These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Buff Ganking--Nevermind, Nerfed Again

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#421 - 2012-10-07 00:29:06 UTC
Touval Lysander wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
What I see is Touval Lysander being contrary because he got curbstomped in the "Wasted Space" thread.

He did?

He was?

By whom. You?

roflmfao

You're a Goon. I could tell you the sky is blue and you'd argue. You said so yourself.

Actually it's quite funny Zim.

This thread is about miners who won't hang their ass out the window for 8 hours a day to make a few million and the motivation by gankers (apparently) is to keep prices high so everyone is happy.

You defended needing to hang your ass out the window making billions of passive income every hour of every day with the reasoning being that prices would rise and everyone would be unhappy.

Consistent aren't we.

Do you understand what a strawman fallacy is? Because almost every post you make has one in it. X

Zim is not inconsistent if an argument he makes is different than an argument I make.

Zim is inconsistent if AND ONLY IF he makes an argument, and then makes the reverse argument, like miners are doing now that they've gotten their "I win!" button.

Glad I could clear that up, Touval.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#422 - 2012-10-07 00:37:51 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
Touval Lysander wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
What I see is Touval Lysander being contrary because he got curbstomped in the "Wasted Space" thread.

He did?

He was?

By whom. You?

roflmfao

You're a Goon. I could tell you the sky is blue and you'd argue. You said so yourself.

Actually it's quite funny Zim.

This thread is about miners who won't hang their ass out the window for 8 hours a day to make a few million and the motivation by gankers (apparently) is to keep prices high so everyone is happy.

You defended needing to hang your ass out the window making billions of passive income every hour of every day with the reasoning being that prices would rise and everyone would be unhappy.

Consistent aren't we.

Do you understand what a strawman fallacy is? Because almost every post you make has one in it. X

Zim is not inconsistent if an argument he makes is different than an argument I make.

Zim is inconsistent if AND ONLY IF he makes an argument, and then makes the reverse argument, like miners are doing now that they've gotten their "I win!" button.

Glad I could clear that up, Touval.

huh?

I meant "We" - the forum community. I was pointing out how one argument in one post is GOOD for US while an identical argument states the exact reverse for THEM - even when the motivation/justification is the same.

The US versus THEM argument is only consistent if you swap sides of US/THEM. Does that make sense?

We're all guilty of it. Just an observation in passing. Carry on.

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
Vanyr Andrard
VacuumTube
#423 - 2012-10-07 00:38:07 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
Touval Lysander wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
What I see is Touval Lysander being contrary because he got curbstomped in the "Wasted Space" thread.

He did?

He was?

By whom. You?

roflmfao

You're a Goon. I could tell you the sky is blue and you'd argue. You said so yourself.

Actually it's quite funny Zim.

This thread is about miners who won't hang their ass out the window for 8 hours a day to make a few million and the motivation by gankers (apparently) is to keep prices high so everyone is happy.

You defended needing to hang your ass out the window making billions of passive income every hour of every day with the reasoning being that prices would rise and everyone would be unhappy.

Consistent aren't we.

Do you understand what a strawman fallacy is? Because almost every post you make has one in it. X

Zim is not inconsistent if an argument he makes is different than an argument I make.

Zim is inconsistent if AND ONLY IF he makes an argument, and then makes the reverse argument, like miners are doing now that they've gotten their "I win!" button.

Glad I could clear that up, Touval.


Irony alert! grouping together people into the category "miners" is exactly the fallacy you are accusing touval of by grouping you and zim together into the category "goons'.
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#424 - 2012-10-07 00:39:45 UTC
Vanyr Andrard wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
Touval Lysander wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
What I see is Touval Lysander being contrary because he got curbstomped in the "Wasted Space" thread.

He did?

He was?

By whom. You?

roflmfao

You're a Goon. I could tell you the sky is blue and you'd argue. You said so yourself.

Actually it's quite funny Zim.

This thread is about miners who won't hang their ass out the window for 8 hours a day to make a few million and the motivation by gankers (apparently) is to keep prices high so everyone is happy.

