These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Burn Jita haz a date!!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dave Stark
#221 - 2014-04-26 23:09:19 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
So bring more.


can't, server node is at capacity.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#222 - 2014-04-26 23:10:05 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
So bring more.


can't, server node is at capacity.


Use ships with higher DPS capability.
Dave Stark
#223 - 2014-04-26 23:10:06 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Like you right now, doing this burn jita.

A charon warps into system, you know it has zero fittings because they have zero fittings available to them, so you just assume the pilot has maxed skills to plan on the side of caution.

You then calculate how much DPS is needed to blow up the Charon before concord can kill you. You bring that much DPS, and then a bunch of white knights in jita alpha half of your catalysts, rep the freighter, and foil your efforts at a gank!

oh dear god, my argument just fell apart, but i thought i was right...

how could i have been so foolish?


glad that you've seen the error of your ways.


Bring enough DPS to kill the people who become vulnerable through healing the freighter your attacking.


but you can't because a bunch of falcons just uncloaked and jammed everyone.


Increase your sensor strength


doesn't matter, they all got lucky and landed jams anyway.
Dave Stark
#224 - 2014-04-26 23:11:03 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
So bring more.


can't, server node is at capacity.


Use ships with higher DPS capability.


we already are. we're literally using vindicators or something equally obscene and hypothetical.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#225 - 2014-04-26 23:13:47 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:


doesn't matter, they all got lucky and landed jams anyway.


learn to fit your ship
Dave Stark
#226 - 2014-04-26 23:15:24 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:


doesn't matter, they all got lucky and landed jams anyway.


learn to fit your ship


well at least we know you haven't got a clue how ecm works.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#227 - 2014-04-26 23:17:55 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:


doesn't matter, they all got lucky and landed jams anyway.


learn to fit your ship


well at least we know you haven't got a clue how ecm works.


no, i understand that regardless of how much sensor strength, there's always going to be a chance that your ship get jammed.

But your ships sensor strength compared to the ship's jamming strength, you can increase your resistance against jamming to be so high that the probability of "everyone" getting jammed is so low that it's more likely an asteroid slam into earth cutting out power.
Dave Stark
#228 - 2014-04-26 23:18:49 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:


doesn't matter, they all got lucky and landed jams anyway.


learn to fit your ship


well at least we know you haven't got a clue how ecm works.


no, i understand that regardless of how much sensor strength, there's always going to be a chance that your ship get jammed.

But your ships sensor strength compared to the ship's jamming strength, you can increase your resistance against jamming to be so high that the probability of "everyone" getting jammed is so low that it's more likely an asteroid slam into earth cutting out power.


but you admit that it's not a chance of 0, and therefore there is risk present?

good, glad you've finally admitted it.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#229 - 2014-04-26 23:20:24 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:


doesn't matter, they all got lucky and landed jams anyway.


learn to fit your ship


well at least we know you haven't got a clue how ecm works.


no, i understand that regardless of how much sensor strength, there's always going to be a chance that your ship get jammed.

But your ships sensor strength compared to the ship's jamming strength, you can increase your resistance against jamming to be so high that the probability of "everyone" getting jammed is so low that it's more likely an asteroid slam into earth cutting out power.


but you admit that it's not a chance of 0, and therefore there is risk present?

good, glad you've finally admitted it.


It's so small of a risk that it's negligible.
Dave Stark
#230 - 2014-04-26 23:22:55 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
It's so small of a risk that it's negligible.


but still large enough that you're wrong.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#231 - 2014-04-26 23:23:52 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
It's so small of a risk that it's negligible.


but still large enough that you're wrong.


I disagree
Dave Stark
#232 - 2014-04-26 23:24:48 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
It's so small of a risk that it's negligible.


but still large enough that you're wrong.


I disagree


you're welcome to, but >0 isn't 0, and therefore you're still wrong.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#233 - 2014-04-26 23:25:36 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
It's so small of a risk that it's negligible.


but still large enough that you're wrong.


I disagree


you're welcome to, but >0 isn't 0, and therefore you're still wrong.


The risk is so miniscule it's negligible.
Dave Stark
#234 - 2014-04-26 23:28:12 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
It's so small of a risk that it's negligible.


but still large enough that you're wrong.


I disagree


you're welcome to, but >0 isn't 0, and therefore you're still wrong.


The risk is so miniscule it's negligible.


well you just admitted there's risk, so you know it's not risk free.

so we've managed to educate you, or you've stopped lying. either way, that's a positive.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#235 - 2014-04-26 23:30:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Divine Entervention
Dave Stark wrote:


well you just admitted there's risk, so you know it's not risk free.

so we've managed to educate you, or you've stopped lying. either way, that's a positive.


Negligible risk, a risk so small you should not consider it as an influencing factor in how you make your decisions.

I welcome this opportunity to teach you how burn jita should properly be conducted.
Dave Stark
#236 - 2014-04-26 23:33:58 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:


well you just admitted there's risk, so you know it's not risk free.

so we've managed to educate you, or you've stopped lying. either way, that's a positive.


Negligible risk, a risk so small you should not consider it as an influencing factor in how you make your decisions.

I welcome this opportunity to teach you how burn jita should properly be conducted.


a risk that still means you're wrong, and ganking isn't risk free.

i welcome this opportunity for you to stop while you're not quite as behind as you were when you were incorrectly spewing that ganking is risk free.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#237 - 2014-04-26 23:36:03 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:


well you just admitted there's risk, so you know it's not risk free.

so we've managed to educate you, or you've stopped lying. either way, that's a positive.


Negligible risk, a risk so small you should not consider it as an influencing factor in how you make your decisions.

I welcome this opportunity to teach you how burn jita should properly be conducted.


a risk that still means you're wrong, and ganking isn't risk free.

i welcome this opportunity for you to stop while you're not quite as behind as you were when you were incorrectly spewing that ganking is risk free.


It's negligible enough to not let it be an influencing factor in how you make your decisions.
Dave Stark
#238 - 2014-04-26 23:38:19 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:


well you just admitted there's risk, so you know it's not risk free.

so we've managed to educate you, or you've stopped lying. either way, that's a positive.


Negligible risk, a risk so small you should not consider it as an influencing factor in how you make your decisions.

I welcome this opportunity to teach you how burn jita should properly be conducted.


a risk that still means you're wrong, and ganking isn't risk free.

i welcome this opportunity for you to stop while you're not quite as behind as you were when you were incorrectly spewing that ganking is risk free.


It's negligible enough to not let it be an influencing factor in how you make your decisions.


i see, instead of stopping you're just going to repeat irrelevant phrases.
Zeko Rena
ENCOM Industries
#239 - 2014-04-26 23:39:33 UTC
This argument is going places

In other news my "S" key broke and I had to map s to one of my function keys.. FML

Oh yeah and I watched a big ship pop yesterday ArrowIdea
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#240 - 2014-04-26 23:42:55 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:


well you just admitted there's risk, so you know it's not risk free.

so we've managed to educate you, or you've stopped lying. either way, that's a positive.


Negligible risk, a risk so small you should not consider it as an influencing factor in how you make your decisions.

I welcome this opportunity to teach you how burn jita should properly be conducted.


a risk that still means you're wrong, and ganking isn't risk free.

i welcome this opportunity for you to stop while you're not quite as behind as you were when you were incorrectly spewing that ganking is risk free.


It's negligible enough to not let it be an influencing factor in how you make your decisions.


i see, instead of stopping you're just going to repeat irrelevant phrases.


It's only irrelevant to you because you choose to regard it as so since you choose to not accept that the risk is negligible enough to not be an influencing factor.

How you feel about it doesn't negate that the risk is negligible.