Player Features and Ideas Discussion

No need.

Your wan... mutual appreciation club MO is pretty clear. Its like you have a check list of troll and flame techniques you apply to anything outside your echo chamber. Something you ripped off reddit I imagine.

No, its not about me. I see how you treat anyone who has a perspective outside the sound bites of that party line.

With me its all just good fun, friend.

You are attempting to imply that the ratter is invulnerable to something, which is obviously about as far from the truth as can be got without actually turning into Satan.

I mean the choice is lose the use of the space, lose profit potential, or lose ship. The camper is forcing loss of one sort or another. What is being asked for is a way to challenge the person inflicting that loss.

Profit isn't evil, unreasonable, or somehow unwarranted. It's there to drive conflict. Well.... Mission accomplished- you have provoked conflict. Now you are hiding behind a 100% safety blanket, inflicting loss upon your enemy, who would like to have a word with you about it.

...and that's where the cloak breaks. You can leave, and lose the use of the space. You can fly a compromised fit, and lose profit. You can fly suicidal and lose the ship.

What you cannot do is fight to resolve the conflict in one way or the other unless the camper chooses to allow it. The best part is that this is being justified because there is no other way to get PvP...lol. I suppose it's the only way to get unprepared soft targets.

Nonconsent for me, but not for thee.

What Mike is actually doing is looking at a game mechanic that has an unreasonable effect and suggest that it be changed.

It is of course true that under the current regime, he has the choices that Teckos outlines.

But we all know game mechanics are fluid things subject to change through dev intervention, or through compensating ingame techniques.

Mike
We have an engagement every 6 days in a core null sec system (and a PvE pilot loss twice a month). You might be able to compensate by thinking along the lines I indicated (find a nice alliance centre surrounded by a nice buffer zone and do some diplo to move there). Until Fozie and the crew make the changes they would like to make.

It is not compromised, you dishonest lout.

It's a balanced fit that can actually defend itself. But since it's not an unbalanced isk printer, you reject it.

That reveals that you are just out to justify removing uncertainity from your obscene farming, nothing else. Any other motive you claim is a lie, used to try and shield your dishonest attempts to break game balance in your favor.

And so it comes out.

"Waaaaaaa they can kill mah ishtar!"

"How very dare anyone harass me!"

Oh and then there's this doggerel.



So, you hate any and all non consensual PvP.

Too bad.

Not only do people not have to respect their prey, most people never will. Deal with it.



Yeah.

By deleting local, most likely without compensation, or if you're lucky it'll get tied to a starbase module.

Oh, that isn't the category I was talking about.

"the kind that takes the target seriously". Heh, nope, not happening.

No, what I'm saying that this is not a flight sim, and individual pilot skill is basically a non factor in the majority of cases.

It's just something used by fluffed up bads who are desperate for an excuse to put themselves on a pedestal.

Karous
Yah, yokels tend to say that. "I am nothing but an F1 tool the EvE central bank uses to fight mineral price deflation". No, dont ask. You would not understand.

Wander
Yah, I do not doubt it does not sound like an EvE familiar to you. Like I said, the game can be understood at many levels. Carry on understanding it at your own pace.

Was this the irony approach?

I think you nailed it. Congrats.