You defended needing to hang your ass out the window making billions of passive income every hour of every day with the reasoning being that prices would rise and everyone would be unhappy.

Consistent aren't we.

Do you understand what a strawman fallacy is? Because almost every post you make has one in it. X

Zim is not inconsistent if an argument he makes is different than an argument I make.

Zim is inconsistent if AND ONLY IF he makes an argument, and then makes the reverse argument, like miners are doing now that they've gotten their "I win!" button.

Glad I could clear that up, Touval.


Irony alert! grouping together people into the category "miners" is exactly the fallacy you are accusing touval of by grouping you and zim together into the category "goons'.

Touval said Zim made an assertion he didn't. I am not incorrect in asserting that miners whined on these forums for the changes we're seeing.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#425 - 2012-10-07 00:43:40 UTC
Weiland Taur wrote:
Ganking has to be hands down the easiest way to make ISK in the game.

WAT

Weiland Taur wrote:
I might be wrong but I think continuing to whine that CCP refuses to make an option to have the target held down and gagged while you lube up is a little on the crazy side.

I might be wrong (actually I'm not, but ladies like modesty) but miners have ALWAYS had the ability to protect themselves, and they had several ways of doing so. What CCP did was to essentially recognize that miners were as a whole too ******* stupid to do any of these things for themselves, so rather than give barges and exhumers a reasonable buff such as CPU and PG that would allow miners to tank if they so happened to put more than one brain cell to the task, they decided to buff EHP directly and make the entire exercise pointless.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#426 - 2012-10-07 00:44:02 UTC
Touval Lysander wrote:
You're a Goon. I could tell you the sky is blue and you'd argue. You said so yourself.

So, because I'm a goon, I'm supposed to take a contrary position to you on the whole sky being blue statement?

Interesting hypothesis.

Touval Lysander wrote:
You defended needing to hang your ass out the window making billions of passive income every hour of every day with the reasoning being that prices would rise and everyone would be unhappy.

This explains so much about why you got curbstomped, your perception of what the posts contained doesn't match up with what the posts actually contained.

Touval Lysander wrote:
Consistent aren't we.

Actually, there's no "we" in this, just "you". You seem to be consistently good at misreading/misinterpreting what a post contains. You might want to get that problem sorted out if you're going to keep on posting without getting egg on your face.

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

RIP Vile Rat
Vanyr Andrard
VacuumTube
#427 - 2012-10-07 00:47:56 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:


Touval said Zim made an assertion he didn't. I am not incorrect in asserting that miners whined on these forums for the changes we're seeing.


Those statements appear to be true, but irrelevant. I imagine this is intentional on your part, so I'll accept it as you conceding the argument.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#428 - 2012-10-07 00:50:09 UTC
Weiland Taur wrote:
I might be wrong but I think continuing to whine that CCP refuses to make an option to have the target held down and gagged while you lube up is a little on the crazy side.

It worked for miners. They had tons of options for making the ships they had ungankable, profit-wise. They chose the yield+cargospace+***** and moan on the forums route. CCP listened, and pretended to make the skiff and hulk usable, and ended up with a mack which is the jack of all trades and allows for even more hands-off mining in more or less total safety than ever before.

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

RIP Vile Rat
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#429 - 2012-10-07 00:58:38 UTC
Vanyr Andrard wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:


Touval said Zim made an assertion he didn't. I am not incorrect in asserting that miners whined on these forums for the changes we're seeing.


Those statements appear to be true, but irrelevant. I imagine this is intentional on your part, so I'll accept it as you conceding the argument.

They only appear irrelevant when divorced from the preceding quotes. I accept your concession.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Weiland Taur
The Icarus Expedition
Solyaris Chtonium
#430 - 2012-10-07 01:02:07 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Weiland Taur wrote:
I might be wrong but I think continuing to whine that CCP refuses to make an option to have the target held down and gagged while you lube up is a little on the crazy side.

It worked for miners. They had tons of options for making the ships they had ungankable, profit-wise. They chose the yield+cargospace+***** and moan on the forums route. CCP listened, and pretended to make the skiff and hulk usable, and ended up with a mack which is the jack of all trades and allows for even more hands-off mining in more or less total safety than ever before.


I think you're right, Zim. However it seems that every group has a ship they can point to and yell "unfair." I remember when the t3's came out and I thought, "damn gankers finally got a ship that takes no effort." When Titans got nerfed everyone pointed at the Goons, unfairly or not. Mining ships needed some work.

I also think it is a profession that is suited to hands off work, where most of your socializing is on TS as opposed to synchronized gate jumping, (about the same as ratting) so I'm not sure I would say that's a bad thing. Do I think CCP did their usual half assed buff, yeah. But that's how CCP does things. They are still absolutely gankable. I suspect but can't prove that a lot of gankers do not like the fact that the extra EHP pushes them to gank socially, in groups instead of as solo wolves which is the form that I remember seeing a lot when I was in hisec.
Vanyr Andrard
VacuumTube
#431 - 2012-10-07 01:04:11 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
Vanyr Andrard wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:


Touval said Zim made an assertion he didn't. I am not incorrect in asserting that miners whined on these forums for the changes we're seeing.


Those statements appear to be true, but irrelevant. I imagine this is intentional on your part, so I'll accept it as you conceding the argument.

They only appear irrelevant when divorced from the preceding quotes. I accept your concession.


Is that your way of asking teacher to explain it to you in baby-steps? Bribery works much better than misdirection, if you're really that desperate.
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#432 - 2012-10-07 01:08:51 UTC
Weiland Taur wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Weiland Taur wrote:
I might be wrong but I think continuing to whine that CCP refuses to make an option to have the target held down and gagged while you lube up is a little on the crazy side.

It worked for miners. They had tons of options for making the ships they had ungankable, profit-wise. They chose the yield+cargospace+***** and moan on the forums route. CCP listened, and pretended to make the skiff and hulk usable, and ended up with a mack which is the jack of all trades and allows for even more hands-off mining in more or less total safety than ever before.


I think you're right, Zim. However it seems that every group has a ship they can point to and yell "unfair." I remember when the t3's came out and I thought, "damn gankers finally got a ship that takes no effort." When Titans got nerfed everyone pointed at the Goons, unfairly or not. Mining ships needed some work.

I also think it is a profession that is suited to hands off work, where most of your socializing is on TS as opposed to synchronized gate jumping, (about the same as ratting) so I'm not sure I would say that's a bad thing. Do I think CCP did their usual half assed buff, yeah. But that's how CCP does things. They are still absolutely gankable. I suspect but can't prove that a lot of gankers do not like the fact that the extra EHP pushes them to gank socially, in groups instead of as solo wolves which is the form that I remember seeing a lot when I was in hisec.

The hands-off thing is where your post starts to derail. CCP is clear on the fact that they don't want players doing PVE while they are AFK, regardless of how boring it is or how it seems like the mechanics should allow for it (hint: the Dominix did).

As for the half-assed part, you got right back on track with that.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#433 - 2012-10-07 01:11:13 UTC
Weiland Taur wrote:
I suspect but can't prove that a lot of gankers do not like the fact that the extra EHP pushes them to gank socially, in groups instead of as solo wolves which is the form that I remember seeing a lot when I was in hisec.

The problem is that they had no problems forcing gankers into doing exactly that with the ships they had pre-buff, but they chose to fit MLU/ILUs and cargohold expanders instead of tanking mods.

Now, they get to have their cake and eat it, too. Actually, the cake's bigger, now vOv

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

RIP Vile Rat
Vanyr Andrard
VacuumTube
#434 - 2012-10-07 01:17:16 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:

The hands-off thing is where your post starts to derail. CCP is clear on the fact that they don't want players doing PVE while they are AFK, regardless of how boring it is or how it seems like the mechanics should allow for it (hint: the Dominix did).

As for the half-assed part, you got right back on track with that.


