These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Decline in numbers... starting to turn into RAPID!!!

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Throth
Doomheim
#901 - 2015-09-01 18:48:41 UTC
Odie McCracken wrote:
Throth wrote:
Be quiet noob. We are talking about hyperdunking. You can't substantiate you claims of being an old player. You reference to suicide ganking is moot because CCP did not endorse it, and has changed it as is evident by the fact that you can't do it anymore. If there is some difference between the two, show you proofs or stfu.


Learn to quote noob. My only point was that suicide ganking has been around in many forms since the beginning nothing more, and nothing less.

That point is that there is always someone looking to take what is yours and as a player you need to be aware of your situation and those looking to take your stuff through violence. This is relevant to cruise missle kessies in Yulai as it is to hyperdunking.

CCP changed the missle mechanics, not the rules about suicide ganking. I'm not sure what proof you are looking for, all I'm saying is that today is no different from then in terms of the fact that suicide ganks happen and that CCP condones them.

Not sure what you're so hostile about.


I started in response to the OP. You responded to me. I don't care what you have to say other than what pertains to you comments on my response to the OP. But keep talking about suicide ganking... cause that's cute. And tell me again how a specific small account in one region is the same as a mechanic used anywhere. Tell me how this mechanic that was changed is the same as a mechanic that CCP endorses now. Wait, don't tell me - because they aren't related.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#902 - 2015-09-01 18:50:24 UTC
Jill Xelitras wrote:
Yes that makes sense.

I find it remarkable that you manage to find the smallest fraction of a subset of subsets to prove your point. I wonder how many players trade in soil and how profitable that is. Do they fly industrial ships or freighters ?

So yes indeed: items that can only be bought AND sold to NPCs and have no other use in game are fitting your definition.

I don't remember if buy and sell orders are in different stations ... I would think so. That forces players to undock at some point, if they want to make a profit. In space, you can again interfere with making tht profit.

Trading in those commodities is however so marginal ... picking that was really the last straw, and it's not going to redeem your prior arguments.
That wasn't to prove my point, I was agreeing that trade is PvP, I just wanted to make sure the door was shut on any idiot that tried to go "but NPC trade goods blah blah blah".

Look, go back and actually read the rest of my posts before you start going on about my arguments. You clearly didn't read them if you missed that first time round, and there are other examples of what constitutes competitive PvE as well as some pretty clear definitions.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Throth
Doomheim
#903 - 2015-09-01 18:53:57 UTC
Estevan Valladares wrote:
The problem is the self worth of a person is sometimes measured by the idea that said persons actions are justified by something.

That is another fallacy, that one is called: Ad Misericordiam.

And that is the one people use to get empathy when they cant get sympathy.

Give them reason because you suffer the same thing or understand the reason of the suffering.


I kept responding to you because I thought you were responding to me, but now I'm not sure who the phk you are talking to. I do know that there can not be any fallacy in the fact that I am not happy with the way the game has changed in my opinion. There is no fallacy in stating the fact that I quitting the game. You must be accusing someone else of logical fallacies then, but we'll never know since you don't quote who you are talking to. Maybe you are accusing yourself.
Salvos Rhoska
#904 - 2015-09-01 18:53:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Lucas Kell wrote:
examples of what constitutes competitive PvE as well as some pretty clear definitions.

Nope.

You were offered the opportunity to provide them, but folded.

So far your best and only one, has been been trading in NPC goods, which was false anyways, as that too is infact PvP, as its the result of players manipulating the market against other players, competitively, even though it involves manipulating an NPC price.

As to a definition of this weird magical and wonderful "competitive PvE", nobody seems willing or able to provide one from an authoritative and substantive source.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Odie McCracken
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#905 - 2015-09-01 18:54:23 UTC
Throth wrote:
Odie McCracken wrote:
Throth wrote:
Be quiet noob. We are talking about hyperdunking. You can't substantiate you claims of being an old player. You reference to suicide ganking is moot because CCP did not endorse it, and has changed it as is evident by the fact that you can't do it anymore. If there is some difference between the two, show you proofs or stfu.


Learn to quote noob. My only point was that suicide ganking has been around in many forms since the beginning nothing more, and nothing less.

That point is that there is always someone looking to take what is yours and as a player you need to be aware of your situation and those looking to take your stuff through violence. This is relevant to cruise missle kessies in Yulai as it is to hyperdunking.

CCP changed the missle mechanics, not the rules about suicide ganking. I'm not sure what proof you are looking for, all I'm saying is that today is no different from then in terms of the fact that suicide ganks happen and that CCP condones them.

Not sure what you're so hostile about.


I started in response to the OP. You responded to me. I don't care what you have to say other than what pertains to you comments on my response to the OP. But keep talking about suicide ganking... cause that's cute. And tell me again how a specific small account in one region is the same as a mechanic used anywhere. Tell me how this mechanic that was changed is the same as a mechanic that CCP endorses now. Wait, don't tell me - because they aren't related.


I guess I'm just not making myself clear.

A guy in 2004 suicide ganking haulers with a kestrel is not different from someone today using hyperdunking to suicide gank. They are both suicide ganking no matter where they are, I used Yulai as an example because that's just where I remember it happening a lot. Doesn't mean that's the only place it happened, not sure why you are fixated on that.

Again, my only point is that people getting their haulers (now freighters too) exploded in High Sec has not changed, though the methods may have. Really it's a pretty simple point I'm trying to make. That's nice you find it 'cute' hope that helps out your day!
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#906 - 2015-09-01 18:57:02 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
[what constitutes competitive PvE as well as some pretty clear definitions.
Nope.

You were offered the opportunity to provide them, but folded.
Incorrect. Now hush.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#907 - 2015-09-01 18:58:59 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
The old rule was quite clear:
Quote:
If you gain a Global Criminal Countdown by committing an illegal action in high security space, it is considered an exploit to attack a target after you warp away from the grid, or warp within the same grid, where you gained that GCC; even if you later return to that grid while still affected by that GCC.
So the act of attacking the same target while under the same GCC was an exploit. The wording is very clear. That was overruled by the new ruling on hyperdunking.
No, it was overruled by Crimewatch 2.0, which redefined what criminal flagging entailed, and hyperdunking is just taking the CW2.0 mechanics and using them to your advantage to get the job done without breaking any rules.

Quote:
And of course they are reshipping. They aren't slinging guns on their pod you know. What a ludicrous statement.
They're not reshipping in the sense of what the reshipping restriction intended to prohibit. The restriction was against a tactic that avoided ship loss; hyperdunking relies on the ship being lost. Again, it is taking the mechanics and using them to your advantage precisely because doing so does not break the rules.

Quote:
But deciding the changes are not for you, raising your concerns about them then leaving if nothing is changed is a perfectly reasonable way of adapting.
That's more extinction than adaptation. Anyway, the point was that you were implying that Jenn said something that was pretty much the exact opposite of what he actually said.
Salvos Rhoska
#908 - 2015-09-01 18:59:37 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
[what constitutes competitive PvE as well as some pretty clear definitions.
Nope.

You were offered the opportunity to provide them, but folded.
Incorrect. Now hush.


No, quite correct, I'm afraid.

So far your only example of "competitive pve" was trading in NPC commodities, which has also been shown to actually be PvP, though it happens by manipulating NPCs.

As to a definition of "competitive pve" neither you nor Whitehound has provided one from any authoritative and substantive source.

So hush all you like, this is how the facts stand at the moment.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Estevan Valladares
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#909 - 2015-09-01 19:00:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Estevan Valladares
There is no burden of proof. You cant prove your toon is from the time you say it is. Wont say that again, you may think you are right, but the fact that you think your toon birth date means something, tells all I need to know on how you are not knowledgeable as you say.

Second, the argument is not about ages, is about your bull of eve having changed. It didnt, and you are not talking about it, using fallacy to deviate your main argument, by the way, also a famous one and has also a name in latin: Non sequitur.

Then you promote a ton of points of order that in nothing adds or changes the discussion, like deviating from the reason to the examples of the consequence without causal link.

Then, from some posts now, you are just cicling the same 3 things: You are old in EVE, your experience makes you know everything, and you are leaving not because you are weak and cant handle the heat, but because the people in eve are bad and treat you unfairly, and ccp doesnt take your hand and punish your nemesis.

That two has also latin names:
Ad antiquitatem
Ad nauseum
And, lets not forget, Post Hoc.

Because since EVE has never changed, the consequences implyed to be caused by that changes arent really logically related.

WorldTradersGuild.Com [WTG] - We are here for the long haul
Throth
Doomheim
#910 - 2015-09-01 19:01:57 UTC
Odie McCracken wrote:
Throth wrote:
Odie McCracken wrote:
Throth wrote:
Be quiet noob. We are talking about hyperdunking. You can't substantiate you claims of being an old player. You reference to suicide ganking is moot because CCP did not endorse it, and has changed it as is evident by the fact that you can't do it anymore. If there is some difference between the two, show you proofs or stfu.


Learn to quote noob. My only point was that suicide ganking has been around in many forms since the beginning nothing more, and nothing less.

That point is that there is always someone looking to take what is yours and as a player you need to be aware of your situation and those looking to take your stuff through violence. This is relevant to cruise missle kessies in Yulai as it is to hyperdunking.

CCP changed the missle mechanics, not the rules about suicide ganking. I'm not sure what proof you are looking for, all I'm saying is that today is no different from then in terms of the fact that suicide ganks happen and that CCP condones them.

Not sure what you're so hostile about.


I started in response to the OP. You responded to me. I don't care what you have to say other than what pertains to you comments on my response to the OP. But keep talking about suicide ganking... cause that's cute. And tell me again how a specific small account in one region is the same as a mechanic used anywhere. Tell me how this mechanic that was changed is the same as a mechanic that CCP endorses now. Wait, don't tell me - because they aren't related.


I guess I'm just not making myself clear.

A guy in 2004 suicide ganking haulers with a kestrel is not different from someone today using hyperdunking to suicide gank. They are both suicide ganking no matter where they are, I used Yulai as an example because that's just where I remember it happening a lot. Doesn't mean that's the only place it happened, not sure why you are fixated on that.

Again, my only point is that people getting their haulers (now freighters too) exploded in High Sec has not changed, though the methods may have. Really it's a pretty simple point I'm trying to make. That's nice you find it 'cute' hope that helps out your day!


Awh that is cute. To be clear, I've never witnessed nor heard of suicide ganking until years after I was playing Eve. Even then, the loss to the ganked and ganker were minimal regarding isk. Mechanics changed. Now, we have where a cheap ship can pop a 1-2 billion isk ship with ease, low cost and low risk. How is this the same? The equivalent of what you are saying in real life is that if a person is going 100 over the speed limit we shouldn't be surprised, because some people were going 5 over for a while. The fact that I have to explain the differences is sad.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#911 - 2015-09-01 19:04:30 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:

Jenn aSide wrote:
Not unlike real life, you can either walk around unaware of your surroundings, get victimized by some criminal who is clearly breaking the law, and then HOPE that criminal gets caught and you get 'reimbursed' (after dealing with myriad lawyers, cops, prosecutors and judges) in some way after waiting months/years....

....OR you can not let yourself be a victim in the 1st place and not have to worry about dealing with any of it.
When I next meet a **** victim I'll let them know they shouldn't have let that happen and tell them it's their own fault. I'm sure that will go down well.
Roll


See, there it is, that underlying BS ideology that prevents understanding (IRL as well as in game). I deal with people who think like this every single day.

Evil people exist. Evil people will hurt you. Evil people choosing to do Evil to you isn't your "FAULT", it's a "REALITY" you have to deal with. "Fault" is irrelevant, reality is not.

You can deal with reality proactively (be aware of your surroundings, plan what you do, perhaps keep a means of self defense handy, stay out of places known to be bad, lock up your valuables etc etc) or reactively ("I've just been victim of an evil person, someone help me, call 911 so I can get some WAY after the fact justice"!!!!). If you choose to be reactive and/or oblivious, well, what did you expect, the world if filled with humans, humans are a known carcinogen.

Irresponsible people always default to 'whose fault it is', and they are always the ones who get victimized. Responsible people rarely get victimized. No you are not at fault for the actions of a bad person, they are at fault. What you didn't do is protect yourself, which helped the bad person do something to you.
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#912 - 2015-09-01 19:06:29 UTC
This thread has reached the critical mass of troll and will soon develop a ISD event horizon. Roll

IB4TL: fear not the people who claims that EVE is Dying; fear the day nobody cares.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
Throth
Doomheim
#913 - 2015-09-01 19:07:04 UTC
Estevan Valladares wrote:
There is no burden of proof. You cant prove your toon is from the time you say it is. Wont say that again, you may think you are right, but the fact that you think your toon birth date means something, tells all I need to know on how you are not knowledgeable as you say.

Second, the argument is not about ages, is about your bull of eve having changed. It didnt, and you are not talking about it, using fallacy to deviate your main argument, by the way, also a famous one and has also a name in latin: Non sequitur.

Then you promote a ton of points of order that in nothing adds or changes the discussion, like deviating from the reason to the examples of the consequence without causal link.

Then, from some posts now, you are just cicling the same 3 things: You are old in EVE, your experience makes you know everything, and you are leaving not because you are weak and cant handle the heat, but because the people in eve is bad and treat you unfairly.

That two has also latin names:
Ad antiquitatem
Ad nauseum
And, lets not forget, Post Hoc.

Because since EVE has never changed, the consequences implyed to be caused by that changes arent really logically related.


Tell me again how this isn't my toon. How do you know that? I'm telling you that Eve did not have hyperdunking before; prove that it did or stfu. Last, you make claims with no reference. Nice. Not nice enough for me to care, but nice enough for a pat on the head; good boy.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#914 - 2015-09-01 19:07:45 UTC
Throth wrote:
To be clear, I've never witnessed nor heard of suicide ganking until years after I was playing Eve.
So you admit, then, that your experience is not a reliable source of information about how EVE worked in the past.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#915 - 2015-09-01 19:09:20 UTC
Tippia wrote:
No, it was overruled by Crimewatch 2.0, which redefined what criminal flagging entailed, and hyperdunking is just taking the CW2.0 mechanics and using them to your advantage to get the job done without breaking any rules.
Lol, no it wasn't. They thought they closed the methods of doing it but that doesn't mean the rule just went away. Just like how they ruled that bumping a titan through POS shields is an exploit, then closed the method of doing that. If we now found another way to torpedo them out, that would still be an exploit.

The manipulation of item base prices was an example of this too. After that we declared an exploit and fixed, they did tiercide and broke some item prices which people exploited again and they got their isk stripped.

Tippia wrote:
They're not reshipping in the sense of what the reshipping restriction intended to prohibit. The restriction was against a tactic that avoided ship loss; hyperdunking relies on the ship being lost. Again, it is taking the mechanics and using them to your advantage precisely because doing so does not break the rules.
Are they or are they not getting into a new ship?

The restriction was clear. You may not attack the target after warping off the grid or within the same grid.

Tippia wrote:
That's more extinction than adaptation. Anyway, the point was that you were implying that Jenn said something that was pretty much the exact opposite of what he actually said.
It's adapting by playing something else. Something that about what, a quarter of the playerbase appears to be deciding to do. All I was implying is that getting nasty at the guy is hardly a decent reaction. He doesn't like something about the game, he told them this and decided to stop playing. Good on him, all the best in whatever he decides to play next.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Jill Xelitras
Xeltec services
#916 - 2015-09-01 19:09:49 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Jill Xelitras wrote:
Yes that makes sense.

I find it remarkable that you manage to find the smallest fraction of a subset of subsets to prove your point. I wonder how many players trade in soil and how profitable that is. Do they fly industrial ships or freighters ?

So yes indeed: items that can only be bought AND sold to NPCs and have no other use in game are fitting your definition.

I don't remember if buy and sell orders are in different stations ... I would think so. That forces players to undock at some point, if they want to make a profit. In space, you can again interfere with making tht profit.

Trading in those commodities is however so marginal ... picking that was really the last straw, and it's not going to redeem your prior arguments.
That wasn't to prove my point, I was agreeing that trade is PvP, I just wanted to make sure the door was shut on any idiot that tried to go "but NPC trade goods blah blah blah".

Look, go back and actually read the rest of my posts before you start going on about my arguments. You clearly didn't read them if you missed that first time round, and there are other examples of what constitutes competitive PvE as well as some pretty clear definitions.


Ok, indeed page 37 / 38 you say trade is PvP and Whitehound disagrees with that. So possibly that's where I mixed you up. Didn't reread the whole rest ...

It's hard to stay focussed Straight

This Threadnought is going places ...

Don't anger the forum gods.

ISD Buldath:

> I Saw, I came, I Frowned, I locked, I posted, and I left.
Odie McCracken
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#917 - 2015-09-01 19:10:12 UTC
Throth wrote:
, I've never witnessed nor heard of suicide ganking until years after I was playing Eve.



Ok you are clearly a troll. No way you played Eve for years without hearing about suicide ganking.

I am flattered you find my posts cute, however I don't date trolls sorry.
Jill Xelitras
Xeltec services
#918 - 2015-09-01 19:13:21 UTC
OMG. want so bad ... naoCool

Don't anger the forum gods.

ISD Buldath:

> I Saw, I came, I Frowned, I locked, I posted, and I left.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#919 - 2015-09-01 19:13:35 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
See, there it is, that underlying BS ideology that prevents understanding (IRL as well as in game). I deal with people who think like this every single day.

Evil people exist. Evil people will hurt you. Evil people choosing to do Evil to you isn't your "FAULT", it's a "REALITY" you have to deal with. "Fault" is irrelevant, reality is not.

You can deal with reality proactively (be aware of your surroundings, plan what you do, perhaps keep a means of self defense handy, stay out of places known to be bad, lock up your valuables etc etc) or reactively ("I've just been victim of an evil person, someone help me, call 911 so I can get some WAY after the fact justice"!!!!). If you choose to be reactive and/or oblivious, well, what did you expect, the world if filled with humans, humans are a known carcinogen.

Irresponsible people always default to 'whose fault it is', and they are always the ones who get victimized. Responsible people rarely get victimized. No you are not at fault for the actions of a bad person, they are at fault. What you didn't do is protect yourself, which helped the bad person do something to you.
But what you're saying is that people should just choose to not be the victim of a crime. Like someone shooting you in the chest or raping you in an alley is something you have the option of avoiding. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that in EVE you can't avoid being hyperdunked, but to suggest that in real life you can simply opt to never be the victim of a crime is a whole new level of stupidity.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Whitehound
#920 - 2015-09-01 19:18:24 UTC
Jill Xelitras wrote:
You are persisting on "having to lose a ship in combat" to define PvP as PvP.

There are various levels of risk in ship combat. I'd say WH and 0.0 are riskier to fight in than Highsec. But that is just my opinion.

What is true, is that a station trader has zero risk of losing a ship in space. This does not however mean that the market is an environment per se. It means that the station trader has cut out all the risks that industrialists, haulers and people who just sell off some loot and buy new mods have.

You said it yourself: "Traders are merely competing with other traders" making it player vs player.

The additional "spot in the market environment" is unnecessary, because you want to emphasize "environment" to sneak your PvE in. When I position my ship in space thats an environment and it doesn't make my actions by default PvE. So as a trader I set my stakes and observe what other traders do. I'm not independent of what other players do.

More important the actions of the trader have consequences on other players aswell, including ship combat enthousiasts. During the alliance tournament, it was commentated that some alliances would try to guess what opponents would want to field. They would then try to buy up all available items of that type either drying up the market or listing them again at a marked up price.

It is as I described it. It is a fight for position in a market environment. Players are represented by brokers and stay anonymous, shielded by the market environment, not just by the station they are sitting in. Or do you disagree with this description?

All you are describing is correct, only is this commonly called competitive PvE. You do certainly compete against other players in competitive PvE. Hence the name. In competitive PvE do you perform tasks, but these cannot be targeted at another player. You only may look at other players, judge their progress and attempt to be better, but you are not fighting them directly. You are only fighting yourself, your limits, the time, the environment, but nothing you do can be used to cause the other players a loss. In competitive PvE is there no loss. Players only compete to make a gain. So is market trading.

Loss is important in PvP. All power in PvP has an equivalent in the amount of loss you can suffer. A rookie ship is replaced easiest, but also does not pose much of a threat. A Titan is very expensive and takes time to build. Losing a Titan is a unique experience, but the power that comes with it is equally unique. The power defines your ability to fight and to inflict losses and the fear of a loss is what drives you to defend it. If it had no loss would EVE be a PvE game.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.