These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

The Hypocrisy of High Sec

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
White Quake
Doomheim
#221 - 2012-10-31 19:54:31 UTC
none of you have any basis of argument other than butthurt bullshite

PVP pilot can gank a mackinaw in a destroyer *thats just eve, get used to it*

CCP ten buffs mining barges u have to actually spend to gank expensive ships and you go *omg thats not fair, u took our toys away, damn you, we hate you, JIHAD*

grow up :) U wanna pvp in high sec without war decs, use big ships n spend money doing it

if a pvp pilot finds summit easy, hes happy, if its difficult, its broken

stupid reasoning
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#222 - 2012-10-31 19:55:10 UTC
White Quake wrote:
yes lets make bs killable in frigs


nothing stops a frigate from killing a battleship hth

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
KrakizBad
Section 8.
#223 - 2012-10-31 19:56:55 UTC
White Quake wrote:
Andski wrote:
DarthNefarius wrote:
Oh look its the ignoring "risk versus rewards" fallacy: cheap ships killing vastly more expensive ships... see what I did there?


oh man the guy who advocates for hisec safety buffs and a revert to the escalation incursion nerfs is talking "risk versus reward"

this is gold


yes lets make bs killable in frigs

and freighters killable in shuttles

and lets watch eve crash and burn

BS's are killable by frigs, easily. Crash and burn in 3...
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#224 - 2012-10-31 19:56:56 UTC
White Quake wrote:
none of you have any basis of argument other than butthurt bullshite

PVP pilot can gank a mackinaw in a destroyer *thats just eve, get used to it*

CCP ten buffs mining barges u have to actually spend to gank expensive ships and you go *omg thats not fair, u took our toys away, damn you, we hate you, JIHAD*

grow up :) U wanna pvp in high sec without war decs, use big ships n spend money doing it

if a pvp pilot finds summit easy, hes happy, if its difficult, its broken

stupid reasoning


lmao

CCP is just changing the game to cater to the lowest common denominator, not to make it "harder" on "those damned PvP pilots"

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#225 - 2012-10-31 19:58:32 UTC
White Quake wrote:
PVP pilot can gank a mackinaw in a destroyer *thats just eve, get used to it*

Don't worry, CCP are sure this'll be a thing of the past when retribution hits.

If it turns out it's not enough, they'll release the next expansion called EVE Online: Trammel.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
TharOkha
0asis Group
#226 - 2012-10-31 19:58:51 UTC
Andski wrote:
White Quake wrote:
yes lets make bs killable in frigs


nothing stops a frigate from killing a battleship hth


As well as post-patch exhumer

CODE. Venture hunt contest in a nutshell
White Quake
Doomheim
#227 - 2012-10-31 19:58:53 UTC
Andski wrote:
White Quake wrote:
none of you have any basis of argument other than butthurt bullshite

PVP pilot can gank a mackinaw in a destroyer *thats just eve, get used to it*

CCP ten buffs mining barges u have to actually spend to gank expensive ships and you go *omg thats not fair, u took our toys away, damn you, we hate you, JIHAD*

grow up :) U wanna pvp in high sec without war decs, use big ships n spend money doing it

if a pvp pilot finds summit easy, hes happy, if its difficult, its broken

stupid reasoning


lmao

CCP is just changing the game to cater to the lowest common denominator, not to make it "harder" on "those damned PvP pilots"


and you run to the forums and try to get high sec nerfed so u can go back to nailing barges with ease and laugh as the miners stop mining because they just die non stop, mineral prices go up, ship prices go up, everything goes up and then ur back here in two months time complaining
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#228 - 2012-10-31 20:00:49 UTC
White Quake wrote:
and you run to the forums and try to get high sec nerfed so u can go back to nailing barges with ease and laugh as the miners stop mining because they just die non stop, mineral prices go up, ship prices go up, everything goes up and then ur back here in two months time complaining


tell me why you seem to think that I'm in favor of dirt-cheap minerals

I'm actually not because I like it when losses actually matter and capitals aren't replaced in a matter of a few hours of PvE

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Marvin Narville
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#229 - 2012-10-31 20:00:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Marvin Narville
White Quake wrote:


How do they have an advantage? If a null sec player cant make as much isk as an empire pilot L2P

its as simple as that, i make more money pvping and ratting than i do, doing anything else, including lvl 4 alts and ice miner alts


Actually if it were as simple as a "matter of isk" you'd still be largely incorrect. If you were shooting for tunnel vision, you nailed it.

Yes, you could make more money ratting in null than in high sec.
Yes you could make more running anomalies in null than in high sec.

No at no point in my post did i say "game mechanics have caused an imbalance that is specifically and entirely restricted to who can generate isk more quickly".

Are there factors in this game beyond making isk which are relevant, yes. I applaud you for reducing it to that lowest common denominator, however you've otherwise entirely missed the point, and ignored huge portions of the game which aren't directly related to how many ISK you can pile up. Perhaps consider broadening your argument, or at least broadening your consideration of those arguments put forth by others so that you can appropriately respond or disagree. Otherwise you sir are currently engaged in a very fruitless monologue with yourself.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#230 - 2012-10-31 20:02:55 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Yeah, the crazier and more feared you are, the more likely the government is going to let you set up an orbital bombardment factory in orbit of one of their densely populated planets. Good one.

Actually, beyond a certain threshold yes. Consider the implications of creating an enemy out of not an individual but rather an undying entity capable of piloting the greatest weapons you have at far greater efficiency and effect than you can.

Have you seen CONCORD?

Just have CONCORD push all the capsuleers out into 'lawless space' and restrict all capsuleers to civilian gatling guns unless fighting FW enemies. Problem solved.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#231 - 2012-10-31 20:07:08 UTC
hahahahahahaha
TharOkha
0asis Group
#232 - 2012-10-31 20:07:36 UTC
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#233 - 2012-10-31 20:09:16 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Yeah, the crazier and more feared you are, the more likely the government is going to let you set up an orbital bombardment factory in orbit of one of their densely populated planets. Good one.

Actually, beyond a certain threshold yes. Consider the implications of creating an enemy out of not an individual but rather an undying entity capable of piloting the greatest weapons you have at far greater efficiency and effect than you can.

Have you seen CONCORD?

Just have CONCORD push all the capsuleers out into 'lawless space' and restrict all capsuleers to civilian gatling guns unless fighting FW enemies. Problem solved.

Ok, are we talking about the entity that is non-governing and is apparently content to simply police while being higher than all in military might or are we talking about the entirely less impressive faction navies who belong to the empires who are making these decisions. Also you haven't responded to the issue of mutual benefit of the revenue created from the use of empire facilities, not that it couldn't stand to be raised. That is alot of isk which is being funneled back into the wallets of the empires.
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#234 - 2012-10-31 20:13:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Touval Lysander
Jenn aSide wrote:
or the consequences of their CHOICE to play

...a multiplayer game
...where undocking in consenting to get pew pew'd
...playing the game wrong

I'm not a hair splitter... (well yes I am but meh).

Multi player game means there is more than one player in the game. Not sure how this became - you must interact.

player 1> o/ fellow player
player 2> gtfo. i do not want to talk to you
player 1> this is a multiplayer game you know?!

Consenting means you accept that you might to be killed. It does not mean you will, nor does it mean you should.

player 1> dude, your in hospital with a bullet wound! what happened?
player 2> i was in my car and some dude shot me
player 1> wtf!! what a dirty rotten so-and-so!
player 2> it's ok. i consented, i left my house and drove to work.

Playing wrong? How can anyone play the game wrong? It's a sandbox.

player 1> dude! no! that's not how you play eve!
player 2> if i want to mine with a logi, why the hell not?
player 1> because you just, you know, don't. it's not cool.

Carry on. Blink

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#235 - 2012-10-31 20:13:56 UTC
I mean I have the self control needed not to punch somebody in the face when they make fun of how bad I am at a video game

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#236 - 2012-10-31 20:15:16 UTC
I'm just waiting for the "people who gank defenseless ships are sociopaths" line.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#237 - 2012-10-31 20:15:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Touval Lysander
Andski wrote:
I mean I have the self control needed not to punch somebody in the face when they make fun of how bad I am at a video game

I make the same claim.

But it's only cos I don't know where they live.

HANG ON!!!

Aren't I responding to the results of a post from a guy that started his "forum career" whining about nastee peeples on the internetz and how badz they poasts?

now he's advocating punching heds? THAT guy?

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
Hestia Mar
Calmaretto
#238 - 2012-10-31 20:22:04 UTC
As a pvp'r you don't take any risk because if you lose a ship you simply clone back to a station and pick up a new ship...play the game with only one ship and then you'd be taking a risk in pvp.

In any case your ship is internet pixels so there is no real risk involved...you just want to feel superior because your risk free existence is different from a carebear's risk free existence

Posting in another "please I want more cannon-fodder to bloat my KB" thread...

Yawn.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#239 - 2012-10-31 20:22:13 UTC
A bit funny... you know... the fact that pvpers who refuse to bring risk to hisec are the ones who whine about risk-free hisec.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#240 - 2012-10-31 20:24:34 UTC
Hestia Mar wrote:
As a pvp'r you don't take any risk because if you lose a ship you simply clone back to a station and pick up a new ship...play the game with only one ship and then you'd be taking a risk in pvp.

"hurr if you have multiple ships you're not taking risks durr"

Hestia Mar wrote:
Posting in another "please I want more cannon-fodder to bloat my KB" thread...

oh look you're 100% wrong

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat