Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Dom Arkaral
Gate Is Red
55
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 20:03:26 -
[301] - Quote
Lol last time I went to AG chan: "Me: hi You plebs: OMG HE HAS A MINING PERMIT. HE'S A SPY KICK HIM FOREVER
So that supports the fact you'll kick anyone even if they're only permit holders (which doesn't mean shiz really)
Merc. Tear Gatherer. Quebecker
I have no Honer (truly)
Attache ta tuque avec d'la broche!
Ich bin krank! (I don't speak German don't bother)
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7175
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 20:25:09 -
[302] - Quote
Masao Kurata wrote:Or y'know when you just try to answer questions, correct misunderstandings, teach mechanics relevant to the discussion or suggest tactics. Purely based on your responses in this thread, I very much doubt you were as reasonable as you say.
Masao Kurata wrote:Not my war, my war's against carebears. Sound's perfect, it's pretty obvious that's what gankers are.
Dom Arkaral wrote:Lol last time I went to AG chan: "Me: hi You plebs: OMG HE HAS A MINING PERMIT. HE'S A SPY KICK HIM FOREVER
So that supports the fact you'll kick anyone even if they're only permit holders (which doesn't mean shiz really) Well actually it means a fair bit. Not to mention that they have code members coming in to troll quite frequently, it's no surprise they have zero tolerance for code members showing up.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
339
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 20:30:30 -
[303] - Quote
Hmm, think I'm about done trying to reason with the troll. Fortunately it won't matter when this thread is locked because it was a fait accompli as of the first post. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17318
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 20:47:54 -
[304] - Quote
Masao Kurata wrote:Hmm, think I'm about done trying to reason with the troll. Fortunately it won't matter when this thread is locked because it was a fait accompli as of the first post.
Change has gone through anyway.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Dom Arkaral
Gate Is Red
55
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 21:03:30 -
[305] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Masao Kurata wrote:Or y'know when you just try to answer questions, correct misunderstandings, teach mechanics relevant to the discussion or suggest tactics. Purely based on your responses in this thread, I very much doubt you were as reasonable as you say. Masao Kurata wrote:Not my war, my war's against carebears. Sound's perfect, it's pretty obvious that's what gankers are. Dom Arkaral wrote:Lol last time I went to AG chan: "Me: hi You plebs: OMG HE HAS A MINING PERMIT. HE'S A SPY KICK HIM FOREVER
So that supports the fact you'll kick anyone even if they're only permit holders (which doesn't mean shiz really) Well actually it means a fair bit. Not to mention that they have code members coming in to troll quite frequently, it's no surprise they have zero tolerance for code members showing up. Permit holder =/= CODE. Member or New Order supporter... Some folks just get it to get some peace
Merc. Tear Gatherer. Quebecker
I have no Honer (truly)
Attache ta tuque avec d'la broche!
Ich bin krank! (I don't speak German don't bother)
|
Berry Nice
NO TAXES FOR EVER
1
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:26:00 -
[306] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Sound's perfect, it's pretty obvious that's what gankers are.
You seem to logically side with the gankers on this topic though, against your criticism of gankers. You say that "Changes should be made not because of how things are, but of how things would be." In fact, there is no counter to wreck shooting, and it was obviously broken and uncounterable, and was changed because it was so unfair and one sided. However, ganking is easily stoppable with a single person, let alone 5-6 people.
If there was as concerted an effort towards anti-ganking as there was towards ganking itself, the winner 100 times out of 100 would be anti-gankers as they have to do so much less than gankers themselves.
Being the good guy isn't profitable, nor should it be. Stopping things from happening isn't what eve was meant to be, and that is why so many fewer people anti-gank than gank.
If you watch anti-gankers, they don't fail because they're unable to succeed, it's because they're terrible players.
They don't understand game mechanics, they don't know how they can help, and they get discouraged by the inept and stupid leadership that drives them away.
There are three things as an anti-ganker you can do, and each one of them fundamentally hurts a gank fleet substantially to the point of failure. (And yet I never see any of this things actually attempted) |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7194
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 11:54:02 -
[307] - Quote
Berry Nice wrote:In fact, there is no counter to wreck shooting, and it was obviously broken and uncounterable, and was changed because it was so unfair and one sided. Loot the wreck. it's a pretty good counter than seems to be working for most people.
Berry Nice wrote:However, ganking is easily stoppable with a single person, let alone 5-6 people. It's not though, is it. Let's see you stop a whole bunch of ganks "easily" on your own. Even with a massive pile of anti-gankers, usually it just means a few more bodies or a second run are needed.
Berry Nice wrote:If there was as concerted an effort towards anti-ganking as there was towards ganking itself, the winner 100 times out of 100 would be anti-gankers as they have to do so much less than gankers themselves. Prove it. Make the effort and prove that anti-ganking is as easy and consistent as you say, show me the balanced rewards, and I'll happily admit defeat. The reaslity is that anti-gankers aren't as organised because the players skilled enough to organise it know well enough that it's too badly balanced to be worthwhile.
Berry Nice wrote:Being the good guy isn't profitable, nor should it be. Stopping things from happening isn't what eve was meant to be, and that is why so many fewer people anti-gank than gank. It's a game. Good guy or bad guy, you should be rewarded for your effort and risk.
Berry Nice wrote:If you watch anti-gankers, they don't fail because they're unable to succeed, it's because they're terrible players.
They don't understand game mechanics, they don't know how they can help, and they get discouraged by the inept and stupid leadership that drives them away.
There are three things as an anti-ganker you can do, and each one of them fundamentally hurts a gank fleet substantially to the point of failure. (And yet I never see any of this things actually attempted) Once again, prove it. I see the the exact opposite way,that they are terrible players because they are unable to succeed. You seem to think it's super easy, so it shouldn't be too hard for you to prove it.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Dom Arkaral
Gate Is Red Complaints Department
59
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 12:29:12 -
[308] - Quote
Lucas Kell The change went through, get over it or gtfo
There's nothing left to talk about here CCPlease lock this tearnought
Merc. Tear Gatherer. Quebecker
I have no Honer (truly)
Attache ta tuque avec d'la broche!
Ich bin krank! (I don't speak German don't bother)
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7197
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 13:22:37 -
[309] - Quote
Dom Arkaral wrote:Lucas Kell The change went through, get over it or gtfo
There's nothing left to talk about here CCPlease lock this tearnought There clearly is something for people to talk about hence the continued discussion (and the counter being planned by CCP). If you don't want to be part of it, then don't. Threads don't have to be locked just because you don't want to post in or read them.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Dom Arkaral
Gate Is Red Complaints Department
59
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 13:55:53 -
[310] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Dom Arkaral wrote:Lucas Kell The change went through, get over it or gtfo
There's nothing left to talk about here CCPlease lock this tearnought There clearly is something for people to talk about hence the continued discussion (and the counter being planned by CCP). If you don't want to be part of it, then don't. Threads don't have to be locked just because you don't want to post in or read them.
This thread isn't about the change since page 5, it's now about anti-ganking and you telling people to prove you wrong.......
Merc. Tear Gatherer. Quebecker
I have no Honer (truly)
Attache ta tuque avec d'la broche!
Ich bin krank! (I don't speak German don't bother)
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7197
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 15:02:46 -
[311] - Quote
Dom Arkaral wrote:This thread isn't about the change since page 5, it's now about anti-ganking The change directly affects anti-ganking so it follows. Again though, if it offends you so to read it, don't.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Dom Arkaral
Gate Is Red Complaints Department
59
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 15:08:02 -
[312] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Dom Arkaral wrote:This thread isn't about the change since page 5, it's now about anti-ganking The change directly affects anti-ganking so it follows. Again though, if it offends you so to read it, don't. Anti-Ganking = saving the freighter AG =/= killing that freighter's possessions
Lol
Merc. Tear Gatherer. Quebecker
I have no Honer (truly)
Attache ta tuque avec d'la broche!
Ich bin krank! (I don't speak German don't bother)
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7197
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 16:01:57 -
[313] - Quote
Dom Arkaral wrote:Anti-Ganking = saving the freighter AG =/= killing that freighter's possessions True enough. That means there are zero mechanics AGs can you to stand a reasonable chance of affecting gankers with a modicum of consistency. That's why as a last resort they volley the wreck.
Also, following your logic, ganking =/= looting a wreck, therefore prior to this change it took:
1+ players to loot vs. 1+ players to volley the wreck however now it takes 1+ players to loot vs. 2+ players to volley the wreck
Imbalance.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Dom Arkaral
Gate Is Red Complaints Department
59
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 16:04:52 -
[314] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Dom Arkaral wrote:Anti-Ganking = saving the freighter AG =/= killing that freighter's possessions True enough. That means there are zero mechanics AGs can you to stand a reasonable chance of affecting gankers with a modicum of consistency. That's why as a last resort they volley the wreck. Also, following your logic, ganking =/= looting a wreck, therefore prior to this change it took: 1+ players to loot vs. 1+ players to volley the wreck however now it takes 1+ players to loot vs. 2+ players to volley the wreck Imbalance. Tell me, how many people did it take to get said loot?
