These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Should High sec go away?

Author
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#241 - 2015-08-15 23:37:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Tippia wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
It's the brand name of a exterior paint that people use for budget paint jobs on cars.

But that makes no sense. Then they wouldn't be Minmatar.
Have you ever seen a car that's been patched up with duct tape and then painted with a roller? They're 20 footers, they look ok from 20 feet and end up looking very Minmatar up close.

I know this, I've owned several examples, some of them older than I am.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#242 - 2015-08-15 23:52:18 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
It's the brand name of a exterior paint that people use for budget paint jobs on cars.

But that makes no sense. Then they wouldn't be Minmatar.
Have you ever seen a car that's been patched up with duct tape and then painted with a roller? They're 20 footers, they look ok from 20 feet and end up looking very Minmatar up close.

I know this, I've owned several examples, some of them older than I am.

Oh, I know the look. I was thinking more of the heretical notion of applying rust protection (now that I've read up on it) on a Minmatar ship. P
BrundleMeth
State War Academy
Caldari State
#243 - 2015-08-16 00:06:12 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
If High sec goes away, most of the people there would probably go away too. Meaning you won't get more targets everywhere else, and CCP would struggle to keep the lights on.

Better solution is that you go away instead.

Exactly. I'd quit faster than you could say "stick it in yer ass"... I'd Biomass with ALL my ISK and Gear too. 200 Billion ISK gone down the Dumper...
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#244 - 2015-08-16 00:15:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Tippia wrote:
Oh, I know the look. I was thinking more of the heretical notion of applying rust protection (now that I've read up on it) on a Minmatar ship. P
It's not heresy if you think of the paint as a form of hull tanking Twisted



BrundleMeth wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
If High sec goes away, most of the people there would probably go away too. Meaning you won't get more targets everywhere else, and CCP would struggle to keep the lights on.

Better solution is that you go away instead.

Exactly. I'd quit faster than you could say "stick it in yer ass"... I'd Biomass with ALL my ISK and Gear too. 200 Billion ISK gone down the Dumper...
Agreed, I did WH's for a year and run PI in lowsec, both are fun to slip into but too stressful to live in for me.

Hisec offers me a level of risk that I don't find stressful, I'm aware that I'm playing a game where Murphy's Law and other players with explosive intentions are extremely active and work around them. If my relatively stress free comfort zone went, I'd be gone the moment my sub expired.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Kinete Jenius
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#245 - 2015-08-16 05:11:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Kinete Jenius
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
The point is that you're claiming that gank destroyers have battleship levels of DPS when in truth they have slightly more than cruiser levels of DPS, PvE cruisers at that. You're also failing to take into account that gank destroyers have an extremely limited engagement envelope whereas gank BS's generally have a much larger engagement envelope.
Some cruisers can easily reach battleship level of DPS. Especially in a PVE situation where tank can be minimized to one module. All you've proven is that cruisers can also reach BS level dps albeit at a much higher cost than a catalyst.

Engagement envelope is irrelevant as it is trivially easy to get a warp in directly on top of my targets. *Hint* cloak

Quote:
You should learn to read, I stated level 3, which by definition isn't level 4.
/facepalm. Are you really trying to be this dense? Is it just an act to try to troll me now? Or is this some secret plan to somehow "win" the forums?

My point was that going BC IV is over a month less in training compared to BS IV. That is supporting evidence of my statement that it's easier than before to get into ganking. When I trained my current set of gank alts I would of had to buy 24 more plexes for dual training if I had to go to BS IV like in the old days. Fortunately the pocket battleships allowed me to stick to BC IV and save time and isk in the process while still pumping up some dps related skills.

Quote:
When used in the manner in which you did, the word fraction generally refers to the underlined part below. If you'd have said between 1/2 and 2/3 of the price then I wouldn't have quibbled with you.
fraction
ˈfrakʃ(ə)n
noun
1.
a numerical quantity that is not a whole number (e.g. 1/2, 0.5).
2.
a small or tiny part, amount, or proportion of something.

Exactly the whole number being the original value and the fraction of the whole number being the new value. You're really trying too hard at this.
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
#246 - 2015-08-16 07:30:50 UTC
If CCP made high sec 'go away' we wouldn't have EVE Online anymore. The company would go bust. High sec is 'where it's at' and has been for a long time now. Even the null & low people are in high sec nowadays. You can't force people to do what they don't want to do. Null sec has to become a viable choice for smaller entities. Whether 'FozzieSov' will bring this remains to be seen. On the face of it the new system appears to an annoying concept that isn't much fun to do. It has to be enjoyable otherwise what is the point.

" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. " Rick. " Find out what ? " Abraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. " Rick. Season four.   ' The Walking Dead. ' .

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#247 - 2015-08-16 07:32:22 UTC
Kinete Jenius wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
The point is that you're claiming that gank destroyers have battleship levels of DPS when in truth they have slightly more than cruiser levels of DPS, PvE cruisers at that. You're also failing to take into account that gank destroyers have an extremely limited engagement envelope whereas gank BS's generally have a much larger engagement envelope.
Some cruisers can easily reach battleship level of DPS. Especially in a PVE situation where tank can be minimized to one module. All you've proven is that cruisers can also reach BS level dps albeit at a much higher cost than a catalyst.

Engagement envelope is irrelevant as it is trivially easy to get a warp in directly on top of my targets. *Hint* cloak

Quote:
You should learn to read, I stated level 3, which by definition isn't level 4.
/facepalm. Are you really trying to be this dense? Is it just an act to try to troll me now? Or is this some secret plan to somehow "win" the forums?

My point was that going BC IV is over a month less in training compared to BS IV. That is supporting evidence of my statement that it's easier than before to get into ganking. When I trained my current set of gank alts I would of had to buy 24 more plexes for dual training if I had to go to BS IV like in the old days. Fortunately the pocket battleships allowed me to stick to BC IV and save time and isk in the process while still pumping up some dps related skills.

Quote:
When used in the manner in which you did, the word fraction generally refers to the underlined part below. If you'd have said between 1/2 and 2/3 of the price then I wouldn't have quibbled with you.
fraction
ˈfrakʃ(ə)n
noun
1.
a numerical quantity that is not a whole number (e.g. 1/2, 0.5).
2.
a small or tiny part, amount, or proportion of something.

Exactly the whole number being the original value and the fraction of the whole number being the new value. You're really trying too hard at this.
*shakes head sadly and gives up.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Yossarian Toralen
M and M Enterpises
#248 - 2015-08-16 08:12:06 UTC
After reading the OP the only real solution is that null should go away, apparently you can't get a fight there.

No such problem in low and high.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#249 - 2015-08-16 10:50:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Kinete Jenius wrote:
Some cruisers can easily reach battleship level of DPS. Especially in a PVE situation where tank can be minimized to one module. All you've proven is that cruisers can also reach BS level dps albeit at a much higher cost than a catalyst.
No, he hasn't. That's some nonsense you've made up. Neither destroyers nor cruisers have battleships DPS unless the battleship is absolutely shitfit, especially not PvE fit cruisers since they generally need the DPS-enhancing slots to survive.

The only a handful of ways for you to come to anything remotely like that conclusion: you are not actually looking at the T1 cruisers in question, or you are not familiar with battleships and what they're capable of. The latter notion is further reinforced by…

Quote:
/facepalm. Are you really trying to be this dense? Is it just an act to try to troll me now? Or is this some secret plan to somehow "win" the forums?

My point was that going BC IV is over a month less in training compared to BS IV.
Your point is wrong. Hilariously, laughably wrong. It's a difference of 139k SP between those two skills — not even three days worth of training in total. His point was that at BS III, the only real difference is the BS skill itself. It's not him being dense here; it's you not knowing what the skill tree looks like, and it's you that suddenly changed the parameters just to try (and utterly fail) to disprove what he said.

Quote:
Engagement envelope is irrelevant as it is trivially easy to get a warp in directly on top of my targets. *Hint* cloak
Oh, you mean the module that a gank ship can't really use, especially not to warp in directly on someone, due to its adverse effects on the ship's combat capability? So yeah, engagement envelope is relevant.

You know, the more you try to argue in favour of your “point”, the more you demonstrate that you aren't actually familiar with the any of the things you're talking about. You don't understand the concept of free; you don't understand what destroyers, cruisers, or battleships can do; you don't understand the skill system; you don't understand how cloaks work; and…

Quote:
Exactly the whole number being the original value and the fraction of the whole number being the new value.
So you didn't actually mean to use the phrase “a fraction of” then. You meant to say “a sliver less”, or you'd be wrong about this too and we can add “English idioms” to the list of things you aren't familiar with.
Josef Djugashvilis
#250 - 2015-08-16 11:07:30 UTC
No hi-sec = no Eve Online.

Even those who constantly like so show how tough they are by whinging about hi-sec must know this.

This is not a signature.

Snagletooth Johnson
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#251 - 2015-08-16 11:47:05 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Oh, I know the look. I was thinking more of the heretical notion of applying rust protection (now that I've read up on it) on a Minmatar ship. P
It's not heresy if you think of the paint as a form of hull tanking Twisted


Duct tape is Hull tanking. Rustoleum is Armor Tanking.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#252 - 2015-08-16 12:40:59 UTC
Snagletooth Johnson wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Oh, I know the look. I was thinking more of the heretical notion of applying rust protection (now that I've read up on it) on a Minmatar ship. P
It's not heresy if you think of the paint as a form of hull tanking Twisted


Duct tape is Hull tanking. Rustoleum is Armor Tanking.
I stand corrected. Big smile

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Rayne Jupiter
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#253 - 2015-08-16 17:24:09 UTC
What an idiotic idea.

Veteran players are extremely bias to ideas like this. Being close to or at the meta level it is easy for them to survive in a dog eat dog environment. But what of the new pilots? Do not get me wrong I enjoy PvP across multiple genre's. I would love to get out there now and start blowing up ships. However, EVE is not a game where you can just jump straight into PvP and yield positive results. EVE is a very complex game with a plethora of aspects dictating a ships efficiency in combat. New players need time to interpret the wealth of information EVE has to offer. On top of learning ship mechanics; optimal and fall-off ranges; damage types; resistances; shield, armor, and speed tanking; cloak mechanics; d-scanning; drone mechanics; (my eyes are already crossing); players have to train essential skills to Level 5, which could take anywhere from 6 months to a year. PvP in EVE is calculated and proactive, reaction time and quick thinking play a small part in determining victory or defeat. High sec offers a semi safe environment where rookie pilots can experiment and discover. I am confident a lot of miners would love to get out there and do some killing. After all outsmarting another person on equal ground is such a great feeling! Yet, the risk vs. reward of PvP isn't worth it for newer pilots. Want to get some more action? Help mentor and coach new pilots! Find ways to contribute to a players PvP confidence. Too lazy to do a little hand holding? Shut up and wait for us newer pilots to catch up!
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#254 - 2015-08-16 18:21:05 UTC
Rayne Jupiter wrote:
What an idiotic idea.

Veteran players are extremely bias to ideas like this. Being close to or at the meta level it is easy for them to survive in a dog eat dog environment. But what of the new pilots? Do not get me wrong I enjoy PvP across multiple genre's. I would love to get out there now and start blowing up ships. However, EVE is not a game where you can just jump straight into PvP and yield positive results. EVE is a very complex game with a plethora of aspects dictating a ships efficiency in combat. New players need time to interpret the wealth of information EVE has to offer. On top of learning ship mechanics; optimal and fall-off ranges; damage types; resistances; shield, armor, and speed tanking; cloak mechanics; d-scanning; drone mechanics; (my eyes are already crossing); players have to train essential skills to Level 5, which could take anywhere from 6 months to a year. PvP in EVE is calculated and proactive, reaction time and quick thinking play a small part in determining victory or defeat. High sec offers a semi safe environment where rookie pilots can experiment and discover. I am confident a lot of miners would love to get out there and do some killing. After all outsmarting another person on equal ground is such a great feeling! Yet, the risk vs. reward of PvP isn't worth it for newer pilots. Want to get some more action? Help mentor and coach new pilots! Find ways to contribute to a players PvP confidence. Too lazy to do a little hand holding? Shut up and wait for us newer pilots to catch up!


What an idiotic post.

Had you bothered to read the thread before posting, you would have seen that many of the players who ridicule the idea of removing highsec are those same veteran players you mentioned.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff

Harry Saq
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#255 - 2015-08-16 18:37:42 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Kinete Jenius wrote:
/facepalm. Are you really trying to be this dense? Is it just an act to try to troll me now? Or is this some secret plan to somehow "win" the forums?

My point was that going BC IV is over a month less in training compared to BS IV.
Your point is wrong. Hilariously, laughably wrong. It's a difference of 139k SP between those two skills — not even three days worth of training in total. His point was that at BS III, the only real difference is the BS skill itself. It's not him being dense here; it's you not knowing what the skill tree looks like, and it's you that suddenly changed the parameters just to try (and utterly fail) to disprove what he said.

Not that I care about any of this nonsense, but you have to consider the guns/missiles as well when moving from cruiser/BC to BS (excluding the BCs that fit BS guns). Just sayin....like, I said, don't care at all, but it isn't just the one skill to look at...
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#256 - 2015-08-16 18:41:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Harry Saq wrote:
Not that I care about any of this nonsense, but you have to consider the guns/missiles as well when moving from cruiser/BC to BS (excluding the BCs that fit BS guns). Just sayin....like, I said, don't care at all, but it isn't just the one skill to look at...

We're talking about ABCs, so no, we don't have to consider them.

Rayne Jupiter wrote:
Veteran players are extremely bias to ideas like this.

What is it about the word “bias” that makes people misuse it so often? Cry
Kinete Jenius
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#257 - 2015-08-16 20:01:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Kinete Jenius
Tippia wrote:
No, he hasn't. That's some nonsense you've made up. Neither destroyers nor cruisers have battleships DPS unless the battleship is absolutely shitfit, especially not PvE fit cruisers since they generally need the DPS-enhancing slots to survive.

The only a handful of ways for you to come to anything remotely like that conclusion: you are not actually looking at the T1 cruisers in question, or you are not familiar with battleships and what they're capable of. The latter notion is further reinforced by…
I like how you're utterly confident at telling me I'm wrong without actually ever defining anything. Battleships of old were considered to be doing well to be +750 DPS. Catalysts can reach +760 dps today. I have cruisers that do +1000 dps which is enough to hang with the current level of battleship dps. Since we have been talking about the OLD gank battleship setups from +5 years ago (when the insurance payout existed) those are the only numbers that are relevant. Comparing the gank ships to modern battleships that have gone through rounds of buffs piloted with characters that have skills and modules that didn't exist then with implants that didn't exist then isn't part of the discussion.

In PVE gank is tank. The more dps you have the less tank you can run.


Quote:
Your point is wrong. Hilariously, laughably wrong. It's a difference of 139k SP between those two skills — not even three days worth of training in total. His point was that at BS III, the only real difference is the BS skill itself. It's not him being dense here; it's you not knowing what the skill tree looks like, and it's you that suddenly changed the parameters just to try (and utterly fail) to disprove what he said.
Yeah 3 days of extra training that could be used for more effective dps increasing skills. When you're spending extra isk to train your alt or taking days off from your main to train a gank alt those 3 days matter greatly. Also as I stated earlier getting to BC IV is far faster and easier than BS IV this receiving an extra dps boost not available nearly as easily at the BS level. It's like your ego can't take the fact that I'm right that pocket battleships makes it easier to get into ganking.

To break it down. If you had a job that took you 10 hours to do normally and suddenly one day the job was cut down to 7 hours worth of the same work you would call that work day easier.


Quote:
Oh, you mean the module that a gank ship can't really use, especially not to warp in directly on someone, due to its adverse effects on the ship's combat capability? So yeah, engagement envelope is relevant.
Oh for god's sake there's no reason for you to be pretending to be stupid. You know damned well the organized that gank groups all the way down to the miner ganker in the back woods of eve will use a ship for a warp in point.

Quote:
You know, the more you try to argue in favour of your “point”, the more you demonstrate that you aren't actually familiar with the any of the things you're talking about. You don't understand the concept of free; you don't understand what destroyers, cruisers, or battleships can do; you don't understand the skill system; you don't understand how cloaks work; and…
You're going full on trump here. Just because you say stuff doesn't make it true.

Here's the only screen shot I have of the last big gank I did.

http://i.imgur.com/xqun1ST.jpg

If only I had actual experience with battleships in a fleet either.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZ4LByLY5T4

This leaves you with only your word on your capabilities and experience.

Quote:
So you didn't actually mean to use the phrase “a fraction of” then. You meant to say “a sliver less”, or you'd be wrong about this too and we can add “English idioms” to the list of things you aren't familiar with.
I meant exactly what I said and what I said was correct. Your insistence on turning it into some sort of false statement just shows how desperate you are to attack me.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#258 - 2015-08-16 20:21:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Kinete Jenius wrote:
I like how you're utterly confident at telling me I'm wrong without actually ever defining anything.
That's because nothing needs to be defined.
Neither destroyers nor cruisers can reach battleship-level damage output — that's just an indisputable numerical fact. Also, he battleships of old could do as much damage as the battleships of today. Tthe battleship buffs you're talking about didn't actually affect their damage output so much as their fitting capabilities. In fact, if we want to compare to the really olden days, their current damage output is completely gutshot. There are no new or higher skills that increase your damage output, nor any relevant new modules or implants that are actually being used for this purpose.

Oh, and I would very much like to see that 1k DPS T1 cruiser of yours…

Quote:
Yeah 3 days
So you were wrong. Laughably wrong. An order of magnitude wrong. About this as about everything else you've tried to say anything about. The difference between BC IV and BS IV is utterly minute — calling it “far faster and easier” is nonsensical to the point of being outright lying.

Just accept it, and stop trying to cover up your ignorance — we have long since gone past the point where you're only pretending to be this stupid.

Quote:
Just because you say stuff doesn't make it true.
It's true because you've proven it to be true, without any doubt, in every single one of the categories mentioned.

Quote:
I meant exactly what I said
Then you were wrong. They're not “a fraction” of the cost or time investment. They're slightly less. I could be charitable and assume that you mistyped and mean “fraction less” rather than “fraction of”, which would be a slightly odd use but at least it would be correct.
Kinete Jenius
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#259 - 2015-08-16 20:25:13 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Kinete Jenius wrote:
I like how you're utterly confident at telling me I'm wrong without actually ever defining anything.
That's because nothing needs to be defined.
Neither destroyers nor cruisers can reach battleship-level damage output — that's just an indisputable numerical fact. Also, he battleships of old could do as much damage as the battleships of today. Tthe battleship buffs you're talking about didn't actually affect their damage output so much as their fitting capabilities.

Oh, and I would very much like to see that 1k DPS T1 cruiser of yours…

Quote:
Yeah 3 days
So you were wrong. Laughably wrong. An order of magnitude wrong. About this as about everything else you've tried to say anything about. The difference between BC IV and BS IV is utterly minute — calling it “far faster and easier” is nonsensical to the point of being outright lying.

Just accept it, and stop trying to cover up your stupidity — we have long since gone past the point where you're only pretending.

Quote:
Just because you say stuff doesn't make it true.
It's true because you've proven it to be true, without any doubt, in every single one of the categories mentioned.

Quote:
I meant exactly what I said
Then you were wrong. They're not “a fraction” of the cost or time investment. They're slightly less. I could be charitable and assume that you mistyped and mean “fraction less” rather than “fraction of”, which would be a slightly odd use but at least it would be correct.

So even when I take the number you provide you still call it dead wrong just because I"m the one that said it.

You're hilariously awful and I see no reason to continue this discussion with an individual that has no regard for facts.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#260 - 2015-08-16 20:26:01 UTC
Posts like this is why it should cost a PLEX to start a topic.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~