These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Let's give the gankers what they want

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#121 - 2014-03-15 10:40:11 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
haha, yea you were totally right in that thread where you were talking about how you want to win an award for all the ****-posting you do.

If there's ever an election for it, I'll vote for you, to help you out.
Sadly I fear even I can't win that. There are others perhaps more deserving and since I'm all for the deserving, they should have it.

But thanks for the vote. That means a lot after the recent discussions we've had. Your support is greatly appreciated.
Kyperion
#122 - 2014-03-15 10:40:32 UTC
And let us not forget the primary reason the professional ganker crowd exists is supposedly to teach miners how subhuman mining is.... and the glories of shooting ****...
Salvos Rhoska
#123 - 2014-03-15 10:41:49 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Why not simply arrange for a protective escort?



because actively having to defend themselves is beyond the ability of most high sec residents.


This is sarcasm, yes?

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#124 - 2014-03-15 10:43:31 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Why not simply arrange for a protective escort?



because actively having to defend themselves is beyond the ability of most high sec residents.


This is sarcasm, yes?
Sadly no, it's the truth.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Kyperion
#125 - 2014-03-15 10:43:43 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Why not simply arrange for a protective escort?



because actively having to defend themselves is beyond the ability of most high sec residents.


This is sarcasm, yes?


Because my idea of 'defending myself' includes the idea of killing the bastard shooting at me before the police get there.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#126 - 2014-03-15 10:44:17 UTC
Kyperion wrote:
....Again, it is a ******* asinine bullshit concept for gameplay mechanics to suggest 'your best option is not to fight' ....

Especially in a "sandbox".... especially in a sandbox that roughly mimics the Joker's ideal universe.

Then fight.

That is also perfectly valid and possible within the game as it currently stands.

You don't need more tools. You just need to make the decision to use the current ones.

If you don't want to tank in order to survive, then fight. It's really quite simple. There are plenty of ships and modules for those ships that allow you to go on the offence.

There are also the mechanics of wardecs that allow you to engage anyone you want in highsec.

So declare war and fit some pvp ships and go blow stuff up and die.

That's the way many people play the game.

You aren't forced to do one thing or the other. You can do whatever you like and every choice we make has consequences. Accept those and do what you want.
Kyperion
#127 - 2014-03-15 10:48:02 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Kyperion wrote:
....Again, it is a ******* asinine bullshit concept for gameplay mechanics to suggest 'your best option is not to fight' ....

Especially in a "sandbox".... especially in a sandbox that roughly mimics the Joker's ideal universe.

Then fight.

That is also perfectly valid and possible within the game as it currently stands.

You don't need more tools. You just need to make the decision to use the current ones.

If you don't want to tank in order to survive, then fight. It's really quite simple. There are plenty of ships and modules for those ships that allow you to go on the offence.

There are also the mechanics of wardecs that allow you to engage anyone you want in highsec.

So declare war and fit some pvp ships and go blow stuff up and die.

That's the way many people play the game.

You aren't forced to do one thing or the other. You can do whatever you like and every choice we make has consequences. Accept those and do what you want.


My point is, EVE is not a sandbox as long as you don't have the utility to do all of that in a mining vessel... should it be an offensive powerhouse... probably not, but at the very least it should be able to go toe to toe with a couple of ships the same way any other ship in this dystopian universe can.

We are talking about a society with little or no rules, so artificially making a solo ship weak is ******* stupid....
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
#128 - 2014-03-15 10:48:58 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Liar.

Troll

UghRoll

Remove standings and insurance.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#129 - 2014-03-15 10:50:37 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
haha, yea you were totally right in that thread where you were talking about how you want to win an award for all the ****-posting you do.

If there's ever an election for it, I'll vote for you, to help you out.
Sadly I fear even I can't win that. There are others perhaps more deserving and since I'm all for the deserving, they should have it.

But thanks for the vote. That means a lot after the recent discussions we've had. Your support is greatly appreciated.


No worries man. You seem like a good guy, just one I disagree with. But I'm sure all of us disagree with each other about something.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#130 - 2014-03-15 10:59:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Kyperion wrote:
My point is, EVE is not a sandbox as long as you don't have the utility to do all of that in a mining vessel.
What you can and can't do with an individual tool has no bearing on whether it's a sandbox or not. What matters is what you can do with all the tools at your disposal. Just because you can't use shears to mine obsidian in Minecraft doesn't make Minecraft any less of a sandbox.

Picking the wrong tools for what you're trying to do just means exact that: you've picked the wrong tool for the job. Pick a better one next time and you'll massively increase your chances of success.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#131 - 2014-03-15 10:59:09 UTC
Kyperion wrote:
My point is, EVE is not a sandbox as long as you don't have the utility to do all of that in a mining vessel... should it be an offensive powerhouse... probably not, but at the very least it should be able to go toe to toe with a couple of ships the same way any other ship in this dystopian universe can.

We are talking about a society with little or no rules, so artificially making a solo ship weak is ******* stupid....

You're right. It's not a true sandbox. It's more "sandboxy".

I really wish it was Mad Max Online and there was no Concord, no highsec, lowsec and nullsec. Just all lawless space.

I fear we would have far more complaints than we already do though, so the best we can do is try to preserve the sandboxy nature of it and play with the tools CCP gives us.

Many industrial/mining vessels can be pvp fit. I lost a fight in an Ishkur to a pvp Nereus and sometimes run a pvp Venture.

We have so many tools available already, I don't personally see a need to add more modules to industrial ships. There are plenty of alternatives available.
Dave Stark
#132 - 2014-03-15 11:14:51 UTC
Kyperion wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Why not simply arrange for a protective escort?



because actively having to defend themselves is beyond the ability of most high sec residents.


This is sarcasm, yes?


Because my idea of 'defending myself' includes the idea of killing the bastard shooting at me before the police get there.


then take a ship with guns, instead of whining on the forums.
Anomaly One
Doomheim
#133 - 2014-03-15 11:19:24 UTC
"it's not a true sandbox unless I can mine with a battleship that's fit to be able to wipe out gankers while getting protection from concord"

CCP should give us a true sandbox, no concord, no sec status, nothing but to judge another with pure reputation
I suppose that's what you want OP? maybe then you'll show dem gankers who's boss!

but maybe if CCP actually changed ganking so it isn't so binary (they would have to remove concord and change the system) but that will never happen, because even if after a gank you somehow got empowered by the space police (+300% dmg, +300% shield recharge etc.) you would still rather whine than do something about it.

Because high sec residents (I know because I "live" there) are out for themselves not each other, they don't care if their "neighbors" lose billions of isk in a gank or w/e, as long as it doesn't happen to them it's alright! but when it does happen to them, well we get people like the OP and all the whining threads.

Psychotic Monk for CSM9 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326497 you want content in highsec? vote Monk
Iam The Empress
Doomheim
#134 - 2014-03-15 11:50:29 UTC
Agreed

PvP pilots only like shooting those who cannot shoot back
Kyperion
#135 - 2014-03-15 11:53:17 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Kyperion wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Why not simply arrange for a protective escort?



because actively having to defend themselves is beyond the ability of most high sec residents.


This is sarcasm, yes?


Because my idea of 'defending myself' includes the idea of killing the bastard shooting at me before the police get there.


then take a ship with guns, instead of whining on the forums.


Because you know my Ishtar is fitted for mining.... dickhead
Kyperion
#136 - 2014-03-15 11:54:07 UTC
Anomaly One wrote:
"it's not a true sandbox unless I can mine with a battleship that's fit to be able to wipe out gankers while getting protection from concord"

CCP should give us a true sandbox, no concord, no sec status, nothing but to judge another with pure reputation
I suppose that's what you want OP? maybe then you'll show dem gankers who's boss!

but maybe if CCP actually changed ganking so it isn't so binary (they would have to remove concord and change the system) but that will never happen, because even if after a gank you somehow got empowered by the space police (+300% dmg, +300% shield recharge etc.) you would still rather whine than do something about it.

Because high sec residents (I know because I "live" there) are out for themselves not each other, they don't care if their "neighbors" lose billions of isk in a gank or w/e, as long as it doesn't happen to them it's alright! but when it does happen to them, well we get people like the OP and all the whining threads.


You are an idiot... the whole premise of this post is to get more real PVP, and less whiney New Order bitches like yourself
Salvos Rhoska
#137 - 2014-03-15 12:00:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
@ Kyperion:

I'm confused.

You are saying you think a Venture, for example, should be able to fit for full mining, and still have slots available to perform as a full dedicated combat vessel, simultaneously?

So that this Venture can mine at full capacity, and at the same time kill fully fitted combat vessels?

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#138 - 2014-03-15 12:01:43 UTC
Miriya Zakalwe
World Wide Welp
#139 - 2014-03-15 12:01:48 UTC
Kyperion wrote:
Anomaly One wrote:
"it's not a true sandbox unless I can mine with a battleship that's fit to be able to wipe out gankers while getting protection from concord"

CCP should give us a true sandbox, no concord, no sec status, nothing but to judge another with pure reputation
I suppose that's what you want OP? maybe then you'll show dem gankers who's boss!

but maybe if CCP actually changed ganking so it isn't so binary (they would have to remove concord and change the system) but that will never happen, because even if after a gank you somehow got empowered by the space police (+300% dmg, +300% shield recharge etc.) you would still rather whine than do something about it.

Because high sec residents (I know because I "live" there) are out for themselves not each other, they don't care if their "neighbors" lose billions of isk in a gank or w/e, as long as it doesn't happen to them it's alright! but when it does happen to them, well we get people like the OP and all the whining threads.


You are an idiot... the whole premise of this post is to get more real PVP, and less whiney New Order bitches like yourself


Well, since your premise - gank targets being able to fight off gankers and mine at the same time - implies that you be able to shoot first to stop gankers, that means you are in favor of eliminating Concord action, which is tantamount to eliminating highsec.

I agree completely. Highsec delenda est!
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#140 - 2014-03-15 12:03:38 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
You can already fight back in haulers
Exhumers too.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack