These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Grow some extremely durable genitalia.

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#161 - 2012-05-27 01:55:20 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
I'm not sure how removing local completely in all secs relates to an anom nerf.

Simple. People are more risk averse than they are grind-averse, if nullsec got heavily depopulated because of an increase in grinding, just imagine what'd happen when you increase risk and grind at the same time.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#162 - 2012-05-27 01:57:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Lord Zim wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
I'm not sure how removing local completely in all secs relates to an anom nerf.

Simple. People are more risk averse than they are grind-averse, if nullsec got heavily depopulated because of an increase in grinding, just imagine what'd happen when you increase risk and grind at the same time.


HTFU. That blanket statement could be used to justify anything. We could remove all pvp in EVE under that one. If nullsec collapsed entirely tomorrow EVE would be just fine. And pioneers from hisexy would head on out there to fill the vacuum.

Nullsec is the lawless boondocks of New Eden. Its a great addition to the game but its not its lifegiving breath.

Remove hisec and the same can't be said. Unless of course you're delusional enough to believe the "pubbies" in their humble hundred(s) man alliance without outside infrastructure are going to pay 15 a month to be permacamped in station (if there is one) by 8000 man alliances.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#163 - 2012-05-27 02:04:14 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
HTFU. That blanket statement could be used to justify anything. We could remove all pvp in EVE under that one.

I'm just telling you exactly what the effects would be from removing local. If people wanted to be somewhere without local, they'd be in wormholes already, where the rewards are actually in line with the added risk/effort required to stay safe.

Caliph Muhammed wrote:
If nullsec collapsed entirely tomorrow EVE would be just fine. And pioneers from hisexy would head on out there to fill the vacuum.

I didn't say "nullsec would collapse", we'd still be out there and shooting anyone trying to take over our space, there just would be less people who rat or mine there, and as such less people to actually gank while roaming. vOv

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Ris Dnalor
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#164 - 2012-05-27 02:04:45 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Luv2chat in local


Good point, so take the OP instead as "showing up in local completely voluntary for all secs".


make it so you only show up after you've typed spmething in the channel

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=118961

EvE = Everybody Vs. Everybody

  • Qolde
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#165 - 2012-05-27 02:06:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Lord Zim wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
HTFU. That blanket statement could be used to justify anything. We could remove all pvp in EVE under that one.

I'm just telling you exactly what the effects would be from removing local. If people wanted to be somewhere without local, they'd be in wormholes already, where the rewards are actually in line with the added risk/effort required to stay safe.


No, you're telling me your agenda biased opinion on what would happen, and to be honest you haven't the understanding of the game or human nature to make the assertion.

Wormholes require logistics and a level of commitment most find unappealing.

Lord Zim wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
If nullsec collapsed entirely tomorrow EVE would be just fine. And pioneers from hisexy would head on out there to fill the vacuum.

I didn't say "nullsec would collapse", we'd still be out there and shooting anyone trying to take over our space, there just would be less people who rat or mine there, and as such less people to actually gank while roaming. vOv


Did you just admit to ganking? You dirty little hypocrite. =p
specializt
State War Academy
Caldari State
#166 - 2012-05-27 02:08:15 UTC  |  Edited by: specializt
Lord Zim wrote:
if nullsec got heavily depopulated because of an increase in grinding, just imagine what'd happen when you increase risk and grind at the same time.


I guess highsec would be overpopulated, sites were extremely boring (if available) and missions were the new, best thing - grinding in nullsec would be like trying to fly a 10/10 without Z0MGT3 ... massive balance-shifts would come, ultimately creating a carebear-Eve with even less action, less PvP and a world-of-shitecraft feeling everywhere.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#167 - 2012-05-27 02:18:10 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
No, you're telling me your agenda biased opinion on what would happen, and to be honest you haven't the understanding of the game or human nature to make the assertion.

Whereas you do?

Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Wormholes require logistics and a level of commitment most find unappealing.

You say commitment: what do you mean by that?

Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Did you just admit to ganking? You dirty little hypocrite. =p

If by "ganking" you mean "fly in alliance/coalition fleets in defense of our space", then yes. If by "ganking" you mean "roam around for ratters to kill", then no.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Frying Doom
#168 - 2012-05-27 02:19:35 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
I'm not sure how removing local completely in all secs relates to an anom nerf.

Simple. People are more risk averse than they are grind-averse, if nullsec got heavily depopulated because of an increase in grinding, just imagine what'd happen when you increase risk and grind at the same time.

