EVE General Discussion

You misdirect very well. Do you by chance play a hunter?

so this is how you act when you isn't whining.



cant tell the difference, tbh

Cruxification? Is that a neologism for getting to the crux of the matter?

Or should we nail you to a cross for misspelling crucifixion? :)

Yes? I thought that was the point?

I'm just wondering if you're one of those that griefs because people take pixels too seriously. It would seem odd and hypcoritical of you, considering that you're taking this game way too seriously yourself.

Whenever people feel aggrieved and ask CCP for changes to game mechanics on the forums, they usually outnumber those who want to maintain the status quo. This is completely rational; when a person is dissatisfied, he will take up arms, but when he is content, he will remain complacent and indifferent. The claim of tears, by either side, is simply a crude straw man, used in lieu of a rational argument. In reality, it's just two groups fighting to get what they want. In this case, one group is fighting for the implementation of massive dampers on non-consensual pvp in high-sec, while the other is trying to hold on to as many "core" EVE principles as it can.

Neither group is objectively right. Maybe if the first group gets what it wants, and EVE goes through massive changes, the game would actually be better off, with an increased subscription count and higher player satisfaction. Or maybe the game will wither and die, for any number of reasons predicted by the opposite side (economy implodes, inability to compete with other pve-centric MMOs, etc). Either way, we won't know until it happens. However, it would be extremely hypocritical of you to demonize me simply for the act of subscribing to a different idology.

Everybody "cries" at some point. So the next time someone feels empowered because their side won a concession and starts spewing memes, it would be wise to remember what brought them to the forums in the first place. This goes for "griefer" and carebear alike.

So, what brought me to the forums? Certainly not the need to disparage anyone's play style. I'm simply here to make the argument that the removal of insurance won't diminish the grievances that people have with ganking; the amount of money is simply too small to be a significant factor. However, when this change fails to create its intended impact, it is likely to lead to further, more drastic changes. Changes that will no doubt have a much larger impact on the core concept of EVE Online. You know, the whole "you're not really safe anywhere" thing? I don't want this to happen, and I'm well within my rights to argue against it, preemptively or not.

PS: I don't grief anyone. I play within the confines of the rules set by CCP.

ah crap, I apologize then, It was the "where the OP got crucified" thing that threw me.

ah, 43 isnt adult? dammit when do I get to grow up?

The issue in question are the tactic of using suicide Blackbirds to jam an Incursion fleets logistics ships.

ECCM or more logistics ships would keep the person they are trying to keep alive from dying by either preventing the logistics from being jammed in the first place... or by having more logistics ships than the Blackbird can jam.

lol me too; it makes it so much more fun in a risk/reward manner