These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Instantly Switching Ships? How?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Raging Bull Unchained
Cryonic Origin
Cryonic Origin Alliance
#41 - 2016-07-06 13:07:04 UTC
Revis Owen wrote:
Predictable, the carebears crying for nerfs to station games after one of them decides to play and gets burned. So funny!

The proper response to getting burned is to adapt and figure the way to kill your opponents. Not cry for CCP's help.

CCP can't patch stupid, no matter how they try. In Eve, if it looks like a trap, it's a trap . . . and if it doesn't look like a trap, it's a trap. Carebears, stop crying for CCP to save you from this harshness that we true Eve players love. Eve is not for you so GTFO and go to some bland MMO that is better for your care-free gaming needs.


You would feel quite alone if all "not real EvE players" would leave EvE for some other MMOs.
Malakye Appleton
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#42 - 2016-07-06 15:17:39 UTC
Revis Owen wrote:
Predictable, the carebears crying for nerfs to station games after one of them decides to play and gets burned. So funny!

The proper response to getting burned is to adapt and figure the way to kill your opponents. Not cry for CCP's help.

CCP can't patch stupid, no matter how they try. In Eve, if it looks like a trap, it's a trap . . . and if it doesn't look like a trap, it's a trap. Carebears, stop crying for CCP to save you from this harshness that we true Eve players love. Eve is not for you so GTFO and go to some bland MMO that is better for your care-free gaming needs.


Your whole killboard is suicide ganking miners? Maybe if you did things that actually took skill or required experience you would better understand how frustrating some of these "mechanics" are.

Living the dream, one tear at a time...
Pandora Carrollon
Provi Rapid Response
#43 - 2016-07-06 15:18:00 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Pandora Carrollon wrote:
Blast the Merlin apart with a larger ship... something the Vindicator won't like tangling with.

yeah but then the merlin wont pop into a vindi,
itl pop into the exact thing you do not want it to.

you want to smack someone doing this you gank the bowhead,
think about how glorious a kill that will be if you can manage it (and thats a big if on a station undock)


True, but since it's at a station, you'd have to bump it off the station and you only have 3 minutes to do that now.

If Captials aren't allowed in HiSec, then just use the biggest ship that is to do this. It would be kinda funny if the Bowhead pooped out a Capital Ship and Concord showed up and erased it. Not sure if that's how the mechanic worked, but would be funny if it did.

8 Golden Rules of EVE • EVE is entirely PvP
Pandora Carrollon
Provi Rapid Response
#44 - 2016-07-06 15:22:15 UTC
Revis Owen wrote:
Predictable, the carebears crying for nerfs to station games after one of them decides to play and gets burned. So funny!

The proper response to getting burned is to adapt and figure the way to kill your opponents. Not cry for CCP's help.

CCP can't patch stupid, no matter how they try. In Eve, if it looks like a trap, it's a trap . . . and if it doesn't look like a trap, it's a trap. Carebears, stop crying for CCP to save you from this harshness that we true Eve players love. Eve is not for you so GTFO and go to some bland MMO that is better for your care-free gaming needs.


It's very nice of you to dictate to others how to play in the sandbox. True EVE players play EVE. That's the only definition that matters.

By the way, if you do your playing in HiSec, you're a carebear too so you might want to temper your comments a bit.

8 Golden Rules of EVE • EVE is entirely PvP
Elenahina
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2016-07-06 15:34:01 UTC
Revis Owen wrote:
Predictable, the carebears crying for nerfs to station games after one of them decides to play and gets burned. So funny!

The proper response to getting burned is to adapt and figure the way to kill your opponents. Not cry for CCP's help.

CCP can't patch stupid, no matter how they try. In Eve, if it looks like a trap, it's a trap . . . and if it doesn't look like a trap, it's a trap. Carebears, stop crying for CCP to save you from this harshness that we true Eve players love. Eve is not for you so GTFO and go to some bland MMO that is better for your care-free gaming needs.


Dude station games suck. Everyone knows this. Just because the mechanics allow them doesn't make them some kind of l337 peeveepee. They take about as much thought as fishing in a barrel.

That said...
@ the OP. The first rule of Eve - if you don't understand what's happening, you're probably about to get your face pushed in. It's like people who complain about margin trading - if you don't understand the mechanics at work, and I mean intimately, you're going to get screwed. Learn from it and move on.

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
Lan Wang
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2016-07-06 15:34:22 UTC
Revis Owen wrote:
Predictable, the carebears crying for nerfs to station games after one of them decides to play and gets burned. So funny!

The proper response to getting burned is to adapt and figure the way to kill your opponents. Not cry for CCP's help.

CCP can't patch stupid, no matter how they try. In Eve, if it looks like a trap, it's a trap . . . and if it doesn't look like a trap, it's a trap. Carebears, stop crying for CCP to save you from this harshness that we true Eve players love. Eve is not for you so GTFO and go to some bland MMO that is better for your care-free gaming needs.


its not exactly stupid is it? accept duel with someone and they can instantly change ships isnt common knowledge, it just sounds broken as fck, it really just defeats the whole purpose of a duel system.

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*
Malakye Appleton
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#47 - 2016-07-06 15:40:54 UTC
To be fair, it wasn't a duel. I saw a flashy frigate and engaged it. Then it switched into a Vindicator.

In any case, I'm over it. I've been learning to just accept that EVE has many broken mechanics that are used to gain unfair advantage in just about any situation and I'm learning hard lessons about what to look for in the future.

Living the dream, one tear at a time...
Isaac Armer
The Soup Kitchen
#48 - 2016-07-06 15:58:54 UTC
Pandora Carrollon wrote:
It's very nice of you to dictate to others how to play in the sandbox. True EVE players play EVE. That's the only definition that matters.

By the way, if you do your playing in HiSec, you're a carebear too so you might want to temper your comments a bit.


Come on, taking down those AFK ships is super l33t pvp. Everyone knows that! Just like the best players at console games keep the difficulty setting on 'easy' to blow through the game and prove they are the best. Oh, wait...
Revis Owen
Krigmakt Elite
Safety.
#49 - 2016-07-06 16:11:56 UTC
Quote:
EVE has many [snip] mechanics that are used to gain unfair advantage in just about any situation


Fixed the statement to be properly neutral. Everyone in Eve has access to use the mechanics to their advantage/others disadvantage. Adapt and figure out how to kill that bad guy. The guy switching ships during station games, or his helpers, can be stopped. Same for me, a ganker. I can be stopped in other ways than by buying a Code permit. Figure it out. Stop being lazy and crying to CCP to excuse you from that effort!

Agent of the New Order http://www.minerbumping.com/p/the-code.html If you do not have a current Mining Permit, please contact me for issuance.
Gneeznow
Ship spinners inc
#50 - 2016-07-06 16:14:36 UTC
I thought you couldn't switch ships like that while taking aggression?
Isaac Armer
The Soup Kitchen
#51 - 2016-07-06 16:39:18 UTC
Revis Owen wrote:
Fixed the statement to be properly neutral. Everyone in Eve has access to use the mechanics to their advantage/others disadvantage. Adapt and figure out how to kill that bad guy. The guy switching ships during station games, or his helpers, can be stopped. Same for me, a ganker. I can be stopped in other ways than by buying a Code permit. Figure it out. Stop being lazy and crying to CCP to excuse you from that effort!


Lazy is fairly subjective. I'd argue anything short of looking for fairly evenly matched fights is lazy. Looking for easy kills, quick ISK instead of working for it is lazy. Ganking for KB padding is lazy.

That being said, EVE supports and rewards the lazy. It always has, and always will. That's the central point behind saying "you don't have to be the hero" in this game.
Revis Owen
Krigmakt Elite
Safety.
#52 - 2016-07-06 17:26:41 UTC
Isaac Armer wrote:
Revis Owen wrote:
Fixed the statement to be properly neutral. Everyone in Eve has access to use the mechanics to their advantage/others disadvantage. Adapt and figure out how to kill that bad guy. The guy switching ships during station games, or his helpers, can be stopped. Same for me, a ganker. I can be stopped in other ways than by buying a Code permit. Figure it out. Stop being lazy and crying to CCP to excuse you from that effort!


Lazy is fairly subjective. I'd argue anything short of looking for fairly evenly matched fights is lazy. Looking for easy kills, quick ISK instead of working for it is lazy. Ganking for KB padding is lazy.

That being said, EVE supports and rewards the lazy. It always has, and always will. That's the central point behind saying "you don't have to be the hero" in this game.

You're talking about laziness in a player's effort on their own activity.

I'm talking about laziness in a player figuring out how to counter another player's activity.

The two subjects are completely different. The second one causes lazy players to cry to CCP for nerfs instead of doing what they ought to be doing in figuring out a counter (often there's more than one) and disrupting or killing the "bad man" pestering them.

Agent of the New Order http://www.minerbumping.com/p/the-code.html If you do not have a current Mining Permit, please contact me for issuance.
Isaac Armer
The Soup Kitchen
#53 - 2016-07-06 17:35:46 UTC
Revis Owen wrote:
You're talking about laziness in a player's effort on their own activity.

I'm talking about laziness in a player figuring out how to counter another player's activity.

The two subjects are completely different. The second one causes lazy players to cry to CCP for nerfs instead of doing what they ought to be doing in figuring out a counter (often there's more than one) and disrupting or killing the "bad man" pestering them.


Understood, I was pointing out laziness isn't tied only to 'carebears' (if we could even agree on a definition of what that is). You use carebear I'm assuming in the traditional sense of HS PvEing (correct me if I'm assuming wrong). I'd argue the HS ganker is lazier and more of a carebear than the pure PvE-er making their ISK solo in WHs.

But back to what you just said. Laziness as you just defined it goes far beyond carebears. Laziness is prevalent with gankers who are losing their minds about upcoming bumping changes (and already lost their minds about wardec changes), nullseccers crying to CCP about gatecamping citadels, etc. It's prevalent with nullseccers who cry to nerf cloaking, and with super pilots who cried to nerf watchlists. Laziness as you're describing is present acorss all playstyles and all parts of space.
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#54 - 2016-07-06 18:11:59 UTC
Cara Forelli wrote:
DeODokktor wrote:
Cara Forelli wrote:
DeODokktor wrote:
Are you sure someone else wasn't there for him to swap with?
Or, are you sure he wasn't in a Platoon and the Platoon member is the one who shot back?

Are you sure you know what game you're playing?


Gang member :P


Closer. Want to try again? I have a fleeting suspicion you'll get it right this time. Blink

Even if he ever gets the word right he clearly doesn't understand how the game mechanics work at all...

Hint: If you shoot a suspect and one of the suspect's *fleet members* shoots at you instead of the suspect you just shot, there is an easy way to tell. They'll turn BRIGHT RED and EXPLODE because CONCORD will not stand for that sort of nonsense...

Seriously...where do people get these ideas that fleets affect who can shoot who?

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#55 - 2016-07-06 18:20:07 UTC
Isaac Armer wrote:
Revis Owen wrote:
You're talking about laziness in a player's effort on their own activity.

I'm talking about laziness in a player figuring out how to counter another player's activity.

The two subjects are completely different. The second one causes lazy players to cry to CCP for nerfs instead of doing what they ought to be doing in figuring out a counter (often there's more than one) and disrupting or killing the "bad man" pestering them.


Understood, I was pointing out laziness isn't tied only to 'carebears' (if we could even agree on a definition of what that is). You use carebear I'm assuming in the traditional sense of HS PvEing (correct me if I'm assuming wrong). I'd argue the HS ganker is lazier and more of a carebear than the pure PvE-er making their ISK solo in WHs.

But back to what you just said. Laziness as you just defined it goes far beyond carebears. Laziness is prevalent with gankers who are losing their minds about upcoming bumping changes (and already lost their minds about wardec changes), nullseccers crying to CCP about gatecamping citadels, etc. It's prevalent with nullseccers who cry to nerf cloaking, and with super pilots who cried to nerf watchlists. Laziness as you're describing is present acorss all playstyles and all parts of space.


Ganking is far from lazy. It can take a lot of effort, and a lot of coordination, depending on the target, and what it's worth.

The common error made is that 'carebear' only applies to PVE'ers. It doesn't, it applies to PVP'ers as well. I tend to find it's best defined by risk aversion. I would not classify the OP as a carebear, as he wilfully engaged in PVP at great risk to himself. But laziness doesn't imply risk aversion. Lazy people take stupid risks all the time just for the sake of saving a bit of time.

I also think the OP will learn more as he goes. As long as he stops calling things 'broken mechanics' just because someone else used them against him, which I'm sure he'll come to understand just fine when he realises he can use it against others just as easily.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Isaac Armer
The Soup Kitchen
#56 - 2016-07-06 18:37:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Isaac Armer
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Ganking is far from lazy. It can take a lot of effort, and a lot of coordination, depending on the target, and what it's worth.

The common error made is that 'carebear' only applies to PVE'ers. It doesn't, it applies to PVP'ers as well. I tend to find it's best defined by risk aversion. I would not classify the OP as a carebear, as he wilfully engaged in PVP at great risk to himself. But laziness doesn't imply risk aversion. Lazy people take stupid risks all the time just for the sake of saving a bit of time.

I also think the OP will learn more as he goes. As long as he stops calling things 'broken mechanics' just because someone else used them against him, which I'm sure he'll come to understand just fine when he realises he can use it against others just as easily.


I have to disagree with what you said about ganking. Lazy is defined by risk aversion, in my mind. Gankers are notoriously risk averse. Moreso than nullsec PvE-ers, I'd say. That being said, we more than likely will never agree at the end of the day, though, and I really don't want to argue for ten pages only to end up getting nowhere.

I'm biased, however in that I think 99% of HS is fairly boring and risk-free today, both on the side of the hunted and hunters.
Geronimo McVain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#57 - 2016-07-06 18:53:02 UTC
The OP is around 2 month old so it's very likely that he never switched ships in a Bow. And these type of mechanic are everything but intuitive.

There is no laziness or stupidity: he just didn't know some obscure mechanic that gets exploited by some vets. I would bet that 50% of the New Eden Population didn't know about this trick without being lazy or stupid.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2016-07-06 19:15:57 UTC
Isaac Armer wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Ganking is far from lazy. It can take a lot of effort, and a lot of coordination, depending on the target, and what it's worth.

The common error made is that 'carebear' only applies to PVE'ers. It doesn't, it applies to PVP'ers as well. I tend to find it's best defined by risk aversion. I would not classify the OP as a carebear, as he wilfully engaged in PVP at great risk to himself. But laziness doesn't imply risk aversion. Lazy people take stupid risks all the time just for the sake of saving a bit of time.

I also think the OP will learn more as he goes. As long as he stops calling things 'broken mechanics' just because someone else used them against him, which I'm sure he'll come to understand just fine when he realises he can use it against others just as easily.


I have to disagree with what you said about ganking. Lazy is defined by risk aversion, in my mind. Gankers are notoriously risk averse. Moreso than nullsec PvE-ers, I'd say. That being said, we more than likely will never agree at the end of the day, though, and I really don't want to argue for ten pages only to end up getting nowhere.

I'm biased, however in that I think 99% of HS is fairly boring and risk-free today, both on the side of the hunted and hunters.


Your agreement is not required for it to be a simple fact. If you'd ever tried ganking anything yourself, you would know this fact well. You call gankers risk averse, but they put their ships on the line every time for a guaranteed ship loss, and not always a guaranteed kill. There's no argument to be had here, not until you've demonstrated some ganking experience of your own to show us how easy and risk averse it really can is, if that's what you want to argue.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Isaac Armer
The Soup Kitchen
#59 - 2016-07-06 19:21:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Isaac Armer
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Your agreement is not required for it to be a simple fact. If you'd ever tried ganking anything yourself, you would know this fact well. You call gankers risk averse, but they put their ships on the line every time for a guaranteed ship loss, and not always a guaranteed kill. There's no argument to be had here, not until you've demonstrated some ganking experience of your own to show us how easy and risk averse it really can is, if that's what you want to argue.


Today I learned your opinions = facts. Thanks bud.

Right, gankers put a few million dollar ship on the line for hundred million (to several billion) ISK payout. Very risky. Hell, most gankers don't do it for the ISK anyway. It's bored people on alts with ISK to spare who want easy kills. You're right, there IS no argument to be had. Gankers go into fights KNOWING they will lose their ship. It's a sunk cost before the fight starts. No real loss. If you need to stroke your epeen by doing the easiest and least risky PvP there is to do in the game for the least amount of risk, go ahead, but don't fool yourself into thinking its risky.

I do apologize for striking a nerve about this super l33t playstyle though.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2016-07-06 19:22:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Isaac Armer wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Your agreement is not required for it to be a simple fact. If you'd ever tried ganking anything yourself, you would know this fact well. You call gankers risk averse, but they put their ships on the line every time for a guaranteed ship loss, and not always a guaranteed kill. There's no argument to be had here, not until you've demonstrated some ganking experience of your own to show us how easy and risk averse it really can is, if that's what you want to argue.


Today I learned your opinions = facts. Thanks bud.

Right, gankers put a few million dollar ship on the line for hundred million (to several billion) ISK payout. Very risky. Hell, most gankers don't do it for the ISK anyway. It's bored people on alts with ISK to spare who want easy kills. You're right, there IS no argument to be had. Gankers go into fights KNOWING they will lose their ship. It's a sunk cost before the fight starts. No real loss. If you need to stroke your epeen by doing the easiest and least risky PvP there is to do in the game for the least amount of risk, go ahead, but don't fool yourself into thinking its risky.

I do apologize for striking a nerve about your l33t playstyle though.


I didn't give an opinion, I gave a fact. It's a demonstrable fact. Very easy to test. Prove me wrong. If it's so easy and risk free, it shouldn't be much trouble to show me a few examples, should it?

Edit: It's not my 'l33t playstyle'. I don't gank. I have done in the past, but not anymore. Stop making assumptions. You admitted yourself, you're biased, so get unbiased and look at it from a neutral point of view. Whether you love or hate what they do, or love or hate the people behind it, you cannot deny that gankers don't take any risks. That would be ignorant, very ignorant.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104