So in another words you couldn't hack it if Null actually became hard like it was meant to be.

Might I suggest Hello Kitty Online for all you hard nullsec types (that just seem to want low risk isk) it might give you the safe feeling your looking for.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#169 - 2012-05-27 02:32:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Lord Zim wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
No, you're telling me your agenda biased opinion on what would happen, and to be honest you haven't the understanding of the game or human nature to make the assertion.

Whereas you do?

Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Wormholes require logistics and a level of commitment most find unappealing.

You say commitment: what do you mean by that?

Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Did you just admit to ganking? You dirty little hypocrite. =p

If by "ganking" you mean "fly in alliance/coalition fleets in defense of our space", then yes. If by "ganking" you mean "roam around for ratters to kill", then no.


Yes I will assert I have an understanding of human nature. I pay very close attention to words people write and the way their text statements sound when spoken. I was being a little facetious though. The game itself isn't hard to learn for anyone willing to "learn".

Because somehow when your awe inspiring mega fleet encounters a fleet 1/10th its size its more challenging than 5 on 10,15, or 20? I can provide you a broom if you require more straws to grasp.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#170 - 2012-05-27 02:35:16 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
So in another words you couldn't hack it if Null actually became hard like it was meant to be.

Don't you worry, I'd "hack it" just as well in nullsec as I do today even if local was removed.

Frying Doom wrote:
Might I suggest Hello Kitty Online for all you hard nullsec types (that just seem to want low risk isk) it might give you the safe feeling your looking for.

Fresh coming from the guy who skipped corp because of a tiny wardec.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#171 - 2012-05-27 02:35:56 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
So in another words you couldn't hack it if Null actually became hard like it was meant to be.

Might I suggest Hello Kitty Online for all you hard nullsec types (that just seem to want low risk isk) it might give you the safe feeling your looking for.


Coming from a guy who dodges wardecs that IS pretty funny.

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#172 - 2012-05-27 02:38:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
So in another words you couldn't hack it if Null actually became hard like it was meant to be.

Don't you worry, I'd "hack it" just as well in nullsec as I do today even if local was removed.


Then its settled. If a risk averse nullbear such as yourself can make it, local is absolutely an unnecessary game retarding protection.
bongsmoke
Visine Red
420 Chronicles of EvE
#173 - 2012-05-27 02:39:14 UTC
Why cant threads like this just die? Or just moved to an area of space where no one can see it? Oh wait....
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#174 - 2012-05-27 02:40:34 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Then its settled. If a risk averse nullbear such as yourself can make it, local is absolutely an unnecesary game retarding protection.


How does local protect you?

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#175 - 2012-05-27 02:41:16 UTC
bongsmoke wrote:
Why cant threads like this just die? Or just moved to an area of space where no one can see it? Oh wait....


Is there a particular reason you don't wish people to see honest discourse?
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#176 - 2012-05-27 02:42:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Richard Desturned wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Then its settled. If a risk averse nullbear such as yourself can make it, local is absolutely an unnecesary game retarding protection.


How does local protect you?


Because all nonconsentual pvp can be avoided by docking up at the sight of another player in system. People could still dock up obviously but they wouldn't have a neon sign and a ringside bell telling them when to do so.
Pok Nibin
Doomheim
#177 - 2012-05-27 02:43:47 UTC
Though much was spoken, nothing was said.

The right to free speech doesn't automatically carry with it the right to be taken seriously.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#178 - 2012-05-27 02:44:31 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Yes I will assert I have an understanding of human nature.

If you do, then you're pretty good at hiding it.

Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Because somehow when your awe inspiring mega fleet encounters a fleet 1/10th its size its more challenging than 5 on 10,15, or 20? I can provide you a broom if you require more straws to grasp.

I'd love to see where you get the "1/10th its size", since most of the fleets we engaged were between 200 and up towards 900.

Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Then its settled. If a risk averse nullbear such as yourself can make it, local is absolutely an unnecessary game retarding protection.

I don't live in null, I join fleets in null.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#179 - 2012-05-27 02:45:02 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Because all nonconsentual pvp can be avoided by docking up at the sight of another player in system. People could still dock up obviously but they wouldn't have a neon sign and a ringside bell telling them when to do so.


So local automatically warps you to the station and docks you up?

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
specializt
State War Academy
Caldari State
#180 - 2012-05-27 02:46:41 UTC
Quote:
risk averse nullbear

Nice contradiction.