Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1393
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 07:46:50 -
[91] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Why is "we're cancelling your war now" inherently different from "we're cancelling your relative peace now"? Why is one more allowable than the other? So long as wardecs are arbitrary why can't dodging be equally so? And why is the only risk an informed declarer might face, the fact that his targets might not willingly go along with their intent, too much to be dealt with?
As for the latter, you double my EHP on every ship I get in so that I'm actually twice as "safe" in reality as compared to the warped view of protection you've created and we might have a fair deal. And why should other players be able to cancel my mining income by mining out all of the asteroids themselves, or cancel my trading income by undercutting my orders on the market? Why is one more allowable than the other? At least the people declaring war have to pay something for it, while defense is completely and utterly free (let's not argue that the 2 million to reform a corporation is an actual cost here). And ship EHP has already been buffed, many times. Especially on haulers and barges. Much like a war dec defender leaves his corp, a miner can leave his system to regain his income. A trader deals with the loss of profits the same as a war dec recipient deals with the loss of any corp assets there may be. That there may be none can nullify the pains there, but if that's the case the question to be asked is why did the aggressor pay isk to gain the ability to aggress something worthless. Much like staying in a system with no ore as a miner that falls on the aggressor for failing to find a proper target.
Ship EHP being buffed for everyone doesn't create this selective protection you imagined. If I'm paying for this I want something worth it. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
6580
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 07:49:00 -
[92] - Quote
*Snip* Please refrain from discussing forum moderation. ISD Ezwal.
It's kind of like when players are getting decced out the wazoo and have to make an appeal to the player base or CCP on the mechanics of wardecs. You know, something "meta" to the game. Some people ask for changes in the mechanics then things don't go their way, others use the report button.
Same thing. I'm sorry you can't see that.
Bring back DEEEEP Space!
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2850
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 07:49:55 -
[93] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:How does one be in CODE and seldom leave the station? That's what I want to know. Have a baby three weeks ago, mostly. Gotta be a good husband, after all. Before that, that would be a wife with a high risk pregnancy. Anyway, I reported you both to Ezwal again for taking this to personal attacks. You both need to settle down already. I for one am thoroughly enjoying watching all of the personal attacks come from exactly one party to the argument.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1393
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 07:51:08 -
[94] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote: And you get to deal with wars with the method of your choice after evaluating you capacity and will to fight.
So does the defender. Or is there some trick I'm missing where being the attacker means I can't get hit back? You're missing where the defender has limited ability or interest, which is no less valid than the attacker's desire to hit them in the first place. It's absolutely less valid, yes. Loss is supposed to happen, it is the intended state of the game, and the function by which the economy is driven. Besides, as I mentioned, my desire is for player corps to be the optimal playstyle for personal income generation by a large margin. Even being in one would be something worth defending. No, it's no less valid because no one is obligated to offer up their ships to create loss. Loss happens upon failure to mitigate another players attempts to take something you have. It's not a natural automatic function that happens without realized intent. And that intent should have a variety of responses. It's no less valid than tanking a ship to make it less desirable as a gank target or watching local for hostiles in null, or even using dscan in a WH.
Mechanics are set up for those who want to avoid loss to do so should they be willing to take some action towards it, and in this case the response is appropriate to the method of aggression. |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
776
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 07:52:29 -
[95] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:How does one be in CODE and seldom leave the station? That's what I want to know. Have a baby three weeks ago, mostly. Gotta be a good husband, after all. Before that, that would be a wife with a high risk pregnancy. Anyway, I reported you both to Ezwal again for taking this to personal attacks. You both need to settle down already.
Diddums, and your posts are full of personal attacks, and we don't report them.
Thanks for confirming something we all knew in that post.
Ella's Snack bar
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
6580
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 07:54:27 -
[96] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Sorry you have to resort to the reporting tool.
Personally, I find it regrettable that you two devolve into ad hominems and personal attacks so quickly. It's really rather telling of the state of your argument, when all you can is spend an entire page on that kind of nonsense, rather than even try to argue your point. You need to settle down, as I mentioned above.
You are the one who does that, then uses the reporting tool when you get back what you dished out. That, IMO, makes you the lowest form of life and no lionger worth debating with knowing you are going to go running to the report button. I must have used the report button at best 5 or 6 times since 2006.
I'm done with you. This is like arguing with a died-hair social justice warrior on Twitter.
Go and report that too.
Bring back DEEEEP Space!
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2850
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 07:54:31 -
[97] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Have a baby three weeks ago, mostly. Gotta be a good husband, after all. Before that, that would be a wife with a high risk pregnancy. Anyway, I reported you both to Ezwal again for taking this to personal attacks.
You both need to settle down already. Diddums, and your posts are full of personal attacks, and we don't report them. Thanks for confirming something we all knew in that post. I haven't seen him personally attack a single person in this thread.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
776
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 07:55:22 -
[98] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:How does one be in CODE and seldom leave the station? That's what I want to know. Have a baby three weeks ago, mostly. Gotta be a good husband, after all. Before that, that would be a wife with a high risk pregnancy. Anyway, I reported you both to Ezwal again for taking this to personal attacks. You both need to settle down already. I for one am thoroughly enjoying watching all of the personal attacks come from exactly one party to the argument.
NOFUX...
Ella's Snack bar
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12722
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 07:55:42 -
[99] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote: No, it's no less valid because no one is obligated to offer up their ships to create loss.
See, that's just a lack of understanding of the nature of EVE. Each and every player is obligated to do this. That's why non consensual PvP is a thing in the first place.
Quote: Loss happens upon failure to mitigate another players attempts to take something you have. It's not a natural automatic function that happens without realized intent. And that intent should have a variety of responses.
You bet it is, or the NPCs wouldn't shoot back.
Quote: Mechanics are set up for those who want to avoid loss to do so should they be willing to take some action towards it, and in this case the response is appropriate to the method of aggression.
Things like warp stabs, mining or ratting while aligned, or tanking your ship, or watching local, those are all fine.
Eliminating half the risk in highsec by playing games with the corp creation system? That is not fine.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
780
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 07:56:43 -
[100] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Have a baby three weeks ago, mostly. Gotta be a good husband, after all. Before that, that would be a wife with a high risk pregnancy. Anyway, I reported you both to Ezwal again for taking this to personal attacks.
You both need to settle down already. Diddums, and your posts are full of personal attacks, and we don't report them. Thanks for confirming something we all knew in that post. I haven't seen him personally attack a single person in this thread.
Really, wow you sure about that...
Ella's Snack bar
|
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
6583
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 07:57:38 -
[101] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:How does one be in CODE and seldom leave the station? That's what I want to know. Have a baby three weeks ago, mostly. Gotta be a good husband, after all. Before that, that would be a wife with a high risk pregnancy. Anyway, I reported you both to Ezwal again for taking this to personal attacks. You both need to settle down already. Diddums, and your posts are full of personal attacks, and we don't report them. Thanks for confirming something we all knew in that post.
We were wondering for a while who was doing it every time a hot debate comes up. Looks like we found out finally.
Bring back DEEEEP Space!
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2851
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 07:57:45 -
[102] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Have a baby three weeks ago, mostly. Gotta be a good husband, after all. Before that, that would be a wife with a high risk pregnancy. Anyway, I reported you both to Ezwal again for taking this to personal attacks.
You both need to settle down already. Diddums, and your posts are full of personal attacks, and we don't report them. Thanks for confirming something we all knew in that post. I haven't seen him personally attack a single person in this thread. Really, wow you sure about that... Very sure.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
780
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 07:58:52 -
[103] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Have a baby three weeks ago, mostly. Gotta be a good husband, after all. Before that, that would be a wife with a high risk pregnancy. Anyway, I reported you both to Ezwal again for taking this to personal attacks.
You both need to settle down already. Diddums, and your posts are full of personal attacks, and we don't report them. Thanks for confirming something we all knew in that post. I haven't seen him personally attack a single person in this thread. Really, wow you sure about that... Very sure.
Oh dear reading and comprehension skills and all that...
Ella's Snack bar
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12722
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 07:58:55 -
[104] - Quote
Not that I'm going to be a tool and discuss forum moderation, but if I made so many personal attacks like you claim, why weren't they deleted when Ezwal had to come in here so many times because of you two guys?
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
780
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:01:02 -
[105] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Not that I'm going to be a tool and discuss forum moderation, but if I made so many personal attacks like you claim, why weren't they deleted when Ezwal had to come in here so many times because of you two guys?
You know you are not supposed to talk about forum moderation, good test this one, will it get deleted.
And in any case he came in because you started whining, like you have done on so many other threads, thanks for confirming that to us.
Ella's Snack bar
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1394
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:02:52 -
[106] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote: No, it's no less valid because no one is obligated to offer up their ships to create loss.
See, that's just a lack of understanding of the nature of EVE. Each and every player is obligated to do this. That's why non consensual PvP is a thing in the first place. Quote: Loss happens upon failure to mitigate another players attempts to take something you have. It's not a natural automatic function that happens without realized intent. And that intent should have a variety of responses.
You bet it is, or the NPCs wouldn't shoot back. Quote: Mechanics are set up for those who want to avoid loss to do so should they be willing to take some action towards it, and in this case the response is appropriate to the method of aggression.
Things like warp stabs, mining or ratting while aligned, or tanking your ship, or watching local, those are all fine. Eliminating half the risk in highsec by playing games with the corp creation system? That is not fine. No, no player is obligated to it, which is why observational and defensive mechanism exist. You are allowed to keep you assets to the extent of your ability to keep them from harm. The nature of eve in no way defies this. It's only a failure to understand the limits of PvP that encourages thinking otherwise.
Until you realize both active and passive defense are PvP can you see that the ability to interfere with the intent of others doesn't inherently create loss.
Edit: Also PvE encounters exist to be farmed at certain effort barriers. They create loss when people don't understand that, but their intend is the generation of resources and income, not loss. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
6583
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:04:21 -
[107] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Not that I'm going to be a tool and discuss forum moderation, but if I made so many personal attacks like you claim, why weren't they deleted when Ezwal had to come in here so many times because of you two guys? You know you are not supposed to talk about forum moderation, good test this one, will it get deleted.
I've got him blocked. His statement was intentionally trying to poke you with a stick so he can put this thread right after the one he has in his sig about IZ. That's the kind of person we are dealing with. The answer to his question is "because he's the one using the report button".
I'm using the block button. Hopefully he's not an American so I don't have to worry about what he's thinking while in a voting booth.
Good night everybody.
Bring back DEEEEP Space!
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
36161
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:13:16 -
[108] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:You are the one who does that, then uses the reporting tool when you get back what you dished out. That, IMO, makes you the lowest form of life and no lionger worth debating with knowing you are going to go running to the report button. I must have used the report button at best 5 or 6 times since 2006.
I'm done with you. This is like arguing with a died-hair social justice warrior on Twitter.
Go and report that too. He doesn't need to. I did already.
Irrespective of who it's from or who it's directed that, those types of posts don't belong here.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12722
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:13:40 -
[109] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote: No, no player is obligated to it, which is why observational and defensive mechanism exist. You are allowed to keep you assets to the extent of your ability to keep them from harm. The nature of eve in no way defies this. It's only a failure to understand the limits of PvP that encourages thinking otherwise.
I think you misunderstand.
I'm not talking about an obligation to die in every specific instance. But as a general rule, yes, everyone exists for their ship to explode, it's the major driving force in the game.
Quote: Until you realize both active and passive defense are PvP can you see that the ability to interfere with the intent of others doesn't inherently create loss.
Passive... what in the hell are you 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.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
780
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:16:22 -
[110] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:You are the one who does that, then uses the reporting tool when you get back what you dished out. That, IMO, makes you the lowest form of life and no lionger worth debating with knowing you are going to go running to the report button. I must have used the report button at best 5 or 6 times since 2006.
I'm done with you. This is like arguing with a died-hair social justice warrior on Twitter.
Go and report that too. He doesn't need to. I did already. Irrespective of who it's from or who it's directed that, those types of posts don't belong here.
diddums...
Ella's Snack bar
|
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
783
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:19:11 -
[111] - Quote
removed double post
Ella's Snack bar
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
783
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:20:01 -
[112] - Quote
Quote: Until you realize both active and passive defense are PvP can you see that the ability to interfere with the intent of others doesn't inherently create loss.
Passive... what in the hell are you talking about?
This is another reason why engaging with you is a waste of time, its obvious except if you are too up yourself.
Ella's Snack bar
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12724
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:22:52 -
[113] - Quote
Now, don't shoot steam out your ears, but I did report that double post for deletion.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
784
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:28:58 -
[114] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Now, don't shoot steam out your ears, but I did report that double post for deletion.
Well this fun exchange was very educational and confirmed a few things for us, nice try at a come back there, but you did the damage earlier. Thank you for your errors...
Ella's Snack bar
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
36163
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:30:29 -
[115] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:diddums... It's also just total disrespect to the OP, who bought a well thought out and expressed post (irrespective of our individual opinions on the topic), which was totally derailed almost from the start.
Why even carry on with this sort of stuff when the actual topic of the thread could be discussed instead? I'm not claiming to be better than anyone in this. Just lamenting the situation that we can't be civil to each other, especially when unprovoked to begin with. Someone always has to claim a higher moral ground and in doing so, attacks someone else. It's just hypocritical.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1394
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:33:46 -
[116] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote: No, no player is obligated to it, which is why observational and defensive mechanism exist. You are allowed to keep you assets to the extent of your ability to keep them from harm. The nature of eve in no way defies this. It's only a failure to understand the limits of PvP that encourages thinking otherwise.
I think you misunderstand. I'm not talking about an obligation to die in every specific instance. But as a general rule, yes, everyone exists for their ship to explode, it's the major driving force in the game. Quote: Until you realize both active and passive defense are PvP can you see that the ability to interfere with the intent of others doesn't inherently create loss.
Passive... what in the hell are you talking about? Maybe we're just dealing with the inversion of the same principle, while at any time you may find yourself outwitted and out of a ship, per the rules of the game, you may also find yourself on the winning side of your pursuit to keep your ship intact. I find neither of these possibilities to be more for or against against the nature of eve. The nature of eve is competition, and anytime you dock in the same ship you undocked in, intent to lose it notwithstanding, you "won" that round in a way. Since there are more than enough of us putting ships at risk, ours or each others, many times realizing the full extent of that risk, there is no obligation created for another individual to not do their best to mitigate their own risk. And additionally, the decision doesn't have to be all or none.
In applying to the wardec situation I feel the same. There is validity in mitigation of potential loss. That shouldn't mean corps that are purely social constructs shouldn't exist because the only valid corps are defense pacts between players. And if in a corp against overwhelming odds, playing on an alt or just not logging in should not be optimal choices.
As far as the use of the word passive, in this context I used it to mean acts that aren't directly confrontational to protect ones assets, tanking a barge, avoiding bling fitting mission ships, not overloading haulers isk wise, basically things that aren't designed to deter a specific aggression as much as to prevent aggressors from even taking notice of you. |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
784
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:35:43 -
[117] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Dracvlad wrote:diddums... It's also just total disrespect to the OP, who bought a well thought out and expressed post, which we all just totally derailed from the start. Why even carry on with this sort of stuff when the actual topic of the thread could be discussed instead. I'm not claiming to be better than anyone in this. Just lamenting the situation that we can't be civil to each other, especially when unprovoked to begin with.
The slime dripping from that post was awesome to behold...
Ella's Snack bar
|
Solecist Project
The Scope Gallente Federation
20692
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:36:26 -
[118] - Quote
alexclone1 wrote:Hello, i am posting with an alt.
Intro: Ive done it all: Build caps; Military Director for a Large Sov holding allaince; FC for small gang leet pvp low sec; FC for high skilled high sec mercs; mining; manufacturing.
So after my Military Director stint for over a year, i took a break from the game. Back in 2010 i was the CEO of a high sec corp. That was most fun ive ever had. We had 160 peeps in 3 months and membership was exploding.
Ive been playing eve since 2006 and back pre 2013 (i think) one had to pay a fixed fee to wardec someone which doubled every time a new entity wardec'd. This means that rarely would a corp get more than 3 war decs at once. The average war dec time was 1 week out of the month.
So i come back to do that high sec corp all over again. The problem is once my corp got to 50 guys in 2 weeks, the war decs came hot and heavy. And they werent like the old days of small corps. Now it was huge multiple war decing alliances. We didnt have a prayer. The corp was wardeced EVERY WEEK afterwards. Thus stomping us out of existance.
Who is there to hire when all the pvpers are in the war decing alliances? Where is there to go? What is there to do?
Sadly i had spent too much $$ for a corp website that never saw the light of day because once i relized the war dec mechanics, it was no longer worth it to be a successful large (50+) high sec corp.
I have no issues fighting, but a 50 man corp spread in euro/american tz simply cant do jack about the HUNDREDS of experienced pvpers camping your stations with nothing better to do.
I would love to have a conversation in the comments from both sides. Perhaps there is some middle ground? There's usually a good reason this happens. If you get decced constantly it's quite possible you have a badmouth in your corp.
In any case is it wrong to believe that a few can't do much against many. LOVESQUAD would be a good example. Even a day old noob cqn be extremely usefull in a war and replacing his ships is cheap as well.
Most often there are also people in leadership positions they shouldn't be.
In any case would you have to be very unlucky to attract a lot of decs without giving them any reason, because there are way too many corps to dec.
"Starting, taking part in, or completing a z0r chain is punishable by a permaban from the forums" - actual rule.
My 386DX33 was the most expensive computer I ever owned.
Eat. Sleep. Profit. Repeat.
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
36165
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:37:08 -
[119] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:The slime dripping from that post was awesome to behold... Why's that?
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12725
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 08:41:28 -
[120] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote: Maybe we're just dealing with the inversion of the same principle, while at any time you may find yourself outwitted and out of a ship, per the rules of the game, you may also find yourself on the winning side of your pursuit to keep your ship intact. I find neither of these possibilities to be more for or against against the nature of eve.
And, so long as you're actually doing it with intended game mechanics, I have no issue with it either.
But you cannot sit there and tell me that CCP intended wars to be trivially removed by screwing around with loopholes in the corp creation mechanics. It's right there in the dev blog, the intended method to dissolve wars is the surrender function.
Quote: In applying to the wardec situation I feel the same. There is validity in mitigation of potential loss.
If that mitigation involves actually playing the game, yes. I have no problem with people who avoid me, I spent damn near three hours a while ago hunting one guy who I just could not catch.
But flipping corps and trivializing the existence of the mechanic in the first place is not "mitigation". It's an exploit used to abrogate the need for any other forms of mitigation at all.
Quote: That shouldn't mean corps that are purely social constructs shouldn't exist because the only valid corps are defense pacts between players.
Purely social constructs are chat channels. Nothing further need be done about that.
Quote: As far as the use of the word passive, in this context I used it to mean acts that aren't directly confrontational to protect ones assets, tanking a barge, avoiding bling fitting mission ships, not overloading haulers isk wise, basically things that aren't designed to deter a specific aggression as much as to prevent aggressors from even taking notice of you.
Those all involve actually doing something in the game itself. Those involve making decisions and weighing choices. Dec dodging does not, it just gives you free safety, no fuss, no muss, fire and forget.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |