DigitalCommunist
Obsidian Core
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 19:31:00 -
[1]
You must not be very intelligent, Guillame Herschel, because you just sided with all the people using Risk vs Reward in their arguments. People do seek the path of least resistance. What exactly are you trying to say, by calling it a BS theory? That you can have a meaningful game without consequence?
The last time I checked, SISI was far less popular than TQ.
_______________________________ http://epicwords.net/ |
DigitalCommunist
Obsidian Core
|
Posted - 2008.02.23 00:35:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Cygnus Scott What real risk is there in Gate camping? What risk is there in attacking some guy mining in a mining ship? None, so stop lying.
The risk is not there. It has been calculated and mitigated. Now if every so often (randomly of course) CONCORD would show up and WTFPWN anyone near the gate with an aggression timer or a sec rating below -5 then there might be some risk. Put roving patrols in low sec, ones that randomly pop up and enforce the "high sec" rule of law for 10 minutes to an hour each day. That way there is risk for Pirates as well, they never know exactly when CONCORD might show up and blow them up.
Also what is with -9.5 character being able to sit in high sec without being shot at by the sentry guns? Seems to me sec rating is broken.
Gate camps get crashed with hilarious frequency. The risk to a gate camper is aggroing a bait ship. Most small scale pvp devolves into bait and gank, and now with the option to cyno in carriers or black ops from systems that are nowhere nearby, that risk becomes even more difficult to marginalize.
As for a person mining in a mining ship? Depends where, but in lowsec the risk is being scrambled in a ship that is incapable of being in any real combat. In high sec the risk is corp wars, npcs, and people suiciding on you. All very unlikely ways to die, unless you're stupid. But then again, you're not mining the most rare stuff in high sec anyways.
As for a -9.5 person being in empire. He/she will get podded by sitting still, guaranteed. There is plenty of risk, and before WTZ it was almost impossible to sneak through superhighways. NPCs don't pod, so that 'risk' isn't present for anyone. If you believe it should be, then it would be present for everybody equally. Since you're debating this based on realism, where is the logic and realism in empires podding a criminal whose only going to end up in one of their stations. They want to remove him as a threat, and get him to leave their space.. not linger around in a makeshift prison.
What you posted must have been a very poor attempt at arguing that certain activities have no risk, and the Risk vs Reward theory is invalidated as a result.
The truth is that all activities have some risk. The second you undock from a station, you're a target. Even people who have been idling at a friendly pos, or cloaked at safespot, have died.
The whole purpose of citing Risk vs Reward in balance discussion is to minimize the amount of reward Empire citizens get. There is a vast majority living there now, and only a tiny fraction of these would be in Empire regardless of the income they had. Everyone else is there because the money is pretty damn easy. Even if you could make it faster elsewhere, you make it just fast enough to keep you in ships and progressing at the same rate character training allows. _______________________________ http://epicwords.net/ |