EVE General Discussion

Just a retoric opinion. What is the "right" eve? was is it before changes were made, after changes have been made or after future changes? and what changes makes it "right?", does no change make it "right"? eve has been changing since the start, a lot of changes have been made since then, should it continue to change?

I think it is right both to suggest changes and to oppose them. I also think it is right to appreciate and not appreciate changes after they have been done.

That isn't what I am talking about and you know it. You have consistently told people that playing solo in highsec is wrong and that their playstyle should be abolished. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it.

High sec incursions need nerfing because I make more doing them that I do with 2 ships in null (well, that was last year, CCP's upping escalation chances have helped). Hell, now that i think of it, it was YOU and you linking that chart that proved the massive imbalance.

The SOE LP store needs work too. http://evemaps.dotlan.net/stats/2015-09 Scroill down to the top carebear systems, of the high sec top 10, 8 are within 2 jumps of a SOE lvl 4 or lvl 3 agent. I made a mint selling just probes last year.

Unlike you, I actually do the PVE I talk about and I'm honest enough to see the imbalances and how they skew things. Wanting things to work well is what normal people do. None of my critique of PVE has to do with null vs high, it's "what is right for EVe PVE".

Again, not hard to understand that you don't see it.

You are a liar.

Link a single post where I said that.

What you jsut said doesn't make any sense. Who said mining solo in an untanked ship was "wrong". If a person pays a sub, they can do with they want, not matter how stupid.

What I've always said is that if you make that choice, don't complain, you made that choice. Sandbox means you can play how you want, sandbox also means EVERYONE can play like they want, and some people choose to gank.

Everyone can complain if they feel there's something to complain about. You seem to think that some people should simply not be allowed to not like something. They can, and CCP can sort out what they feel is in the best interest of the game to change. You are not the gatekeeper for public opinion.

This is a DISCUSSION forum. You just made the utter stupid "free speech" argument. I am not CCP, I am not a government, i can't sensor anoyne, I have no moderator rights. I can (and do) call something stupid if I identify it as such. When i say "don't complain" I mean "it's stupid to complain".

So yea, afk mining in an untanked ship is allowed. You can do it if you choose. Since you pay a sub, you can come to this forum and complain. And i can call that complaint stupid because I have posting rights too. If you don't like it, you should not complain about it.

Over the years I've found it common that people like you complain about other people having the same freedoms you do. You can complain page after page after page about hyperdunking even though that CCP says It's fine, but if I call a spade a space, you don't like that.

Hypocrite.

That is caused by people thinking not smart and wrong are the same thing and phrasing poorly. Some people, like you say, choose to be terrorists for lack of better terms. Mining untanked is all fine and dandy. More isk to ya, but you got to play knowing you are mining in a warzone unprotected. So play smart. Mine safe or protect yourself.

That said, if a person is mining how they want, they got to understand it is a warzone and not get mad at the players killing them. There are counters, but they come at cost.

The only real issue is that there are imbalances of playstyle. Is too easy to recover sec status from a gank. Lack of lasting consequences on that side is a big one and I think the biggest reason there is issue.

Edit: As for hyperdunking, that one is kinda wierd.... I think it is because it defies natural logic. If concord followed a player as they unship and reship, then it would be a null issue. Perhaps concord will get drifter AI and podkill making hyperdunking more risk.

I'd agree in principle, except for two (slightly related) things:

1. No-one really recovers sec status from a gank. After all, why bother? Why spend the ISK when it doesn't give you any real advantage in your continued ganking to do so? So the supposed ease of doing this is hardly even a factor, and since it is tied to tag grinding, one of the key reasons it's easy is because no-one is doing it. The tag supply is plentiful, which wouldn't be the case if it was used a lot.

2. The lack of consequences is a direct result of player choice. Most of the consequences from player conflict are — unsurprisingly — meant to come from the player you're in conflict with. If that player choose to not conflict you back, then that consequence obviously does not materialise. This is why there's no advantage to spend ISK to get your sec status back up: you can stay low-status and not be overly bothered because the other players simply choose not to bother you.

So as with so many other things in EVE, the reason there is an issue comes down to player choice. It may be an issue of toolset, since there's some evidence to support the notion that the system of killrights and legality of targets is still somewhat opaque, but it can't all be because of that. Rather, it's just a natural consequence of the play styles that come into conflict: one that wants the conflict, and one that does not. The balance that is supposed to exist between the two relies on there being a conflict response, but since one side does not want conflict, this response falls flat.


…and now we can open the standard can of worms of whether there should be mechanical compensation for this unwillingness to engage in conflict.

Since mechanics currently support deterrence far more than response the lack of player enforced consequence is inevitable really. No one goes after the hardened, evasive and/or well defended targets, thus those defenders have nothing to shoot at and it appears that player choice favors a lack of defense.

Since gank alts are a thing as well, those gankers only have a limited window for potential retaliation as well when they strike, which as stated, won't be against well defended targets. That leaves aside the fact that outside of defense fleets the most desirable gank targets are offensively rather weak compared to the tools used against them.