I like how you put that "how it seems like the mechanics should allow for it". Let's not mince words...whether one is afk or not, one wouldn't touch the computer for an hour while mining ice. It IS, that the mechanic DOES allow for it. You can sit in front of the computer watching the ice tick into your hold, or you can afk, but there's no need to touch the computer either way. If you want to say 'seems', and 'should', then just say "It seems that CCP should fix ice mining". If ice mining were more involving, and no ice fields were found in high-sec, it would do much more to obsolete this thread than merely taking some EHP off the mack.
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#435 - 2012-10-07 01:19:03 UTC
Vanyr Andrard wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:

The hands-off thing is where your post starts to derail. CCP is clear on the fact that they don't want players doing PVE while they are AFK, regardless of how boring it is or how it seems like the mechanics should allow for it (hint: the Dominix did).

As for the half-assed part, you got right back on track with that.


I like how you put that "how it seems like the mechanics should allow for it". Let's not mince words...whether one is afk or not, one wouldn't touch the computer for an hour while mining ice. It IS, that the mechanic DOES allow for it. You can sit in front of the computer watching the ice tick into your hold, or you can afk, but there's no need to touch the computer either way. If you want to say 'seems', and 'should', then just say "It seems that CCP should fix ice mining". If ice mining were more involving, and no ice fields were found in high-sec, it would do much more to obsolete this thread than merely taking some EHP off the mack.

We do not disagree here.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Weiland Taur
The Icarus Expedition
Solyaris Chtonium
#436 - 2012-10-07 01:22:19 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
Weiland Taur wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Weiland Taur wrote:
I might be wrong but I think continuing to whine that CCP refuses to make an option to have the target held down and gagged while you lube up is a little on the crazy side.

It worked for miners. They had tons of options for making the ships they had ungankable, profit-wise. They chose the yield+cargospace+***** and moan on the forums route. CCP listened, and pretended to make the skiff and hulk usable, and ended up with a mack which is the jack of all trades and allows for even more hands-off mining in more or less total safety than ever before.


I think you're right, Zim. However it seems that every group has a ship they can point to and yell "unfair." I remember when the t3's came out and I thought, "damn gankers finally got a ship that takes no effort." When Titans got nerfed everyone pointed at the Goons, unfairly or not. Mining ships needed some work.

I also think it is a profession that is suited to hands off work, where most of your socializing is on TS as opposed to synchronized gate jumping, (about the same as ratting) so I'm not sure I would say that's a bad thing. Do I think CCP did their usual half assed buff, yeah. But that's how CCP does things. They are still absolutely gankable. I suspect but can't prove that a lot of gankers do not like the fact that the extra EHP pushes them to gank socially, in groups instead of as solo wolves which is the form that I remember seeing a lot when I was in hisec.

The hands-off thing is where your post starts to derail. CCP is clear on the fact that they don't want players doing PVE while they are AFK, regardless of how boring it is or how it seems like the mechanics should allow for it (hint: the Dominix did).

As for the half-assed part, you got right back on track with that.


When I say hands off I don't mean AFK. I can't speak for other miners but I would never not be looking, checking in with the screen in hisec due to flippers etc... and in null sec which is arguably safer, you are always looking for neuts and the occasional camper. It may be irrelevant to this discussion but the act of mining dictates a more "hands off," approach as their is less to actually interact with.
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#437 - 2012-10-07 01:26:16 UTC
Weiland Taur wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
Weiland Taur wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Weiland Taur wrote:
I might be wrong but I think continuing to whine that CCP refuses to make an option to have the target held down and gagged while you lube up is a little on the crazy side.

It worked for miners. They had tons of options for making the ships they had ungankable, profit-wise. They chose the yield+cargospace+***** and moan on the forums route. CCP listened, and pretended to make the skiff and hulk usable, and ended up with a mack which is the jack of all trades and allows for even more hands-off mining in more or less total safety than ever before.


I think you're right, Zim. However it seems that every group has a ship they can point to and yell "unfair." I remember when the t3's came out and I thought, "damn gankers finally got a ship that takes no effort." When Titans got nerfed everyone pointed at the Goons, unfairly or not. Mining ships needed some work.