Merc. Tear Gatherer. Quebecker
I have no Honer (truly)
Attache ta tuque avec d'la broche!
Ich bin krank! (I don't speak German don't bother)
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7197
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 16:30:02 -
[315] - Quote
Dom Arkaral wrote:Tell me, how many people did it take to get said loot? Aka kill the ship LOL, so the way you are playing this is that if AGs show up and shoot at the gankers but the ship dies anyway, then they volley the loot off the field as a last resort, those are two separate actions, but if gankers gank a ship then one of the gankers ships who wasn't shooting the target goes and loots the loot, that is all part of the same action.
That's probably the best example of double standards I've seen in a long while. Either dealing with the loot is part of both playstyles, or neither.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Dom Arkaral
Gate Is Red Complaints Department
59
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 16:35:57 -
[316] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Dom Arkaral wrote:Tell me, how many people did it take to get said loot? Aka kill the ship LOL, so the way you are playing this is that if AGs show up and shoot at the gankers but the ship dies anyway, then they volley the loot off the field as a last resort, those are two separate actions, but if gankers gank a ship then one of the gankers ships who wasn't shooting the target goes and loots the loot, that is all part of the same action. That's probably the best example of double standards I've seen in a long while. Either dealing with the loot is part of both playstyles, or neither. Drop the ball son, it's all ogre
Merc. Tear Gatherer. Quebecker
I have no Honer (truly)
Attache ta tuque avec d'la broche!
Ich bin krank! (I don't speak German don't bother)
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7197
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 16:47:45 -
[317] - Quote
I accept your admission of defeat.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Dom Arkaral
Gate Is Red Complaints Department
59
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 17:04:40 -
[318] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:I accept your admission of defeat. LOL
prove it
Merc. Tear Gatherer. Quebecker
I have no Honer (truly)
Attache ta tuque avec d'la broche!
Ich bin krank! (I don't speak German don't bother)
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
366
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 17:04:49 -
[319] - Quote
I have been seriously considering giving you exact instructions to stop over 90% of freighter ganks. It is not very hard and demonstrates that you are just a bunch of miners and ratters with no ingenuity whatsoever.
But CCP is doing it for you and you would never show any humility anyway. No matter how much you would owe your new success to a ganker, you would never admit it, there would just be more gloating and I really hate skillless, clueless plebs gloating. So go back to your actual superpower: whining to CCP until they kill highsec pvp. Then you can enjoy your safe zone for a few months, get bored and quit EVE. Then as the ecosystem goes to hell with predation removed and more players quit, you can gloat about how you helped kill EVE. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7197
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 17:17:14 -
[320] - Quote
Masao Kurata wrote:I have been seriously considering giving you exact instructions to stop over 90% of freighter ganks. It is not very hard and demonstrates that you are just a bunch of miners and ratters with no ingenuity whatsoever. Sure you are. I'm also sure that if you did, it would fall into the category "easier said than done" where you have a proposal that sounds great on paper but is nearly impossible to pull off with any effect in reality.
Masao Kurata wrote:But CCP is doing it for you and you would never show any humility anyway. No matter how much you would owe your new success to a ganker, you would never admit it, there would just be more gloating and I really hate skillless, clueless plebs gloating. Why would I need to show humility? I'm not an AG. I gank vastly more than I AG.
Masao Kurata wrote:So go back to your actual superpower: whining to CCP until they kill highsec pvp. Then you can enjoy your safe zone for a few months, get bored and quit EVE. Then as the ecosystem goes to hell with predation removed and more players quit, you can gloat about how you helped kill EVE. I don't want to rid highsec of PvP, you're just having an over the top knee-jerk reaction to the proposal for a discussion on balance. If anything I and pushing for more PvP as I want improved active mechanics for AGs to fight off gankers and better rewards to encourage them to do so. But I can assure you that if ganking were killed off I would still not get bored and quit. The forums would be slightly cleaner, and I wouldn't have to listen to so many people saying "OH THE TEARS!" every time someone said anything in local, but no, I would certainly nto get bored and quit. Mainly because I rarely undock a ship in highsec that isn't blinky red anyway.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
368
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 17:47:49 -
[321] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Masao Kurata wrote:I have been seriously considering giving you exact instructions to stop over 90% of freighter ganks. It is not very hard and demonstrates that you are just a bunch of miners and ratters with no ingenuity whatsoever. Sure you are. I'm also sure that if you did, it would fall into the category "easier said than done" where you have a proposal that sounds great on paper but is nearly impossible to pull off with any effect in reality.
Not at all. That said, you would have to exhibit some minimal effort in flying spaceships, less than ganking requires though. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7198
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 18:49:16 -
[322] - Quote
Masao Kurata wrote:Not at all. That said, you would have to exhibit some minimal effort in flying spaceships, less than ganking requires though. Indeed, and you will keep saying that and keep saying "oh but I'm not going to tell AGs how, but if they knew, they'd be able to do it easily" and this will continue until the end of time because the reality is that you'd state something that everyone including the AGs already know but simply isn't feasible. It's quite simple mate, if you want to prove that playing as an AG is easy, go right ahead, if not then it's plainly obvious it's because you can't. Without that, being that I have experience in both ganking and anti-ganking, I'll stick with my original opinion that it's massively unbalanced in favour of ganking, which is further supported by the number of players willing to participate in each.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
368
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 18:53:15 -
[323] - Quote
Of course it's feasible, but even if I wasn't quitting EVE I wouldn't do it myself. Killing carebears is the one true cause in this game. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7198
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 18:55:36 -
[324] - Quote
Masao Kurata wrote:Of course it's feasible, but even if I wasn't quitting EVE I wouldn't do it myself. Killing carebears is the one true cause in this game. Exactly, and since gankers quite clearly are carebears, you should have no problem becoming an AG.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Dom Arkaral
Gate Is Red Complaints Department
59
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 19:12:14 -
[325] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Masao Kurata wrote:Of course it's feasible, but even if I wasn't quitting EVE I wouldn't do it myself. Killing carebears is the one true cause in this game. Exactly, and since gankers quite clearly are carebears, you should have no problem becoming an AG. Ed: I love by the way how you're literally going to ragequit because they are adding a bit of EHP to freighters, and you have the nerve to claim that AGs failing is down to effort. (and by "literally" I of course mean "not" since nobody quits EVE, they just threaten to when they have a tantrum).
Let it go
I think you're not talking about the wreck hp buff anymore Lucas Don't make ISD lock this one too
Merc. Tear Gatherer. Quebecker
I have no Honer (truly)
Attache ta tuque avec d'la broche!
Ich bin krank! (I don't speak German don't bother)
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7198
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 19:32:27 -
[326] - Quote
Dom Arkaral wrote:Let it go
I think you're not talking about the wreck hp buff anymore Lucas Of course I am, I'm talking about how the wreck HP buff negatively affects a style of play. It's nothing to do with me if gankers want to keep running in slinging insults around, making claims they refuse to prove and derailing the conversation.
And once again, you are choosing to be a part of the thread. Stop trying to further derail it just because you don't like it being open.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Dom Arkaral
Gate Is Red Complaints Department
59
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 19:36:06 -
[327] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Dom Arkaral wrote:Let it go
I think you're not talking about the wreck hp buff anymore Lucas Of course I am, I'm talking about how the wreck HP buff negatively affects a style of play. It's nothing to do with me if gankers want to keep running in slinging insults around, making claims they refuse to prove and derailing the conversation. And once again, you are choosing to be a part of the thread. Stop trying to further derail it just because you don't like it being open. You can't prove the gankers false either You keep sending the ball when you lack an answer
We have stats that you turn away like a true antiganker.
I'm done here, Praise James o7
Merc. Tear Gatherer. Quebecker
I have no Honer (truly)
Attache ta tuque avec d'la broche!
Ich bin krank! (I don't speak German don't bother)
|
Globby
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
318
|
Posted - 2016.02.13 17:24:52 -
[328] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Dom Arkaral wrote:Let it go
I think you're not talking about the wreck hp buff anymore Lucas Of course I am, I'm talking about how the wreck HP buff negatively affects a style of play. It's nothing to do with me if gankers want to keep running in slinging insults around, making claims they refuse to prove and derailing the conversation. And once again, you are choosing to be a part of the thread. Stop trying to further derail it just because you don't like it being open.
I'll post a couple undeniable facts for you:
Wreck shooting was an incredibly low barrier to entry (15 minute alt) method that had absolutely no counterplay unless the pilot made a very stupid and hard to make mistake. It was a method that consistently allowed a 2 million isk thrasher to deny hundreds of billions of loot that 15-40 people worked together to achieve. It was a punishment that could have completely broke the freighter ganking game.
Wreck shooting was absolutely in need of a nerf, and it was nerfed because it makes no sense to have one guy be able to thwart the efforts of 20 guys.
@Lucas Kell I'm not going to speak up to how antigankers could still (very much so) cost effectively wreck shoot and deny hundreds of billions of loot. It just costs a reasonable amount to do and requires you to bring more than one guy (more like 2). It is still disproportionately more cost effective than ganking though for (loot destroyed)/(ship cost). (I'm not in the business of helping my competition.) |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7203
|
Posted - 2016.02.13 18:03:52 -
[329] - Quote
Globby wrote:I'll post a couple undeniable facts for you: Thanks, although your definition of undeniable is different from most people's.
Globby wrote:Wreck shooting was an incredibly low barrier to entry (15 minute alt) method that had absolutely no counterplay unless the pilot made a very stupid and hard to make mistake. It was a method that consistently allowed a 2 million isk thrasher to deny hundreds of billions of loot that 15-40 people worked together to achieve. It was a punishment that could have completely broke the freighter ganking game. And a wreck looter could counter this by simply looting the wreck faster than the guy shooting it. It was the EVE equivalent of a quick draw. You're making out like you lost all of your loot to a bunch of 15 minute thrasher alts, which you and I both know is complete rubbish. Following the change two people now need to coordinate a strike and both land the hit before the one person can loot it. That is a considerably harder task.
Globby wrote:Wreck shooting was absolutely in need of a nerf, and it was nerfed because it makes no sense to have one guy be able to thwart the efforts of 20 guys. They never could thwart the efforts of 20 guys. The gankers aren't looters, they are combat pilots. To thwart them, the one player would have to be able to stop the gank, which they can't. No, the one thrasher pilot could thwart the efforts of the one looter, that was all.
Globby wrote:@Lucas Kell I'm not going to speak up to how antigankers could still (very much so) cost effectively wreck shoot and deny hundreds of billions of loot. It just costs a reasonable amount to do and requires you to bring more than one guy (more like 2). It is still disproportionately more cost effective than ganking though for (loot destroyed)/(ship cost). (I'm not in the business of helping my competition.) It's quite ironic you talking about the value of the loot in the wreck like it should be a factor, when you spend so much time telling gank victims that they shouldn't expect to live just because their ship is valuable. This is exactly the same thing. You're saying "my loot is valuable, therefore it should cost you a lot to destroy". Ridiculous.
Clearly deniable.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Globby
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
319
|
Posted - 2016.02.13 18:52:41 -
[330] - Quote
Your naivety is showing.
*Loot mechanics do not allow you to loot a wreck for a tick or two after it spawns. It is impossible to beat a insta-lock thrasher to the punch. It is 100% game mechanically impossible if the wreck shooter is competent. The wreck isn't 'openable' for one to two seconds, but is completely shootable. There is no quickdraw, it's dependant on whether or not the wreckshooter is competent.
I guess you have a point, with respects to them not stopping the gank, but there was absolutely no way to stop them from shooting the wreck. I've laid out the 100% sure fire way to shoot a wreck without any counter play many times.
I'm not saying it should cost a lot to destroy, I'm just saying that there is a balance to what a 15 minute alt in a 2 million isk thrasher should be able to do (ie not destroy/deny hundreds of billions in isk over 4 months.)
1) Wreck shooting was an incredibly low barrier to entry (15 minute alt) method that had absolutely no counterplay unless the pilot made a very stupid and hard to make mistake. (see * for details)
2) It was a method that consistently allowed a 2 million isk thrasher on an alt to deny hundreds of billions of loot that 15-40 people worked together to achieve.
3) It was a punishment that could have completely broke the freighter ganking game.
Please point me to which of the three numbers above are incorrect.
Lucas Kell wrote:It's quite ironic you talking about the value of the loot in the wreck like it should be a factor, when you spend so much time telling gank victims that they shouldn't expect to live just because their ship is valuable.
I don't say that, in fact I say the opposite, don't fly a capital ship without support. If 20+ guys want you dead and you're alone, the game shouldn't continue to make it harder for an actual organization to capitalize on a single guy's stupidity. (ESPECIALLY WHEN DSTS AND JUMP FREIGHTERS ARE NEARLY 100% SECURE HAULING TENS OF BILLIONS LOL)
lucas kell wrote: You're saying "my loot is valuable, therefore it should cost you a lot to destroy". Ridiculous.
It's actually not what I said, but yeah keep distorting the argument. You fail to realize wreck shooting is still completely viable, it just is a little harder to do now that it can't be done by a 15 minute alt in a 2 million isk thrasher. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |