EVE Search - Should High sec go away?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Should High sec go away?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jonah Gravenstein Machiavellian Space Bastards 24753	Posted - 2015.08.15 23:37:06 - [241] - Quote Tippia wrote: Jonah Gravenstein wrote: It's the brand name of a exterior paint that people use for budget paint jobs on cars. But that makes no sense. Then they wouldn't be Minmatar. Have you ever seen a car that's been patched up with duct tape and then painted with a roller? They're 20 footers, they look ok from 20 feet and end up looking very Minmatar up close. I know this, I've owned several examples, some of them older than I am. Civilized behaviour is knowing that violence is barbaric, but paying other people to do it is business. Nil mortifi sine lucre.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25652	Posted - 2015.08.15 23:52:18 - [242] - Quote Jonah Gravenstein wrote: Tippia wrote: Jonah Gravenstein wrote: It's the brand name of a exterior paint that people use for budget paint jobs on cars. But that makes no sense. Then they wouldn't be Minmatar. Have you ever seen a car that's been patched up with duct tape and then painted with a roller? They're 20 footers, they look ok from 20 feet and end up looking very Minmatar up close. I know this, I've owned several examples, some of them older than I am. Oh, I know the look. I was thinking more of the heretical notion of applying rust protection (now that I've read up on it) on a Minmatar ship. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2.
BrundleMeth Caldari Provisions Caldari State 458	Posted - 2015.08.16 00:06:12 - [243] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: If High sec goes away, most of the people there would probably go away too. Meaning you won't get more targets everywhere else, and CCP would struggle to keep the lights on. Better solution is that you go away instead. Exactly. I'd quit faster than you could say "stick it in yer ass"... I'd Biomass with ALL my ISK and Gear too. 200 Billion ISK gone down the Dumper...
Jonah Gravenstein Machiavellian Space Bastards 24756	Posted - 2015.08.16 00:15:45 - [244] - Quote BrundleMeth wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: If High sec goes away, most of the people there would probably go away too. Meaning you won't get more targets everywhere else, and CCP would struggle to keep the lights on. Better solution is that you go away instead. Exactly. I'd quit faster than you could say "stick it in yer ass"... I'd Biomass with ALL my ISK and Gear too. 200 Billion ISK gone down the Dumper... Agreed, I've did WH's for a year and run PI in lowsec, both are fun to slip into but too stressful to live in for me. Hisec offers me a level of risk that I don't find stressful, I'm aware that I'm playing a game where Murphy's Law is extremely active and work around it. Civilized behaviour is knowing that violence is barbaric, but paying other people to do it is business. Nil mortifi sine lucre.
Kinete Jenius Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 59	Posted - 2015.08.16 05:11:14 - [245] - Quote Jonah Gravenstein wrote: The point is that you're claiming that gank destroyers have battleship levels of DPS when in truth they have slightly more than cruiser levels of DPS, PvE cruisers at that. You're also failing to take into account that gank destroyers have an extremely limited engagement envelope whereas gank BS's generally have a much larger engagement envelope. Some cruisers can easily reach battleship level of DPS. Especially in a PVE situation where tank can be minimized to one module. All you've proven is that cruisers can also reach BS level dps albeit at a much higher cost than a catalyst. Quote: You should learn to read, I stated level 3, which by definition isn't level 4. /facepalm. Are you really trying to be this dense? Is it just an act to try to troll me now? Or is this some secret plan to somehow "win" the forums? My point was that going BC IV is over a month less in training compared to BS IV. That is supporting evidence of my statement that it's easier than before to get into ganking. When I trained my current set of gank alts I would of had to buy 24 more plexes for dual training if I had to go to BS IV like in the old days. Fortunately the pocket battleships allowed me to stick to BC IV and save time and isk in the process while still pumping up some dps related skills. Quote: When used in the manner in which you did, the word fraction generally refers to the underlined part below. If you'd have said between 1/2 and 2/3 of the price then I wouldn't have quibbled with you. fraction -êfrak-â(+Ö)n noun 1. a numerical quantity that is not a whole number (e.g. 1/2, 0.5). 2. a small or tiny part, amount, or proportion of something. Exactly the whole number being the original value and the fraction of the whole number being the new value. You're really trying too hard at this.
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn Department 10 248	Posted - 2015.08.16 07:30:50 - [246] - Quote If CCP made high sec 'go away' we wouldn't have EVE Online anymore. The company would go bust. High sec is 'where it's at' and has been for a long time now. Even the null & low people are in high sec nowadays. You can't force people to do what they don't want to do. Null sec has to become a viable choice for smaller entities. Whether 'FozzieSov' will bring this remains to be seen. On the face of it the new system appears to an annoying concept that isn't much fun to do. It has to be enjoyable otherwise what is the point. " They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. "-áRick. " Find out what ? "-áAbraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. "-áRick. Season four.-á-á ' The Walking Dead. ' .
Jonah Gravenstein Machiavellian Space Bastards 24761	Posted - 2015.08.16 07:32:22 - [247] - Quote Kinete Jenius wrote: Jonah Gravenstein wrote: The point is that you're claiming that gank destroyers have battleship levels of DPS when in truth they have slightly more than cruiser levels of DPS, PvE cruisers at that. You're also failing to take into account that gank destroyers have an extremely limited engagement envelope whereas gank BS's generally have a much larger engagement envelope. Some cruisers can easily reach battleship level of DPS. Especially in a PVE situation where tank can be minimized to one module. All you've proven is that cruisers can also reach BS level dps albeit at a much higher cost than a catalyst. Engagement envelope is irrelevant as it is trivially easy to get a warp in directly on top of my targets. Hint cloak Quote: You should learn to read, I stated level 3, which by definition isn't level 4. /facepalm. Are you really trying to be this dense? Is it just an act to try to troll me now? Or is this some secret plan to somehow "win" the forums? My point was that going BC IV is over a month less in training compared to BS IV. That is supporting evidence of my statement that it's easier than before to get into ganking. When I trained my current set of gank alts I would of had to buy 24 more plexes for dual training if I had to go to BS IV like in the old days. Fortunately the pocket battleships allowed me to stick to BC IV and save time and isk in the process while still pumping up some dps related skills. Quote: When used in the manner in which you did, the word fraction generally refers to the underlined part below. If you'd have said between 1/2 and 2/3 of the price then I wouldn't have quibbled with you. fraction -êfrak-â(+Ö)n noun 1. a numerical quantity that is not a whole number (e.g. 1/2, 0.5). 2. a small or tiny part, amount, or proportion of something. Exactly the whole number being the original value and the fraction of the whole number being the new value. You're really trying too hard at this. *shakes head sadly and gives up. Civilized behaviour is knowing that violence is barbaric, but paying other people to do it is business. Nil mortifi sine lucre.
Yossarian Toralen M and M Enterpises 45	Posted - 2015.08.16 08:12:06 - [248] - Quote After reading the OP the only real solution is that null should go away, apparently you can't get a fight there. No such problem in low and high.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25654	Posted - 2015.08.16 10:50:51 - [249] - Quote Kinete Jenius wrote: Some cruisers can easily reach battleship level of DPS. Especially in a PVE situation where tank can be minimized to one module. All you've proven is that cruisers can also reach BS level dps albeit at a much higher cost than a catalyst. No, he hasn't. That's some nonsense you've made up. Neither destroyers nor cruisers have battleships DPS unless the battleship is absolutely shitfit, especially not PvE fit cruisers since they generally need the DPS-enhancing slots to survive. The only a handful of ways for you to come to anything remotely like that conclusion: you are not actually looking at the T1 cruisers in question, or you are not familiar with battleships and what they're capable of. The latter notion is further reinforced byGÇª Quote: /facepalm. Are you really trying to be this dense? Is it just an act to try to troll me now? Or is this some secret plan to somehow "win" the forums? My point was that going BC IV is over a month less in training compared to BS IV. Your point is wrong. Hilariously, laughably wrong. It's a difference of 139k SP between those two skills GÇö not even three days worth of training in total. His point was that at BS III, the only real difference is the BS skill itself. It's not him being dense here; it's you not knowing what the skill tree looks like, and it's you that suddenly changed the parameters just to try (and utterly fail) to disprove what he said. Quote: Engagement envelope is irrelevant as it is trivially easy to get a warp in directly on top of my targets. Hint cloak Oh, you mean the module that a gank ship can't really use, especially not to warp in directly on someone, due to its adverse effects on the ship's combat capability? So yeah, engagement envelope is relevant. You know, the more you try to argue in favour of your GÇ£pointGÇ¥, the more you demonstrate that you aren't actually familiar with the any of the things you're talking about. You don't understand the concept of free; you don't understand what destroyers, cruisers, or battleships can do; you don't understand the skill system; you don't understand how cloaks work; andGÇª Quote: Exactly the whole number being the original value and the fraction of the whole number being the new value. So you didn't actually mean to use the phrase GÇ£a fraction ofGÇ¥ then. You meant to say GÇ£a sliver lessGÇ¥, otherwise, you'd be wrong about this too and we can add GÇ£English idiomsGÇ¥ to the list of things you aren't familiar with. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2.
Josef Djugashvilis 2975	Posted - 2015.08.16 11:07:30 - [250] - Quote No hi-sec = no Eve Online. Even those who constantly like so show how tough they are by whinging about hi-sec must know this. This is not a signature.

Snagletooth Johnson Snagle Material Services CAStabouts 279	Posted - 2015.08.16 11:47:05 - [251] - Quote Jonah Gravenstein wrote: Tippia wrote: Oh, I know the look. I was thinking more of the heretical notion of applying rust protection (now that I've read up on it) on a Minmatar ship. It's not heresy if you think of the paint as a form of hull tanking Duct tape is Hull tanking. Rustoleum is Armor Tanking.
Jonah Gravenstein Machiavellian Space Bastards 24782	Posted - 2015.08.16 12:40:59 - [252] - Quote Snagletooth Johnson wrote: Jonah Gravenstein wrote: Tippia wrote: Oh, I know the look. I was thinking more of the heretical notion of applying rust protection (now that I've read up on it) on a Minmatar ship. It's not heresy if you think of the paint as a form of hull tanking Duct tape is Hull tanking. Rustoleum is Armor Tanking. I stand corrected. Civilized behaviour is knowing that violence is barbaric, but paying other people to do it is business. Nil mortifi sine lucre.
Rayne Jupiter Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2015.08.16 17:24:09 - [253] - Quote What an idiotic idea. Veteran players are extremely bias to ideas like this. Being close to or at the meta level it is easy for them to survive in a dog eat dog environment. But what of the new pilots? Do not get me wrong I enjoy PvP across multiple genre's. I would love to get out there now and start blowing up ships. However, EVE is not a game where you can just jump straight into PvP and yield positive results. EVE is a very complex game with a plethora of aspects dictating a ships efficiency in combat. New players need time to interpret the wealth of information EVE has to offer. On top of learning ship mechanics; optimal and fall-off ranges; damage types; resistances; shield, armor, and speed tanking; cloak mechanics; d-scanning; drone mechanics; (my eyes are already crossing); players have to train essential skills to Level 5, which could take anywhere from 6 months to a year. PvP in EVE is calculated and proactive, reaction time and quick thinking play a small part in determining victory or defeat. High sec offers a semi safe environment where rookie pilots can experiment and discover. I am confident a lot of miners would love to get out there and do some killing. After all outsmarting another person on equal ground is such a great feeling! Yet, the risk vs. reward of PvP isn't worth it for newer pilots. Want to get some more action? Help mentor and coach new pilots! Find ways to contribute to a players PvP confidence. Too lazy to do a little hand holding? Shut up and wait for us newer pilots to catch up!
admiral root Red Galaxy 3091	Posted - 2015.08.16 18:21:05 - [254] - Quote Rayne Jupiter wrote: What an idiotic idea. Veteran players are extremely bias to ideas like this. Being close to or at the meta level it is easy for them to survive in a dog eat dog environment. But what of the new pilots? Do not get me wrong I enjoy PvP across multiple genre's. I would love to get out there now and start blowing up ships. However, EVE is not a game where you can just jump straight into PvP and yield positive results. EVE is a very complex game with a plethora of aspects dictating a ships efficiency in combat. New players need time to interpret the wealth of information EVE has to offer. On top of learning ship mechanics; optimal and fall-off ranges; damage types; resistances; shield, armor, and speed tanking; cloak mechanics; d-scanning; drone mechanics; (my eyes are already crossing); players have to train essential skills to Level 5, which could take anywhere from 6 months to a year. PvP in EVE is calculated and proactive, reaction time and quick thinking play a small part in determining victory or defeat. High sec offers a semi safe environment where rookie pilots can experiment and discover. I am confident a lot of miners would love to get out there and do some killing. After all outsmarting another person on equal ground is such a great feeling! Yet, the risk vs. reward of PvP isn't worth it for newer pilots. Want to get some more action? Help mentor and coach new pilots! Find ways to contribute to a players PvP confidence. Too lazy to do a little hand holding? Shut up and wait for us newer pilots to catch up! What an idiotic post. Had you bothered to read the thread before posting, you would have seen that many of the players who ridicule the idea of removing highsec are those same veteran players you mentioned. No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
Harry Saq Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass 100	Posted - 2015.08.16 18:37:42 - [255] - Quote Tippia wrote: Kinete Jenius wrote: /facepalm. Are you really trying to be this dense? Is it just an act to try to troll me now? Or is this some secret plan to somehow "win" the forums? My point was that going BC IV is over a month less in training compared to BS IV. Your point is wrong. Hilariously, laughably wrong. It's a difference of 139k SP between those two skills GÇö not even three days worth of training in total. His point was that at BS III, the only real difference is the BS skill itself. It's not him being dense here; it's you not knowing what the skill tree looks like, and it's you that suddenly changed the parameters just to try (and utterly fail) to disprove what he said. Not that I care about any of this nonsense, but you have to consider the guns/missiles as well when moving from cruiser/BC to BS (excluding the BCs that fit BS guns). Just sayin....like, I said, don't care at all, but it isn't just the one skill to look at...
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25668	Posted - 2015.08.16 18:41:52 - [256] - Quote Harry Saq wrote: Not that I care about any of this nonsense, but you have to consider the guns/missiles as well when moving from cruiser/BC to BS (excluding the BCs that fit BS guns). Just sayin....like, I said, don't care at all, but it isn't just the one skill to look at... We're talking about ABCs, so no, we don't have to consider them. Rayne Jupiter wrote: Veteran players are extremely bias to ideas like this. What is it about the word GÇ£biasGÇ¥ that makes people misuse it so often? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2.
Kinete Jenius Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 59	Posted - 2015.08.16 20:01:57 - [257] - Quote Tippia wrote: No, he hasn't. That's some nonsense you've made up. Neither destroyers nor cruisers have battleships DPS unless the battleship is absolutely shitfit, especially not PvE fit cruisers since they generally need the DPS-enhancing slots to survive. The only a handful of ways for you to come to anything remotely like that conclusion: you are not actually looking at the T1 cruisers in question, or you are not familiar with battleships and what they're capable of. The latter notion is further reinforced byGÇª I like how you're utterly confident at telling me I'm wrong without actually ever defining anything. Battleships of old were considered to be doing well to be +750 DPS. Catalysts can reach +760 dps today. I have cruisers that do +1000 dps which is enough to hang with the current level of battleship dps. Since we have been talking about the OLD gank battleship setups from +8 years ago that is the only numbers that are relevant. Comparing the gank ships to modern battleships that have gone through rounds of buffs piloted with characters that have skills and modules that didn't exist then with implants that didn't exist then isn't part of the discussion. In PVE gank is tank. The more dps you have the less tank you can run. Quote: Your point is wrong. Hilariously, laughably wrong. It's a difference of 139k SP between those two skills GÇö not even three days worth of training in total. His point was that at BS III, the only real difference is the BS skill itself. It's not him being dense here; it's you not knowing what the skill tree looks like, and it's you that suddenly changed the parameters just to try (and utterly fail) to disprove what he said. Yeah 3 days of extra training that could be used for more effective dps increasing skills. When you're spending extra isk to train your alt or taking days off from your main to train a gank alt those 3 days matter greatly. Also as I stated earlier getting to BC IV is far faster and easier than BS IV. Nothing about this is hilarious other then your attempts at misrepresenting what I state. It's like your ego can't take the fact that I'm right that pocket battleships makes it easier to get into ganking. Quote: Oh, you mean the module that a gank ship can't really use, especially not to warp in directly on someone, due to its adverse effects on the ship's combat capability? So yeah, engagement envelope is relevant. Oh for god's sake there's no reason for you to be pretending to be stupid. You know damned well the organized that gank groups all the way down to the miner ganker in the back woods of eve will use a ship for a warp in point. Quote: You know, the more you try to argue in favour of your GÇ£pointGÇ¥, the more you demonstrate that you aren't actually familiar with the any of the things you're talking about. You don't understand the concept of free; you don't understand what destroyers, cruisers, or battleships can do; you don't understand the skill system; you don't understand how cloaks work; andGÇª You're going full on trump here. Just because you say stuff doesn't make it true. Here's the only screen shot I have of the last big gank I did. http://i.imgur.com/xqun1ST.jpg If only I had actual experience with battleships in a fleet either. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZ4LByLY5T4 Quote: So you didn't actually mean to use the phrase GÇ£a fraction ofGÇ¥ then. You meant to say GÇ£a sliver lessGÇ¥, or you'd be wrong about this too and we can add GÇ£English idiomsGÇ¥ to the list of things you aren't familiar with. I meant exactly what I said and what I said was correct. Your insistence on turning it into some sort of false statement just shows how desperate you are to attack me.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25674	Posted - 2015.08.16 20:21:05 - [258] - Quote Kinete Jenius wrote: I like how you're utterly confident at telling me I'm wrong without actually ever defining anything. That's because nothing needs to be defined. Neither destroyers nor cruisers can reach battleship-level damage output GÇö that's just an indisputable numerical fact. Also, he battleships of old could do as much damage as the battleships of today. Tthe battleship buffs you're talking about didn't actually affect their damage output so much as their fitting capabilities. In fact, if we want to compare to the really olden days, their current damage output is completely gutshot. Oh, and I would very much like to see that 1k DPS T1 cruiser of yoursGÇª Quote: Yeah 3 days So you were wrong. Laughably wrong. An order of magnitude wrong. About this as about everything else you've tried to say anything about. The difference between BC IV and BS IV is utterly minute GÇö calling it GÇ£far faster and easierGÇ¥ is nonsensical to the point of being outright lying. Just accept it, and stop trying to cover up your ignorance GÇö we have long since gone past the point where you're only pretending to be this stupid. Quote: Just because you say stuff doesn't make it true. It's true because you've proven it to be true, without any doubt, in every single one of the categories mentioned. Quote: I meant exactly what I said Then you were wrong. They're not GÇ£a fractionGÇ¥ of the cost or time investment. They're slightly less. I could be charitable and assume that you mistyped and mean GÇ£fraction lessGÇ¥ rather than GÇ£fraction ofGÇ¥, which would be a slightly odd use but at least it would be correct. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2.
Kinete Jenius Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 59	Posted - 2015.08.16 20:25:13 - [259] - Quote Tippia wrote: Kinete Jenius wrote: I like how you're utterly confident at telling me I'm wrong without actually ever defining anything. That's because nothing needs to be defined. Neither destroyers nor cruisers can reach battleship-level damage output GÇö that's just an indisputable numerical fact. Also, he battleships of old could do as much damage as the battleships of today. Tthe battleship buffs you're talking about didn't actually affect their damage output so much as their fitting capabilities. Oh, and I would very much like to see that 1k DPS T1 cruiser of yoursGÇª Quote: Yeah 3 days So you were wrong. Laughably wrong. An order of magnitude wrong. About this as about everything else you've tried to say anything about. The difference between BC IV and BS IV is utterly minute GÇö calling it GÇ£far faster and easierGÇ¥ is nonsensical to the point of being outright lying. Just accept it, and stop trying to cover up your stupidity GÇö we have long since gone past the point where you're only pretending. Quote: Just because you say stuff doesn't make it true. It's true because you've proven it to be true, without any doubt, in every single one of the categories mentioned. Quote: I meant exactly what I said Then you were wrong. They're not GÇ£a fractionGÇ¥ of the cost or time investment. They're slightly less. I could be charitable and assume that you mistyped and mean GÇ£fraction lessGÇ¥ rather than GÇ£fraction ofGÇ¥, which would be a slightly odd use but at least it would be correct. So even when I take the number you provide you still call it dead wrong just because I"m the one that said it. You're hilariously awful and I see no reason to continue this discussion with an individual that has no regard for facts.
Sentamon Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 2257	Posted - 2015.08.16 20:26:01 - [260] - Quote Posts like this is why it should cost a PLEX to start a topic. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~

Kinete Jenius Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 59	Posted - 2015.08.16 20:26:55 - [261] - Quote Sentamon wrote: Posts like this is why it should cost a PLEX to start a topic. As if plex prices aren't inflating enough :P
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25674	Posted - 2015.08.16 20:33:08 - [262] - Quote Kinete Jenius wrote: So even when I take the number you provide you still call it dead wrong just because I"m the one that said it. No. When you take the number I provide GÇö the correct one GÇö and then try to make it sound as if is the same as the one you initially said GÇö the wrong one GÇö I'm going to keep saying that you are wrong. Only now I do it both because you initial number was laughably wrong, and because you are trying to cover up that bit of ignorance in such a laughably incorrect way. I'm not calling it dead wrong GÇ£because [you're] the one that said itGÇ¥; I'm calling it wrong because what you said was wrong, and now you're trying to obfuscate what you actually said because you realised how wrong you were. Only when you take the number I provide and say GÇ£oh, I was wrongGÇ¥ will I stop calling you wrong. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2.
admiral root Red Galaxy 3096	Posted - 2015.08.16 20:34:15 - [263] - Quote Kinete Jenius wrote: Sentamon wrote: Posts like this is why it should cost a PLEX to start a topic. As if plex prices aren't inflating enough :P Not if you're selling, they're not. No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
Kinete Jenius Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 59	Posted - 2015.08.16 20:41:18 - [264] - Quote admiral root wrote: Kinete Jenius wrote: Sentamon wrote: Posts like this is why it should cost a PLEX to start a topic. As if plex prices aren't inflating enough :P Not if you're selling, they're not. Fair point. But 15 bucks a post seems a bit steep you must admit. Tippia wrote: Kinete Jenius wrote: So even when I take the number you provide you still call it dead wrong just because I"m the one that said it. No. When you take the number I provide GÇö the correct one GÇö and then try to make it sound as if is the same as the one you initially said GÇö the wrong one GÇö I'm going to keep saying that you are wrong. Only now I do it both because you initial number was laughably wrong, and because you are trying to cover up that bit of ignorance in such a laughably incorrect way. I'm not calling it dead wrong GÇ£because [you're] the one that said itGÇ¥; I'm calling it wrong because what you said was wrong, and because you're now trying to obfuscate what you actually said because you realised how wrong you were. Only when you take the number I provide and say GÇ£oh, I was wrongGÇ¥ will I stop calling you wrong. Oh, and when you do that, could you please also cough up the 1k+ DPS T1 cruiser fit? Your number only proved my point to be correct. The fact that you can't see such a blindingly obvious concept is proof that you're being intentionally dishonest. There is nothing to be gained from discussing anything in such a situation. Do keep in mind there was no isk value limit placed on said cruiser build. If you can't figure it out I might post some builds for you after work if I'm bored.
admiral root Red Galaxy 3096	Posted - 2015.08.16 20:44:32 - [265] - Quote Kinete Jenius wrote: admiral root wrote: Kinete Jenius wrote: Sentamon wrote: Posts like this is why it should cost a PLEX to start a topic. As if plex prices aren't inflating enough :P Not if you're selling, they're not. Fair point. But 15 bucks a post seems a bit steep you must admit. He said to start a thread, not to post. You have to admit, it'd be worth it to raise the standard a little, or they could go with La Nariz's suggestion about banning NPCs from posting. No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
Kinete Jenius Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 59	Posted - 2015.08.16 20:48:21 - [266] - Quote admiral root wrote: Kinete Jenius wrote: admiral root wrote: Kinete Jenius wrote: Sentamon wrote: Posts like this is why it should cost a PLEX to start a topic. As if plex prices aren't inflating enough :P Not if you're selling, they're not. Fair point. But 15 bucks a post seems a bit steep you must admit. He said to start a thread, not to post. You have to admit, it'd be worth it to raise the standard a little, or they could go with La Nariz's suggestion about banning NPCs from posting. Newbies trying to get help and the fact that corp management takes >9 minutes to train on an alt would limit the effectiveness of such a plan. I guess the cost of creating the corporation might have some effect.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25675	Posted - 2015.08.16 20:57:45 - [267] - Quote Kinete Jenius wrote: Your number only proved my point to be correct. Not really, no, since your entire point hinged on there being a one-month difference in training time between the skills. To wit: GÇ£My point was that going BC IV is over a month less in training compared to BS IV.GÇ¥ We both know you were wrong. If you want to just own up to it and change your stance now, rather than try to make up some transparent lie about how it was what you meant all along, then that's fine, but just accept the simple fact of the matter: you were laughably wrong. Quote: There is nothing to be gained from discussing anything in such a situation. I'm not discussing it. I'm pointing out the fact of the matter: you were wrong. Lying about what you said after the fact doesn't make you any less wrong GÇö quite the opposite. Quote: Do keep in mind there was no isk value limit placed on said cruiser build. Actually, there was. You were just so desperate about trying to invent some nonsense that you missed itGÇª See if you can spot it this time. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2.
Rayne Jupiter Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2015.08.16 20:57:52 - [268] - Quote admiral root wrote: Rayne Jupiter wrote: What an idiotic idea. Veteran players are extremely bias to ideas like this. Being close to or at the meta level it is easy for them to survive in a dog eat dog environment. But what of the new pilots? Do not get me wrong I enjoy PvP across multiple genre's. I would love to get out there now and start blowing up ships. However, EVE is not a game where you can just jump straight into PvP and yield positive results. EVE is a very complex game with a plethora of aspects dictating a ships efficiency in combat. New players need time to interpret the wealth of information EVE has to offer. On top of learning ship mechanics; optimal and fall-off ranges; damage types; resistances; shield, armor, and speed tanking; cloak mechanics; d-scanning; drone mechanics; (my eyes are already crossing); players have to train essential skills to Level 5, which could take anywhere from 6 months to a year. PvP in EVE is calculated and proactive, reaction time and quick thinking play a small part in determining victory or defeat. High sec offers a semi safe environment where rookie pilots can experiment and discover. I am confident a lot of miners would love to get out there and do some killing. After all outsmarting another person on equal ground is such a great feeling! Yet, the risk vs. reward of PvP isn't worth it for newer pilots. Want to get some more action? Help mentor and coach new pilots! Find ways to contribute to a players PvP confidence. Too lazy to do a little hand holding? Shut up and wait for us newer pilots to catch up! What an idiotic post. Had you bothered to read the thread before posting, you would have seen that many of the players who ridicule the idea of removing highsec are those same veteran players you mentioned. Nope, all veteran players completely bias!
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 25675	Posted - 2015.08.16 21:05:10 - [269] - Quote Rayne Jupiter wrote: Nope, all veteran players completely bias! Would you like some verb-and-adjective dressing for your word salad? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2.
Rayne Jupiter Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2015.08.16 21:12:45 - [270] - Quote Tippia wrote: Rayne Jupiter wrote: Nope, all veteran players completely bias! Would you like some verb-and-adjective dressing for your word salad? Nope, all veteran players are completely biased in regards to removing high-sec. Better? I still feel something is missing. English composition was never my forte, I had to take it twice D: Would you like some advice on losing your virginity?



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.