I also think it is a profession that is suited to hands off work, where most of your socializing is on TS as opposed to synchronized gate jumping, (about the same as ratting) so I'm not sure I would say that's a bad thing. Do I think CCP did their usual half assed buff, yeah. But that's how CCP does things. They are still absolutely gankable. I suspect but can't prove that a lot of gankers do not like the fact that the extra EHP pushes them to gank socially, in groups instead of as solo wolves which is the form that I remember seeing a lot when I was in hisec.

The hands-off thing is where your post starts to derail. CCP is clear on the fact that they don't want players doing PVE while they are AFK, regardless of how boring it is or how it seems like the mechanics should allow for it (hint: the Dominix did).

As for the half-assed part, you got right back on track with that.


When I say hands off I don't mean AFK. I can't speak for other miners but I would never not be looking, checking in with the screen in hisec due to flippers etc... and in null sec which is arguably safer, you are always looking for neuts and the occasional camper. It may be irrelevant to this discussion but the act of mining dictates a more "hands off," approach as their is less to actually interact with.

Ironically, with a buff to ganking, there would be.

Not to mention, again, I have always encouraged miners to mine aligned. Attentive, aligned miners survive 99 out of 100 contacts with gankers, as the aligned miner can warp out when the hostile (or neutral) ship lands on grid but before they exit warp. That's a nearly 100% survival ratio, the "1" out of 100 usually being attributed to bad timing or a misclick...

So yeah, I think mining should be more engaging by providing miners with adequate risks.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#438 - 2012-10-07 01:26:25 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Weiland Taur wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Weiland Taur wrote:
I might be wrong but I think continuing to whine that CCP refuses to make an option to have the target held down and gagged while you lube up is a little on the crazy side.

It worked for miners. They had tons of options for making the ships they had ungankable, profit-wise. They chose the yield+cargospace+***** and moan on the forums route. CCP listened, and pretended to make the skiff and hulk usable, and ended up with a mack which is the jack of all trades and allows for even more hands-off mining in more or less total safety than ever before.


I think you're right, Zim. However it seems that every group has a ship they can point to and yell "unfair." I remember when the t3's came out and I thought, "damn gankers finally got a ship that takes no effort." When Titans got nerfed everyone pointed at the Goons, unfairly or not. Mining ships needed some work.

I also think it is a profession that is suited to hands off work, where most of your socializing is on TS as opposed to synchronized gate jumping, (about the same as ratting) so I'm not sure I would say that's a bad thing. Do I think CCP did their usual half assed buff, yeah. But that's how CCP does things. They are still absolutely gankable. I suspect but can't prove that a lot of gankers do not like the fact that the extra EHP pushes them to gank socially, in groups instead of as solo wolves which is the form that I remember seeing a lot when I was in hisec.

The extra ehp makes macks mpossible to gank pofitably. Killing them is just as easy solo.
Weiland Taur
The Icarus Expedition
Solyaris Chtonium
#439 - 2012-10-07 01:35:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Weiland Taur
[/quote]
Ironically, with a buff to ganking, there would be.

Not to mention, again, I have always encouraged miners to mine aligned. Attentive, aligned miners survive 99 out of 100 contacts with gankers, as the aligned miner can warp out when the hostile (or neutral) ship lands on grid but before they exit warp. That's a nearly 100% survival ratio, the "1" out of 100 usually being attributed to bad timing or a misclick...

So yeah, I think mining should be more engaging by providing miners with adequate risks.[/quote]

I have never been good at mining aligned. I think it's a waste of keystrokes. It takes enough of my attention to keep all my accounts and orca paying attention to each other and making sure ore is being moved at a steady pace as I practice TS smack-Fu. I always tank and have had several run in with Test Gankers who always seem to hang around laughing at their own failed ganks. Good stuff. I find it amusing that in a game where ganking is rampant people think that extra m3 is worth the replacement cost of a t2 ship. Of course math is not my strongest point.

Not sure how I completely messed up the quotes...
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#440 - 2012-10-07 01:39:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Darth Gustav
It's the "/" in the very first quote tag. It doesn't belong there.

You're not wrong. Tanking beats not tanking, and at least you tried mining aligned.

I believe you can attest, then, that mining that way is certainly "engaging" enough.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom