| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9825
   |
Posted - 2015.02.19 16:51:11 -
[1] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:Can somebody please define the meme "SKYNET" in EvE? I know it is a reference to the Terminator movies, but I can't connect it to EvE ...
It;'s a term some idjot or another applied to the fact that carriers can delegate control of fighters to other ships off grid while sitting in a safe/at a pos/on a station etc. The use of the term is to pretend something that has existed for a decade is somehow new and unbalanced when in reality it's old and the users of the term of butt hurt at some lose ....to an old game mechanic.
Just like "drone assist", the users of the term misidentify the problem. Instead of putting the 'blame' where it belongs (on the inclusion of drone damage and tracking mods and buffing of Drone ships like the Ishtar, things that didn't exist in the past), the instead focus on the older game mechanics (Drone Assist, Fighter Delegation) and lose their minds. Mainly because they like drone bonuses and drone mods but don't like it when other people use those things to kill them in a blob or from afar.
In other words, it's just the same old "those guys used something that killed me...ME of all people, Don't they know who the F$%^ I am? TO THE FORUMS to right this injustice!!!" crying we all shold be used to by now.
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9825
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 17:10:09 -
[2] - Quote
Godfrey Silvarna wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:It;'s a term some idjot or another applied to the fact that carriers can delegate control of fighters to other ships off grid while sitting in a safe/at a pos/on a station etc. The use of the term is to pretend something that has existed for a decade is somehow new and unbalanced when in reality it's old and the users of the term of butt hurt at some loss ....to an old game mechanic.
Just like "drone assist", the users of the term misidentify the problem. Instead of putting the 'blame' where it belongs (on the inclusion of drone damage and tracking mods and buffing of Drone ships like the Ishtar, things that didn't exist in the past), the instead focus on the older game mechanics (Drone Assist, Fighter Delegation) and lose their minds. Mainly because they like drone bonuses and drone mods but don't like it when other people use those things to kill them in a blob or from afar.
In other words, it's just the same old "those guys used something that killed me...ME of all people, Don't they know who the F$%^ I am? TO THE FORUMS to right this injustice!!!" crying we all shold be used to by now. It is true that assigning fighters was a fringe tactic before drone stat boosting modules were a thing. Drone modules themselves are also not really a problem, since you need to compromise tank and capacitor to fit them on an on-grid carrier, which means it will die in a fire in an amusing and embarassing manner. It becomes a problem when you can fit a carrier for full damage and full damage application without ever putting it at risk, so you get fighters with unreasonably high tracking and damage without the tradeoffs you would otherwise have to suffer for those fitting choises.
That means the problem is the tracking mods and ability of fighters to benefit from those, not the actual mechanic of fighter delegation (which is the thing everyone seems to want nerfed). |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9826
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 17:40:40 -
[3] - Quote
Godfrey Silvarna wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:That means the problem is the tracking mods and ability of fighters to benefit from those, not the actual mechanic of fighter delegation (which is the thing everyone seems to want nerfed). I am arguing that those modules are fine and well in balance when used in on-grid drone boats, including carriers. These are the conditions ships should be balanced in. Delegating was a fringe mechanic no one would have cared about, before these modules were added, so why should we lose the modules and keep the fringe mechanic no one would have missed if it was lost before it was made viable by the modules?
This is exaclty what I alluded to in my post. "I like being about to put on mods that boosts MY drones on grid, I don't like the fact that other people can do it from off grid).
The actual 'solution' (to this thing that isn't actually a problem) is to remove carrier and module bonuses from assigned fighters (like it used to be, fighters assigned from a Thanny were no better than any other carrier's fighters because the Thanny's fighter bonus wasn't applied to it's off grid fighters), not to screw with a mechanic that isn't actually the problem.
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9838
|
Posted - 2015.02.20 13:57:33 -
[4] - Quote
SharkPrince2001 wrote:http://gorsking.blogspot.se/2015/02/****-skynet.html
TL;DR he things warp drives should be removed from fighters because CCP made a change that allows fighters to benefit from carrier pilots skills and the mods on that carrier.
This guy should work for CCP. He already thinks like CCP, ie:
-Identify a problem
-Identify the source of the problem
-change something did not cause the problem and hope that the original problem is now somehow 'fixed'.... |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9850
|
Posted - 2015.02.20 20:42:59 -
[5] - Quote
Jori McKie wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:SharkPrince2001 wrote:http://gorsking.blogspot.se/2015/02/****-skynet.html TL;DR he things warp drives should be removed from fighters because CCP made a change that allows fighters to benefit from carrier pilots skills and the mods on that carrier. This guy should work for CCP. He already thinks like CCP, ie: -Identify a problem -Identify the source of the problem -change something did not cause the problem and hope that the original problem is now somehow 'fixed'.... You are wrong and he his right. See how simple i can denounce you. His article explains exactly how it works, he provides the numbers and what has changed. At the end he offers a reasonable and easy to code solution. You on the other hand.
\
How does it make sense to change something that did not cause the problem rather than just change the thing this did cause it? You don't need an article written so 5th graders can understand it to see how dumb the idea is. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9861
|
Posted - 2015.02.21 20:47:53 -
[6] - Quote
Zen Guerrilla wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:
\
How does it make sense to change something that did not cause the problem rather than just change the thing this did cause it? You don't need an article written so 5th graders can understand it to see how dumb the idea is.
Being abled to assign fighters from pretty much complete safety IS the core of the problem. Even a 5th grader should understand that.
could that 5th grade also understand that that problem didn't exist the same way prior to some change to the game that CAUSED the problem.
Which is the entire damn point, somehow people live in bizarre land where the solution to a problem isn't the thing that CAUSED the problem, it's somehow changing things that didn't cause the problem. And somehow, they guy saying "fix the actual thing that created the problem" s crazy for saying that.....
|
| |
|