially given everything that's been said by the pro-gankers arguing that having zero risk in this game would be game breaking, but that a ship using the right tactics to achieve zero risk is not. Go figure.
Read the post. Learn.
People to vote for CSM X(in order): Sabriz Adoudel, Cagali Cagali, Steve Ronuken, Manfred Sideous, Mike Azariah, Gorski Car
|
Valterra Craven
439
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 02:46:59 -
[1175] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
Apart from the constant calls for "more consequences for busy gank systems from faction navies" AKA, more NPC protection.
Hey, I freely admitted that I asked for consequences, like in my very first post. But you know what a question is not? A demand.
baltec1 wrote:
Yea well you haven't.
Guess that means I don't think I've lost.
|
Valterra Craven
439
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 02:48:16 -
[1176] - Quote
Hiasa Kite wrote:
In this scenario you can still screw up and die. That's not possible with a literally invulnerable ship.
Oh, so it took you all of those words to admit that there is no such thing as 100% safety. Great. Same page.
|
Hiasa Kite
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
184
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 02:51:23 -
[1177] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:Hiasa Kite wrote:
In this scenario you can still screw up and die. That's not possible with a literally invulnerable ship.
Oh, so it took you all of those words to admit that there is no such thing as 100% safety. Great. Same page.
The theory offers 100% safety. The practicality is that any slip in concentration, failure to communicate, deviation from procedure can lead to death.
Wait, your entire argument hinged on this simple premise? That's why you've bobbing around in the bowl for so long?
People to vote for CSM X(in order): Sabriz Adoudel, Cagali Cagali, Steve Ronuken, Manfred Sideous, Mike Azariah, Gorski Car
|
Valterra Craven
439
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 02:52:42 -
[1178] - Quote
Hiasa Kite wrote:
Wait, your entire argument hinged on this simple premise? That's why you've bobbing around in the bowl for so long?
Lol, no. You guys like to go down the rabbit hole, so I just followed you down it.
|
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
490
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 03:53:42 -
[1179] - Quote
Seems like Valterra has won this round. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
11727
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 05:04:03 -
[1180] - Quote
And when Veers agrees with you, that's when you know that you're well and truly damned.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
|
|
Valterra Craven
439
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 14:20:14 -
[1181] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:And when Veers agrees with you, that's when you know that you're well and truly damned.
Did you have rebuttal to my points, or do you just like proving that pro-gankers are in every way comparable and a like to the same carebears they despise? |
Hiasa Kite
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
193
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 14:29:04 -
[1182] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:And when Veers agrees with you, that's when you know that you're well and truly damned. Did you have rebuttal to my points, or do you just like proving that pro-gankers are in every way comparable and a like to the same carebears they despise?
Feel free to reread his posts to pick up on any rebuttals you may have missed. Unless that is you've raised new points yet to be discussed
People to vote for CSM X(in order): Sabriz Adoudel, Cagali Cagali, Steve Ronuken, Manfred Sideous, Mike Azariah, Gorski Car
|
Valterra Craven
439
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 15:51:00 -
[1183] - Quote
Hiasa Kite wrote:
Feel free to reread his posts to pick up on any rebuttals you may have missed. Unless that is you've raised new points yet to be discussed
Anything worth responding to already has been. Or did you forget that I catalog everything? |
Hiasa Kite
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
193
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 15:57:20 -
[1184] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:Hiasa Kite wrote:
Feel free to reread his posts to pick up on any rebuttals you may have missed. Unless that is you've raised new points yet to be discussed
Anything worth responding to already has been. Or did you forget that I catalog everything?
Well there you go. Everything's been sorted.
People to vote for CSM X(in order): Sabriz Adoudel, Cagali Cagali, Steve Ronuken, Manfred Sideous, Mike Azariah, Gorski Car
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3827
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 17:19:46 -
[1185] - Quote
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them.
The Rules:
27. Off-topic posting is prohibited.
Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued to the off-topic poster.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
11750
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 23:15:11 -
[1186] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:
Whats to explain?
Well, for starters, when you were first pressed to give an example of a "perfect gank", you gave the incredibly ignorant answer of "gank the webber", as though you thought that such a thing would actually feasibly work.
So you're displaying a large level of ignorance of the very mechanic you've been trying to claim needs a nerf for the last twenty or so pages.
Let's start with that.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Tiffany 'Tiffs' Succeed
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
48
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 03:43:44 -
[1187] - Quote
Hi!
Let me clear this mess up for you....
Valtera, your equivalency doesn't fit. The freighter isn't invulnerable per se. The webber webs it into warp,
which means can be incredibly hard or near impossible to catch the freighter.
As you didn't know this, Kaarous rightfully explained that you don't really understand the mechanics behind this.
What you don't realise is that you do not know enough to actually have a say in this.
You know that you don't know a lot, don't get me wrong ...
... but your blindness about what it is that you are missing ...........
Oh and it's not only you anyway.
The others don't get that they shouldn't keep talking to you like this,
because they can't help you out of your misery anyway.
Tbh, I didn't read any pages before this one ...
... but I didn't want to see you people go on and on and on ......
... especially when it's such a completely screwed conversation. |
Valterra Craven
439
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 03:58:57 -
[1188] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Let's start with that.
Just in case this wasn't clear the first time: "The point of my logic is to paint you guys into a corner"
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Well, for starters, when you were first pressed to give an example of a "perfect gank", you gave the incredibly ignorant answer of "gank the webber", as though you thought that such a thing would actually feasibly work.
So you're displaying a large level of ignorance of the very mechanic you've been trying to claim needs a nerf for the last twenty or so pages.
So why the farce?
If you guys are constantly going to argue that only gankers are qualified to talk about the mechanics of ganking and you (besides CCP) are the only people that can speak to whether ganking is or is not broken (despite the obvious conflict of interest), then the ONLY way for me to get a point across is for YOU or someone in your camp to mess up. This means that the goal of me saying very little was to draw someone out and make the argument for me.
Since, Hiasa Kite has so graciously provided the necessary evidence and because it did not come from me, you can not argue that I don't know what I'm talking about.
So I will ask you again, since you continue to deflect without actually proving your claims are true, what is your choice?
Continue to claim that webbing a ship based on your methods is unkillable/unstoppable, or admit that there is at least one scenario where your tactics can be effectively countered. |
Valterra Craven
439
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 04:12:20 -
[1189] - Quote
Tiffany 'Tiffs' Succeed wrote:
Let me clear this mess up for you....
Thanks for your help, but I know perfectly well how the mechanic works and what it enables.
Tiffany 'Tiffs' Succeed wrote:
The freighter isn't invulnerable per se.
I wasn't the one that claimed that the webbing mechanic made freighters 100% safe. (which you would have realized if you had read further back.)That honor belongs to Kaarous. Therefore if as he claims the freighter is 100% safe, then that is the equivalent to being invulnerable.
Tiffany 'Tiffs' Succeed wrote:
The webber webs it into warp, which means can be incredibly hard or near impossible to catch the freighter.
So if NO ONE, including gankers have an effective counter as Kaarous points out then how is what you are saying any different to what I'm saying?
My point is that the freighter doesn't need to be 100% invulnerable for this mechanic to be game breaking. If the goal is to reduce the risk of getting blown up to near zero or actually zero, and the goal is achieved, then by the very nature of the parameters that the way the game is laid out that ability would be game breaking.
|
Hiasa Kite
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
195
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 12:12:31 -
[1190] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:My point is that the freighter doesn't need to be 100% invulnerable for this mechanic to be game breaking. If the goal is to reduce the risk of getting blown up to near zero or actually zero, and the goal is achieved, then by the very nature of the parameters that the way the game is laid out that ability would be game breaking.
You keep trying to force this, but that's not how it works. If freighters that can stay safe is game breaking, then what of:
- Cloaking devices?
- Warp core stabilizers?
- Interdiction nullificattion?
- Instant alignment?
- Local intel?
- D-scan?
- Combat probes?
- Jump drives?
- Tactical bookmarks (instant docks/undocks etc)?
- And indeed, player communication
All of these mechanics, used properly and/or in some combination allow pilots to attain a very high degree of safety and in most cases, near-as-dammit 100% in quite literally any area of space.
To argue that safe freighters are game breaking is to argue all of the above are game breaking, too. Shockingly enough, I don't think anyone's going to support the removal of ALL of those features.
People to vote for CSM X(in order): Sabriz Adoudel, Cagali Cagali, Steve Ronuken, Manfred Sideous, Mike Azariah, Gorski Car
|
|
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
11752
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 12:36:28 -
[1191] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:
Just in case this wasn't clear the first time: "The point of my logic is to paint you guys into a corner"
Translation:
"You lot exposed that I was trying to dictate changes based on a position of total ignorance, so now being deliberately obtuse is all I have left."
I never thought I'd say this, but I miss Dinsdale. At least he was actually inventive and fun to read, not a total bore shoveling doggerel at everyone.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Concord Guy's Cousin
State War Academy
Caldari State
602
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 13:40:45 -
[1192] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:I never thought I'd say this, but I miss Dinsdale. At least he was actually inventive and fun to read, not a total bore shoveling doggerel at everyone. Dinsdale occasionally produced quality trolls and tinfoilhattery, the current crop of wannabes are trying to make up with quantity that which they lack in quality.
ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"
NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.
|
Valterra Craven
439
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 14:20:03 -
[1193] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Translation:
"You lot exposed that I was trying to dictate changes based on a position of total ignorance, so now being deliberately obtuse is all I have left."
I never thought I'd say this, but I miss Dinsdale. At least he was actually inventive and fun to read, not a total bore shoveling doggerel at everyone.
Translation: you guys would rather name call and tear people up rather than make actual arguments. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
11752
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 14:20:45 -
[1194] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Translation:
"You lot exposed that I was trying to dictate changes based on a position of total ignorance, so now being deliberately obtuse is all I have left."
I never thought I'd say this, but I miss Dinsdale. At least he was actually inventive and fun to read, not a total bore shoveling doggerel at everyone.
Translation: you guys would rather name call and tear people up rather than make actual arguments.
Actually, it's more like we're openly mocking you, since actually making arguments just resulted in you ignoring them repeatedly, while trolling away with the same old narrative.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Valterra Craven
439
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 14:22:24 -
[1195] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Actually, it's more like we're openly mocking you, since actually making arguments just resulted in you ignoring them repeatedly, while trolling away with the same old narrative.
Well, at least you can admit that you're a douchewaffle, since I actually responded to every single argument you guys made pointing out their flaws. But I can understand how'd you rather whitewash history than actually accomplish anything. |
Hiasa Kite
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
197
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 14:23:52 -
[1196] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Actually, it's more like we're openly mocking you, since actually making arguments just resulted in you ignoring them repeatedly, while trolling away with the same old narrative.
Well, at least you can admit that you're a douchewaffle, since I actually responded to every single argument you guys made pointing out their flaws. But I can understand how'd you rather whitewash history than actually accomplish anything.
Spewing logical fallacies is not pointing out a flaw.
People to vote for CSM X(in order): Sabriz Adoudel, Cagali Cagali, Steve Ronuken, Manfred Sideous, Mike Azariah, Gorski Car
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
11752
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 14:23:53 -
[1197] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:
Well, at least you can admit that you're a douchewaffle, since I actually responded to every single argument you guys made pointing out their flaws.
On the literal previous page, you outright admitted that you're just trolling and that you have no clue what you're talking about.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Valterra Craven
439
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 14:25:22 -
[1198] - Quote
Hiasa Kite wrote:Valterra Craven wrote:My point is that the freighter doesn't need to be 100% invulnerable for this mechanic to be game breaking. If the goal is to reduce the risk of getting blown up to near zero or actually zero, and the goal is achieved, then by the very nature of the parameters that the way the game is laid out that ability would be game breaking. You keep trying to force this, but that's not how it works. If freighters that can stay safe is game breaking, then what of:
- Cloaking devices?
- Warp core stabilizers?
- Interdiction nullificattion?
- Instant alignment?
- Local intel?
- D-scan?
- Combat probes?
- Jump drives?
- Tactical bookmarks (instant docks/undocks etc)?
- And indeed, player communication
All of these mechanics, used properly and/or in some combination allow pilots to attain a very high degree of safety and in most cases, near-as-dammit 100% in quite literally any area of space. To argue that safe freighters are game breaking is to argue all of the above are game breaking, too. Shockingly enough, I don't think anyone's going to support the removal of ALL of those features.
Because NO ONE has made a complaint about anything on that list when being used improperly being game breaking? Or do do the reams of threads on afk cloaking in NULL pass you by, or the reams of threads about how people were farming Faction Warfare with WCS on? Or the fact that people have complained endlessly about ceptors are overpowere with nullification, or the reams of thread about how broken local is, or the fact that they just nerfed the ever living hell out of jump drives... right...
|
Valterra Craven
439
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 14:26:11 -
[1199] - Quote
Hiasa Kite wrote:
Spewing logical fallacies is not pointing out a flaw.
Sure, if I had done that, but considering I didn't....
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
11752
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 14:27:16 -
[1200] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:Hiasa Kite wrote:
Spewing logical fallacies is not pointing out a flaw.
Sure, if I had done that, but considering I didn't....
No, you did. He might not have used a strong enough plural, though, since you've probably snagged the record for the forums.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 [40] 50 60 70 .. 75 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |