Crime & Punishment

Eh. I'm sure it was fun whilst it lasted - for those who bothered with such things. All good things go away.

OP sent me a private tear mail. You know they're angry when you get private mail from them.

This has once again proven my theory correct: whenever I start training for something or (ab)using dubious game mechanics, it get's nerfed shortly after.

Contact me in game for your nerfing needs so we can work out an arrangement that will benefit the both of us (meaning: pay me to get your desired stuff nerfed) \o/

I know how you feel. Links got nerfed just as my alt was able to start providing them. But she's almost done with Recon 5 now and I still haven't heard about nerfs to Falcons. So there is hope, dim though it may be.

Sometimes it takes a while, predicting Falcon will get shafted around summer though as I have it somewhere in my training plans.

As for the case of the drone aggro: I wanted this one nerfed as I think it was bad game mechanics. Killed a couple of boats cuz of it and it just doesn't feel quite as good as an honest gank

I'm not too happy about how it was nerfed, I'd rather see it nerfed through the safety settings. If green, they don't engage, if yellow, only engage when your own stuff is stolen, if red, engage everything that flashes. That leaves more tactical options, I can think of scenarios where I'd WANT my drones to automaticly attack without even having to target the target myself first. With more options, there is also more room for misjudgements and stupid mistakes, resulting in more stuff getting blown up which is good, right?

I get the green and yellow safeties. What are the rules when you use the red option?

Its not about cowardice or bravery, or anyone judging how anyone else plays the game -- the bigger issue is the constant nerfing of hisec by CCP based on carebear tears, contrary to their founding 'conflict is good' and 'htfu' roots that required people to use their brains, not be bubble wrapped.

What I mean is that intended or not, having drones with their setting at 'agressive' aggroing someone attacking a players MTU is a GOOD MECHANIC. It passed the 'does it create opportunity for conflict, or remove it' smell test.

Remember, the bear still had the option to put brain in gear and use the 'passive' drone setting right?

Where the real tears originated was with the carebear not using his brain, wanting to AFK mission run with an 'agressive' drone setting, and then crying like a b!tch when a pirate DID use his brain to get a limited engagement against him. THAT is what EvE is about, or...sadly....used to be...

::sniff::

When your drones decide to pop the spawn trigger and drop multiple BS and web/scram frigates on you, you'll appreciate the passive setting

So actively playing the game is unreasonable, you want to run missions AFK or semi-AFK while you fap.

And even given the option to have drones set to aggressive to auto-engage targets, and then quickly setting them to 'passive' once a stranger appears on short range d-scan or lands in your pocket while you have an MTU out is also 'unreasonable' and onerous I guess.

Both require a brain and active play, with the potential to be a conflict generator -- sounds like a win-win good game mechanic to me.

There you have it folks, the ongoing road to nerfdom in full display. Catch our next episode when Serendipity Lost says...

"Serendipity Lost > Wardecs should be consensual only, someone shouldnt be able to declare war on me in hisec when I am mission running and be able to shoot at me without my say so..."