These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Desires of the New Order

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Eve Solecist
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
#41 - 2015-04-06 21:09:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Eve Solecist
Mr Epeen wrote:
Eve Solecist wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
Kalissa Ropol wrote:

I cannot admit to having read 100% of what is out there or retaining 100% of what I read, but I don’t recall seeing anywhere in the manifestos from James315 what he wants Highsec to be like.


Here's all you need to understand about James and his CODE dogma:

Miner bumping is a scam set up to take a ton of ISK from stupid people while at the same time promoting risk free PVP and trying to sell it as somehow elite.

Anything CODE can safely be ignored.

Mr Epeen Cool

Please don't talk like that ass on the first page.
You are better than that.

Advising ignornance is a dumb and hatefull thing to do.

Please tell me you didn't actually buy shares, Sol.

Mr Epeen Cool

I would never. :)

Still ... there needs to be a line that seperates
actual people from the haters and it shouldn't be too blurry.

In general, advising ignorance is a bad and hatefull thing to do.
It spawns only more ignorance and you yourself see what that brings us.

More haters.
More stupid.
More self entitlement.
  • All incoming connection attempts are being blocked. If you want to speak to me you will find me either in Hek local, you can create a contract or make a thread about it in General Discussions. I will call you back. -
Candi LeMew
Division 13
#42 - 2015-04-06 21:09:37 UTC
All these RP references in CODE threads make me cringe.

I mean, sure, technically we're all RPing to some extent when we login but nothing worse than when someone notices you're a RPer and says something like "Oh, RP? Yeah I met some CODE guys once."

*headdesk*

Please don't confuse it with the 'dedicated' RP community itself, per say.

Having said that, I have no problem with what CODE does personally. A lot of us love blowing things up just because it's there and enjoy attaching fun reasoning to it. At the end of the day no part of space is ever meant to be completely safe and people like blowing other people up everywhere in EVE for essentially the same reason. It's fun, and conflict is what this game is about.

🍌

Remember... in Anoikis Bob Is Always Watching...

"I been kicked out of better homes than this" - Rick James
Eve Solecist
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
#43 - 2015-04-06 21:11:16 UTC
Banana. ^_^
  • All incoming connection attempts are being blocked. If you want to speak to me you will find me either in Hek local, you can create a contract or make a thread about it in General Discussions. I will call you back. -
Tuttomenui II
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2015-04-06 21:14:14 UTC
Kalissa Ropol wrote:
Eve Solecist wrote:
Kalissa Ropol wrote:
I don’t necessarily have anything negative to say about them ganking what looks like a valid bot. It is when you carry that attitude to all people in high sec are helping bots by allowing bots to hide in plain sight I think they have lost their way.

Why not just admit that they are a high sec suicide squad there to cause mayhem, because that is what they currently do according to their killboard. Based on what I have read on the site my alt wasn’t even offered an opportunity to pay the 10 mill a year. So low I presume it’s a joke and a scam for those stupid enough to pay it.

It's a game.
Do you understand that?
If yes, do you understand that in a game there is kind of a point to play
followers of a cult, when the game allows you to do so for fun?

Just checking if you are one of those wackos who can't seperate game from RL ......


And the fee exists because GMs demanded it.
There is a thread about bumping in C&P.


Not sure why you are quoting me here as I am not opposed to CODEs originally stated goal - I think it is a very valiant position to take. I do take issue with how the mandate has grown such that the original vision of CODE no longer applies. But as the Code says it is a living document and subject to change.

I believe we all know that EVE is a game and everyone is able to play how they want in the sandbox. I never said that CODE should not do what pleases it. You have to have fun. The argument these threads normally get to is that their fun is wrecking my fun - which is a valid statement.

How is real life applicable to anything in EVE? Why bring this up?

So if someone pays 10 mil to CODE, is there some database you enter the name in and you cant be ganked anymore? Is that even a realistic thing that would be recognized by the GM? Is there some link to prove this statement?

I'm not complaining about bumping or being ganked. I am simply asking to what end does the CODE serve other than to justify to their selves ganking people.


Maybe it has evolved beyond the control of james315. Like the experiment in 'The Wave' getting out of hand.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#45 - 2015-04-06 21:15:02 UTC
Kalissa Ropol wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
Kalissa Ropol wrote:
Why does balance need to be brought to High-sec at all?
It creates conflict.


Not to get into a game of Why, but why does High Sec need conflict when it was not designed to be as such and other areas of the game are designed as such?

You need to check your premises. Highsec was always intended to have conflict - that is why CCP put ganking and wardecs into the game. They are not mistakes and have been there from the beginning.

Ganking could be removed from highsec with no effort at all on CCP's side yet they don't. Why? Because highsec ISK not intended to be safesec.

There are very good reasons related to risk vs. reward as to why there should not be a risk- and conflict-free in a sandbox game which James 315 covers better than I could in his manifestos and elsewhere. But the main point is that many people, including the developers at CCP, think the game is better off with risk and conflict in highsec.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Chewytowel Haklar
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#46 - 2015-04-06 21:15:17 UTC
I personally thought they just liked the idea of shooting miners and freighters because they avoid taking part in any other aspect of the game. This was an attempt at getting them out of their shell perhaps? And perhaps it was also to create content?
Kalissa Ropol
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2015-04-06 21:25:27 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Kalissa Ropol wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
Kalissa Ropol wrote:
Why does balance need to be brought to High-sec at all?
It creates conflict.


Not to get into a game of Why, but why does High Sec need conflict when it was not designed to be as such and other areas of the game are designed as such?

You need to check your premises. Highsec was always intended to have conflict - that is why CCP put ganking and wardecs into the game. They are not mistakes and have been there from the beginning.

Ganking could be removed from highsec with no effort at all on CCP's side yet they don't. Why? Because highsec ISK not intended to be safesec.

There are very good reasons related to risk vs. reward as to why there should not be a risk- and conflict-free in a sandbox game which James 315 covers better than I could in his manifestos and elsewhere. But the main point is that many people, including the developers at CCP, think the game is better off with risk and conflict in highsec.


He actually does not cover it better, hence the original question.
Paranoid Loyd
#48 - 2015-04-06 21:28:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Paranoid Loyd
Did you read the manifestos John linked? You couldn't possibly "cover" it any better than that.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2015-04-06 21:33:11 UTC
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
Did you read the manifestos John linked? You couldn't possibly "cover" it any better than that.

James' manifestos are really rather lacking in content compared to their word count. I'd hate to sentence anyone to trudge through them for deeper meaning.
Paranoid Loyd
#50 - 2015-04-06 21:38:59 UTC
Yes, I know reading lots of words is hard and it's even harder to read between the lines.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Kalissa Ropol
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2015-04-06 21:39:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Kalissa Ropol
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
Did you read the manifestos John linked? You couldn't possibly "cover" it any better than that.


Sure did. One is from 2011 the other from 2012 and deal only with mining and how everyone in high sec should die because they could be or may as well be bots. Near the end of his second manifesto it talks about why.

Now they are long, he likes to use really long sentence structures which is fine, hes preaching, but lets ask the serious question. What does High Sec look like when all the PvE is gone?

Where would you rather be? In sov protected by known friends and enemies and the ability to fight back or stuck in high sec where you cant fight back without going full boar war dec.

I see that as my problem with it all. If you could be proactive and kill CODE before they got to -5 then sure, but you can't/ And I dont mean to limit that statement to CODE, that is not a fair comment. The ability to be proactive against anyone of negative standing regardless if they are criminal or not.

I shouldn't even have to think about if Id rather mission protected by CONCORD or in Sov. Now CONCORD isn't protection, its Punishment, but it does not really punish at all when you get down to the risk isk reward part of it all.
Nerath Naaris
Pink Winged Unicorns for Peace Love and Anarchy
#52 - 2015-04-06 21:39:59 UTC
I have yet to see definite proof that CODE ganks miners that obey and adhere to THE CODE. What I do see, though, is miners that believe paying 10 million ISK allows them to continue their AFK-behavior.
Now I am not a member of CODE but I do think that not holding a mining permit while doing at-keyboard mining in a properly fitted ship is a lot more important than the other way round.

That said, miners also seem unable to understand that CODE might actually work in their favour by eliminating their competition and thus potentially raising the mineral prices. Instead, apparently most miners choose to cling to some unwarranted "solitarity"....
Hell, if I would ever actually start mining (not likely), I would set up a second account just to gank anyone else mining in my belt.

Je suis Paris // Köln // Brüssel // Orlando // Nice // Würzburg, München, Ansbach // Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray

Je suis Berlin // Fort Lauderdale // London // St. Petersburg // Stockholm

Je suis [?]
Kalissa Ropol
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#53 - 2015-04-06 21:45:09 UTC
Nerath Naaris wrote:
I have yet to see definite proof that CODE ganks miners that obey and adhere to THE CODE. What I do see, though, is miners that believe paying 10 million ISK allows them to continue their AFK-behavior.
Now I am not a member of CODE but I do think that not holding a mining permit while doing at-keyboard mining in a properly fitted ship is a lot more important than the other way round.

That said, miners also seem unable to understand that CODE might actually work in their favour by eliminating their competition and thus potentially raising the mineral prices. Instead, apparently most miners choose to cling to some unwarranted "solitarity"....
Hell, if I would ever actually start mining (not likely), I would set up a second account just to gank anyone else mining in my belt.


Well it was said earlier that the Code is actually meaningless to CODE. So 10 mill or not, if they want to they will gank you for just being there.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2015-04-06 21:45:57 UTC
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
Yes, I know reading lots of words is hard and it's even harder to read between the lines.

I've read them both. It wasn't hard, there just wasn't anything there to justify the time investment. Maybe because James takes a strange detour from the simple reasoning that ganking is part of the game and thus in need of no justification.
Paranoid Loyd
#55 - 2015-04-06 21:48:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Paranoid Loyd
Kalissa Ropol wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
Did you read the manifestos John linked? You couldn't possibly "cover" it any better than that.


Sure did. One is from 2011 the other from 2012 and deal only with mining and how everyone in high sec should die because they could be or may as well be bots. Near the end of his second manifesto it talks about why.

Now they are long, he likes to use really long sentence structures which is fine, hes preaching, but lets ask the serious question. What does High Sec look like when all the PvE is gone?

Where would you rather be? In sov protected by known friends and enemies and the ability to fight back or stuck in high sec where you cant fight back without going full boar war dec.

If these are your thoughts after reading what he wrote, you either didn't read what he wrote or you did but failed to understand it.



Kalissa Ropol wrote:

I see that as my problem with it all. If you could be proactive and kill CODE before they got to -5 then sure, but you can't/ And I dont mean to limit that statement to CODE, that is not a fair comment. The ability to be proactive against anyone of negative standing regardless if they are criminal or not.

I shouldn't even have to think about if Id rather mission protected by CONCORD or in Sov. Now CONCORD isn't protection, its Punishment, but it does not really punish at all when you get down to the risk isk reward part of it all.


I shoot criminals, not all the time but I do, usually when they are annoying me and occasionally when there is nothing else around to shoot. It's really not hard to hunt them, but it does require more effort than shooting rocks.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Kalissa Ropol
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2015-04-06 21:50:32 UTC
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
...snip...


I admit I may miss his point because he meanders alot and never says anything directly.
Eve Solecist
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
#57 - 2015-04-06 22:06:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Eve Solecist
Kalissa Ropol wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
Did you read the manifestos John linked? You couldn't possibly "cover" it any better than that.


Sure did. One is from 2011 the other from 2012 and deal only with mining and how everyone in high sec should die because they could be or may as well be bots. Near the end of his second manifesto it talks about why.

Now they are long, he likes to use really long sentence structures which is fine, hes preaching, but lets ask the serious question. What does High Sec look like when all the PvE is gone?

Where would you rather be? In sov protected by known friends and enemies and the ability to fight back or stuck in high sec where you cant fight back without going full boar war dec.

I see that as my problem with it all. If you could be proactive and kill CODE before they got to -5 then sure, but you can't/ And I dont mean to limit that statement to CODE, that is not a fair comment. The ability to be proactive against anyone of negative standing regardless if they are criminal or not.

I shouldn't even have to think about if Id rather mission protected by CONCORD or in Sov. Now CONCORD isn't protection, its Punishment, but it does not really punish at all when you get down to the risk isk reward part of it all.

Everyone can fight back.
People can group up.
People can create alts to gank the gankers,
or gank the lootwrecks if it's gate gankers.

AFK people generally can't be proactive though ...
... and thus they die, because they should have known better.

People asking for more security are those who deserve it the least,
because they are the ones neglecting it in the first place.

This is the most important part the haters conviniently ignore.

Furthermore isn't there enough suicide ganking going on to halt anything at all.
  • All incoming connection attempts are being blocked. If you want to speak to me you will find me either in Hek local, you can create a contract or make a thread about it in General Discussions. I will call you back. -
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#58 - 2015-04-06 22:14:49 UTC
Jade Blackwind wrote:
Kalissa Ropol wrote:
what is it that CODE desires Highsec to be like?
I think they want it removed.


Then they would have no content. I would think they rather enjoy their killmail farm.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#59 - 2015-04-06 22:21:15 UTC
Haven't been keeping up....is this different enough from other code/ganking threads to warrent a read?
Aphsala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#60 - 2015-04-06 22:21:22 UTC
Hopefully with the introduction of new structures, but more importantly the modules you can place in said structures, gradually we will see a decline, an eventual elimination of, "security" rated space

I envision the full of New Eden being nothing but Null space with us the players having the tools to build an have our space the way wee want it, the quicker the illusion of hi and low security is dispersed the better.

I've also been known to be really wrong alot :D