These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

Gankers upset about carebear whining...
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cetaphil Thrace
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2012-05-24 17:31:04 UTC
Pinky Feldman wrote:
Alonzo Odantis wrote:
I'm new here, so maybe i'm missing something.

But I keep hearing how the game catered to carebears by making gankers not get insurance for suiciding and overall making it harder to pop noobs and miners in the heart of highsec space.



1) So you want to be able to gank people in high sec because it's "realistic" right? no safe zones right? But you want insurance to give you money back so you can do so without it costing you much...remind me who the carebear whining to CCP is in this scenario again?

2) "Wah we are so sick of carebears being catered to, stop making the game harder" yeah...about that...

i heard a lot of good things about the pvp community in this game, but so far the bulk of the 1337 pirates I see from the forums just want to be able to gank SAFELY in highsec without worrying about anti-pkers or anyone being able to stop them...

Irony...


"OMG These miners just expect to be able to do nothing but mine all day and have no risk. That's such garbage everything in this game should have risk...PS Please stop making me have to lose money to suicide bomb someone in the middle of a space police station"

if it was up to me, it would be 1 char per account, and a much harsher clone system. IE: You may save your clone once a month, any progress made since last save is lost. The insurance not only wouldn't cover your suicide ship, but once you blew up a handful of ships in a short amount of time no insurance would cover you. Think about real world insurance, no one is going to insure your car if you get into an accident every week.

Don't when you can pop on an alt, do your damage, and hide back on your main that has pristine rep because you use alts to do your dirty work, don't cry to me about "carebears" because you're the biggest ones in the group.


This is EVE, people should be able to defend themselves and take matters into their own hands, which is something I wholly advocate and follows the sandbox theme of the game. The issue people have with carebears "whining" is that they don't want to play the same game that the rest of us do and instead of asking CCP for a way to put guns on their sandcastles, they want CCP to draw lines in the sand instead.

I absolutely think there should be risk in the game for all parties, but instead of petitioning CCP to create equal risk for aggressive parties they instead request complete pacification. Finally, if you want to compare EVE to real life, why not just complain the flying around in internet spaceships aspect is unrealistic and should be changed. Troll harder.

Total awesomeness Pinky!
Alonzo Odantis
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#42 - 2012-05-24 17:41:17 UTC
Cetaphil Thrace wrote:
Pinky Feldman wrote:
Alonzo Odantis wrote:
I'm new here, so maybe i'm missing something.

But I keep hearing how the game catered to carebears by making gankers not get insurance for suiciding and overall making it harder to pop noobs and miners in the heart of highsec space.



1) So you want to be able to gank people in high sec because it's "realistic" right? no safe zones right? But you want insurance to give you money back so you can do so without it costing you much...remind me who the carebear whining to CCP is in this scenario again?

2) "Wah we are so sick of carebears being catered to, stop making the game harder" yeah...about that...

i heard a lot of good things about the pvp community in this game, but so far the bulk of the 1337 pirates I see from the forums just want to be able to gank SAFELY in highsec without worrying about anti-pkers or anyone being able to stop them...

Irony...


"OMG These miners just expect to be able to do nothing but mine all day and have no risk. That's such garbage everything in this game should have risk...PS Please stop making me have to lose money to suicide bomb someone in the middle of a space police station"

if it was up to me, it would be 1 char per account, and a much harsher clone system. IE: You may save your clone once a month, any progress made since last save is lost. The insurance not only wouldn't cover your suicide ship, but once you blew up a handful of ships in a short amount of time no insurance would cover you. Think about real world insurance, no one is going to insure your car if you get into an accident every week.

Don't when you can pop on an alt, do your damage, and hide back on your main that has pristine rep because you use alts to do your dirty work, don't cry to me about "carebears" because you're the biggest ones in the group.


This is EVE, people should be able to defend themselves and take matters into their own hands, which is something I wholly advocate and follows the sandbox theme of the game. The issue people have with carebears "whining" is that they don't want to play the same game that the rest of us do and instead of asking CCP for a way to put guns on their sandcastles, they want CCP to draw lines in the sand instead.

I absolutely think there should be risk in the game for all parties, but instead of petitioning CCP to create equal risk for aggressive parties they instead request complete pacification. Finally, if you want to compare EVE to real life, why not just complain the flying around in internet spaceships aspect is unrealistic and should be changed. Troll harder.

Total awesomeness Pinky!




If CCP was as hands off as you pretend you'd want them there, the game would be dead. Games require rules, even sandboxes. You want minimal rules, sure, but you still need rules. Carebears want too many, gankers want too many as well, which is the point of this thread, that the gankers crying about rules don't mind exploiting rules for their benefit too, when being so brave at hiding in high sec and abusing mechanics to trick people into flagging and such. I don't care about being getting "tricked" but i'm not going to pretend that the carebears are all on the non-pvp side, there are jsut as many on the gank side of things.
Lucy Ferrr
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#43 - 2012-05-24 18:09:09 UTC
Welcome to Eve Online. Judging by the OP I can tell you just joined our universe. Eve is hard, Eve is harsh, but worry not capsuleer you will get the hang of it. In the future try playing the game a few months before you come to the forums with rants.

And for the record I've never once heard a suicide ganker complain about no insurance.
Alonzo Odantis
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#44 - 2012-05-24 18:57:45 UTC
Captain Sunnymuffins wrote:
I think you are missing something. May I suggest keeping marbles in a jar?

Professional suicide gankers couldn't give a toss about insurance.

Your assessment of "risk" is inaccurate. A suicide will always lose their ship - risk is 100%. There is also the risk of failure. The suicide ganker must decide whether the target's loot and the chance of failure are sufficient to out-weight this risk.

You'll find that whiners exist across all professions. They are people who find comfort in the ability to blame someone else for their short-comings.



You sure you understand the term risk?
Aulx-Gao Ekanon
#45 - 2012-05-24 19:23:14 UTC
Captain Sunnymuffins wrote:
I think you are missing something. May I suggest keeping marbles in a jar?

Professional suicide gankers couldn't give a toss about insurance.

Your assessment of "risk" is inaccurate. A suicide will always lose their ship - risk is 100%. There is also the risk of failure. The suicide ganker must decide whether the target's loot and the chance of failure are sufficient to out-weight this risk.

You'll find that whiners exist across all professions. They are people who find comfort in the ability to blame someone else for their short-comings.



Quote:
From Wikipedia: Risk is the potential that a chosen action or activity (including the choice of inaction) will lead to a loss (an undesirable outcome). The notion implies that a choice having an influence on the outcome exists (or existed). Potential losses themselves may also be called "risks". Almost any human endeavor carries some risk, but some are much more risky than others.


The loss of the ship for a suicide ganker is not a risk, it is a given. It is part of the equation. There is the risk of failure in that the ganker may not be successful in the destruction of the target or fail to nab the loot, assuming loot is even in the equation.

I suppose having loot in the equation is what separates suicide gankers from griefers.

_Naughty by nature, wicked by choice. _
Alonzo Odantis
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#46 - 2012-05-24 19:29:43 UTC
Aulx-Gao Ekanon wrote:
Captain Sunnymuffins wrote:
I think you are missing something. May I suggest keeping marbles in a jar?

Professional suicide gankers couldn't give a toss about insurance.

Your assessment of "risk" is inaccurate. A suicide will always lose their ship - risk is 100%. There is also the risk of failure. The suicide ganker must decide whether the target's loot and the chance of failure are sufficient to out-weight this risk.

You'll find that whiners exist across all professions. They are people who find comfort in the ability to blame someone else for their short-comings.



Quote:
From Wikipedia: Risk is the potential that a chosen action or activity (including the choice of inaction) will lead to a loss (an undesirable outcome). The notion implies that a choice having an influence on the outcome exists (or existed). Potential losses themselves may also be called "risks". Almost any human endeavor carries some risk, but some are much more risky than others.


The loss of the ship for a suicide ganker is not a risk, it is a given. It is part of the equation. There is the risk of failure in that the ganker may not be successful in the destruction of the target or fail to nab the loot, assuming loot is even in the equation.

I suppose having loot in the equation is what separates suicide gankers from griefers.



The ganker's ship is a given sunk cost, the ability to kill the other person before concord shows up is a risk, the loot that will drop to make it worth the investment is a risk.
Aulx-Gao Ekanon
#47 - 2012-05-24 19:44:22 UTC
Alonzo Odantis wrote:
The ganker's ship is a given sunk cost, the ability to kill the other person before concord shows up is a risk, the loot that will drop to make it worth the investment is a risk.


It seems that these two risks can be calculated and reduced as well. Passive Targeter + Ship Scanner, right? A ganker can get an idea of the target's EHP and potential loot drop and decide if engaging the target is worth the risk.

_Naughty by nature, wicked by choice. _
Alonzo Odantis
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#48 - 2012-05-24 19:47:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Alonzo Odantis
Aulx-Gao Ekanon wrote:
Alonzo Odantis wrote:
The ganker's ship is a given sunk cost, the ability to kill the other person before concord shows up is a risk, the loot that will drop to make it worth the investment is a risk.


It seems that these two risks can be calculated and reduced as well. Passive Targeter + Ship Scanner, right? A ganker can get an idea of the target's EHP and potential loot drop and decide if engaging the target is worth the risk.



What does that have to do with the price of tea in china?

We're not discussing it these risks are able to be modified up or down, we're discussing if they are or are not risks, which they are.

If you are attempting to say that these can be reduced to determined results, that is incorrect. Sometimes I hit for 1300 damage, sometimes I hit for 800. There's a lot of randomness in combat.
Lunkwill Khashour
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#49 - 2012-05-24 20:32:47 UTC
OP wants 1 char per account. OP is alt. Irony alert!
Grumpy Owly
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#50 - 2012-05-25 00:00:48 UTC
For PvP and like to encourage more of it?

Want to validate a potential Career path in ≡v≡ with new income potential that is ideally designed as simply a transferance of ISK from one pilot to another?

Actually like situations where ships shoot back and "really" improve your KB resume?

You agree that pilots should adapt to challenging situations in ≡v≡ where acceptance of risk is an everyday seperator of those getting ahead on the curve?

Or simply want to make ≡v≡ less boring?

Support: Bounty Hunting for CSM7.

CCP Design panel wrote:

"It's going to be awesome."

"It's absolutley on the list of things to do."

"We have a spaceships game, but you can't be han solo or boba fett, that's not clever."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=_pLi1J9YrkM#t=1199s

Stop the carebear whining, put the power to address these situations in the player arena in game.

Bounty Hunting - Soon (™): Retribution (Winter 2012)

It's just criminal - Smuggling
Alonzo Odantis
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#51 - 2012-05-25 03:31:01 UTC
Lunkwill Khashour wrote:
OP wants 1 char per account. OP is alt. Irony alert!



^^^

Again, the paranoia and utter denial of the possibility of genuinely new characters is baffling.
Roosterton
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#52 - 2012-05-25 03:52:47 UTC
ITT: Carebear whines about gankers whining about carebears whining about gankers.
Spikeflach
Perkone
Caldari State
#53 - 2012-05-25 06:12:09 UTC
I found it intriguing the idea of there actually being no risk when it comes to suicide ganks. I mean, your ship will be popped so you know its going to happen so the loss of the gankers ship is no risk to the ganker.

Thing is, miners can't counter a suicide gank. They may see it coming, but if a miner were to somehow manage to activate some module against the suicide ganker before the gank, the miner would be suiciding the mining ship to concord.
Serina Tsukaya
Dropbears Anonymous
Brave Collective
#54 - 2012-05-25 10:35:42 UTC
Spikeflach wrote:
I found it intriguing the idea of there actually being no risk when it comes to suicide ganks. I mean, your ship will be popped so you know its going to happen so the loss of the gankers ship is no risk to the ganker.

Thing is, miners can't counter a suicide gank. They may see it coming, but if a miner were to somehow manage to activate some module against the suicide ganker before the gank, the miner would be suiciding the mining ship to concord.




Miner vs a suicide ganker? Yes, said miner has slim chances. Sucide ganker vs a 10 hulk fleet with orca support and escort in the form of logi and a instacane? I'd say the miner has a fighting chance.
MisterNick
The Sagan Clan
#55 - 2012-05-25 11:46:12 UTC
This was a rather long-winded way to call gankers failed pvpers.

"Human beings make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to invent boredom."
Knus'lar
Solarmark
Stellarium Alliance
#56 - 2012-05-25 15:17:57 UTC
Alonzo Odantis wrote:
Daemon Ceed wrote:
Alonzo Odantis wrote:
The gambit of excuses for why i'm posting this is hilarious.
I'm not a miner. I've been playing not quite 2 weeks now and all of my skillpoints so far are in basic stuff and combat oriented skills.


That's right. You've been playing barely 2 weeks and you want to try to start suggesting things in a game that you know little to nothing about. Do what most of us have done; Play for at least 4-6 months, figure out why things are the way they are, and then if you so choose open your mouth and try to give suggestions. Right now, you are like a student in his first week at an automobile mechanics 101 course and trying to give ideas on how to completely redesign the internal combustion engine.



and you're like a sad old man that still thinks his job as elevator operator matters.

You assume too much that i'm as slow at learning as yourself. I don't need 6 months to know that whining from carebear gankers is whining.

Whining isn't unique to eve.


Why are you trying so hard to white knight? Yes, people whine, everyone knows that. Why are you trying so hard to point out the blatantly obvious? You clearly arent old enough to know what you are talking about. Since when have real suicide gankers cried about insurance? Your arugment about how gankers only kill in highsec because 'they arent good enough to get real fights blah blah blah' just makes you sound like Five Thirty. Null sec isnt everyone's cup of tea, and killing in highsec is a legitimate form of PvP. I dont know where you 'found' ganker tears, becase they do not exist. Carebears like to think gankers cry about things like insurance and concord, but they dont. Not real ones anyways, maybe the newbie 2 week old ones
Alonzo Odantis
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#57 - 2012-05-25 19:41:30 UTC
Knus'lar wrote:
Alonzo Odantis wrote:
Daemon Ceed wrote:
Alonzo Odantis wrote:
The gambit of excuses for why i'm posting this is hilarious.
I'm not a miner. I've been playing not quite 2 weeks now and all of my skillpoints so far are in basic stuff and combat oriented skills.


That's right. You've been playing barely 2 weeks and you want to try to start suggesting things in a game that you know little to nothing about. Do what most of us have done; Play for at least 4-6 months, figure out why things are the way they are, and then if you so choose open your mouth and try to give suggestions. Right now, you are like a student in his first week at an automobile mechanics 101 course and trying to give ideas on how to completely redesign the internal combustion engine.



and you're like a sad old man that still thinks his job as elevator operator matters.

You assume too much that i'm as slow at learning as yourself. I don't need 6 months to know that whining from carebear gankers is whining.

Whining isn't unique to eve.


Why are you trying so hard to white knight? Yes, people whine, everyone knows that. Why are you trying so hard to point out the blatantly obvious? You clearly arent old enough to know what you are talking about. Since when have real suicide gankers cried about insurance? Your arugment about how gankers only kill in highsec because 'they arent good enough to get real fights blah blah blah' just makes you sound like Five Thirty. Null sec isnt everyone's cup of tea, and killing in highsec is a legitimate form of PvP. I dont know where you 'found' ganker tears, becase they do not exist. Carebears like to think gankers cry about things like insurance and concord, but they dont. Not real ones anyways, maybe the newbie 2 week old ones



I read these forums, I made this post based on things I read. Why are you blatantly lying to cover for them? I'm guessing because "them" is "you"

As far as "trying so hard"

I made a forum post, while a flipper baby might find this challenging and difficult, for me it's a few keystrokes while relaxing a bit at the office between clients. If gankers didn't cry about concord why are there huge threads on 'OMG Don't Take away our way of avoiding concord WAHHHHH'

Hush noob, I'll be happy to teach you how video games work sometime if you be quiet and listen.
Previous page123