These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Malcanis for CSM 8 Vote till you drop

First post
Author
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#721 - 2013-03-29 22:01:08 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:

Because to make any inroads at all against your "instalock" problem, you would have to make every lock excruciatingly long, which'll have its impact on everything, even "small gang vs small gang".

And again, gatecamps isn't a problem. I've yet to die to a single gatecamp, and I flew to/from the hisec island in solitude multiple times a day for a long, long time. I just flew a ship designed to get around the "problem" of gatecamps. Only bads whine about gatecamps.

You must be roleplaying a braindead capsuleer, that could explain why you keep answering wrong.
*sigh* I'll keep it simple for you AGAIN :
- I never said not dieing to gatecamps is hard when you commit to fly a ship to do so
- I said it's a bad design : low risk, high reward pvp which is ruining low sec.
If you don't understand that I give up on you, It' won't have impact on everything most fw fights are in plexes/hubs where they should be (feel free to camp acceleration gates).

Lord Zim wrote:

Actually, yes, I do. It'll be more than you think.

Then stop saying stupid stuff friendo.

Lord Zim wrote:

No, what it doesn't change is the fact that you're complaining about not being able to get away from a gate which is camped, when everyone that's even remotely sensible would take precautions in the form of either using a ship designed to break through those gatecamps (and, incidentally, there's a lot of ships designed for that express purpose) or using a scout.

Again, it's low risk high reward pvp, therefore it's bad design and should be removed, especially regarding the actual state of low sec.

Lord Zim wrote:

I'm going to just continue to point out the fact that there are alternatives which work just fine in lowsec, today, to bust up larger gatecamps, and it doesn't involve bombs or "moar numbers". Use them, instead of bitching about gatecamps (and showing us you don't want to adapt).

It's not only about gatecamps, bomb have their use in lowsec.
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#722 - 2013-03-29 22:07:47 UTC
Karl Hobb wrote:

I have no proof of you using more than one of those character slots.

This is not nazy germany where you need an api to post on forum, silly new guy.

Karl Hobb wrote:

I don't see how any of your propositions to deal with gate camping result in less reward for anyone.

That's because you are not very smart friendo, I'm sorry but I can't help.

Lord Zim wrote:
"People who suck at eve and jump blind into a gatecamp in a ship which isn't designed for busting through gatecamps should be able to get away scot free. Even freighters."

"people should only fly in shuttles because we are camping"
No wonder why solo pvp is dead with bears like you. Stay at gate, instalock randoms, pew pew elite pvp 2013.
I guess I vote for Malcanis is a vote for bad design, I'm off it was easy like camping a gate.
Bear
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#723 - 2013-03-29 22:12:31 UTC
Afk Moon Goo wrote:
You must be roleplaying a braindead capsuleer, that could explain why you keep answering wrong.
*sigh* I'll keep it simple for you AGAIN :
- I never said not dieing to gatecamps is hard when you commit to fly a ship to do so
- I said it's a bad design : low risk, high reward pvp which is ruining low sec.
If you don't understand that I give up on you, It' won't have impact on everything most fw fights are in plexes/hubs where they should be (feel free to camp acceleration gates).

Gatecamps isn't "ruining lowsec", no matter how much you want to howl about it ruining lowsec.

Afk Moon Goo wrote:
Again, it's low risk high reward pvp, therefore it's bad design and should be removed, especially regarding the actual state of low sec.

The "actual state of low sec" has nothing to do with gatecamps.

Afk Moon Goo wrote:
"people should only fly in shuttles because we are camping"

I didn't fly a shuttle, I flew something which was designed to bust through gatecamps. You should try it.

Afk Moon Goo wrote:
No wonder why solo pvp is dead with bears like you. Stay at gate, instalock randoms, pew pew elite pvp 2013.

Ah, I knew there was a trollword missing from your posts, and there it is: "bears".

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

RIP Vile Rat

Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#724 - 2013-03-29 22:14:56 UTC
Afk Moon Goo wrote:
Karl Hobb wrote:
I have no proof of you using more than one of those character slots.
This is not nazy germany where you need an api to post on forum, silly new guy.

In other words you won't prove you know what you're talking about. Cool.

Afk Moon Goo wrote:
No wonder why solo pvp is dead
Lol

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.

Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#725 - 2013-03-29 22:28:12 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Afk Moon Goo wrote:
You must be roleplaying a braindead capsuleer, that could explain why you keep answering wrong.
*sigh* I'll keep it simple for you AGAIN :
- I never said not dieing to gatecamps is hard when you commit to fly a ship to do so
- I said it's a bad design : low risk, high reward pvp which is ruining low sec.
If you don't understand that I give up on you, It' won't have impact on everything most fw fights are in plexes/hubs where they should be (feel free to camp acceleration gates).

Gatecamps isn't "ruining lowsec", no matter how much you want to howl about it ruining lowsec.

That's just like your opinion I can provide facts why it's ruining lowsec :
- Average solo pvper can't fly what he wants because we are camping
- People won't fleet to fight campers because most of the time they disengage unless they are 100% sure they'll kill you (typical bears)
- Can be annoying for small gang doing fw, but it's ok I guess when you have a scout
Notice how you are in full damage control mode since it's bad design.

Lord Zim wrote:

The "actual state of low sec" has nothing to do with gatecamps.

It's not helping, but ye low sec isn't appealing for order reasons. I should be more specific, it's ruining solo pvp in low sec.

Lord Zim wrote:

I didn't fly a shuttle, I flew something which was designed to bust through gatecamps. You should try it.

So low sec solo pvp is limited to one type of ship, good to know homie.

Lord Zim wrote:

Ah, I knew there was a trollword missing from your posts, and there it is: "bears".

Mommie always told me "you must be proud of who you are", it's ok to be a lil bear friendo. You want easy kills, you want elite pvp, you want easy afk money? It's ok you are not alone ^_^.
Have a good night/day sir bbz.


PS : I do pi/research in ls for 5 months, never died to a single gatecamp on my indy because I can scout and cloak, doesn't mean it's not a bad design who is ruining low sec solo pvp.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#726 - 2013-03-29 22:42:09 UTC
Afk Moon Goo wrote:
That's just like your opinion I can provide facts why it's ruining lowsec :
- Average solo pvper can't fly what he wants because we are camping
- People won't fleet to fight campers because most of the time they disengage unless they are 100% sure they'll kill you (typical bears)
- Can be annoying for small gang doing fw, but it's ok I guess when you have a scout
Notice how you are in full damage control mode since it's bad design.

The "average solo PVPer" can't fly what he wants in lowsec because the environment he's flying in is dangerous. I'd love to fly around in lowsec in a titan, but I can't, because it's not designed for that.

So no, gatecamps are still not ruining lowsec.
Afk Moon Goo wrote:
It's not helping, but ye low sec isn't appealing for order reasons. I should be more specific, it's ruining solo pvp in low sec.

No, it isn't. It's "ruining" your idea of "solo PVP", because you want to use tools which aren't adapted/adaptable to the environment in which you're flying.

Afk Moon Goo wrote:
So low sec solo pvp is limited to one type of ship, good to know homie.

There's more than 1 type of ship which can (and does) work in lowsec, even solo.

Afk Moon Goo wrote:
You want easy kills, you want elite pvp, you want easy afk money? It's ok you are not alone ^_^.

I don't want "easy kills" (since I don't gatecamp), I don't want "elite PVP" (no, "blobs" isn't "elite PVP"), and I don't want "easy afk money" (I haven't had a single ship reimbursed in a very, very long time; then again I make my isk mostly AFK in Jita).

But thanks for making incorrect assumptions.

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

RIP Vile Rat

Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#727 - 2013-03-30 08:35:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
Marian Devers wrote:
Malcanis, what are your thoughts regarding supercaps; also, regarding Shadoo's 0.0 Thunderdome?


Because somebody posting with an hours-old NPC corp forum alt that will inevitably be biomassed by the end of the election is clearly trying to derail this thread, I'm just quoting the last useful post to ~try~ to get this thing back on track.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#728 - 2013-03-30 08:43:57 UTC
At no time will I be be advocating to CCP that they rebalance the game around people who can't deal with solved problems like losec gate camps.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Frying Doom
#729 - 2013-03-30 08:47:08 UTC
Did I miss something?

All this talk of lo-sec in a candidate thread who has said he is not sure what to do about lo-sec and that it is his weakest area.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#730 - 2013-03-30 09:20:35 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:

The "average solo PVPer" can't fly what he wants in lowsec because the environment he's flying in is dangerous. I'd love to fly around in lowsec in a titan, but I can't, because it's not designed for that.

So no, gatecamps are still not ruining lowsec.


You are missing the point, you can avoid gatecamps easily if you want but it'll restrict the numbers of ship you can fly in LS solo pvp, also if you don't you will lose your ship in a pvp environment disregard of your pvp skill, it's a bad design.

Lord Zim wrote:

No, it isn't. It's "ruining" your idea of "solo PVP", because you want to use tools which aren't adapted/adaptable to the environment in which you're flying.

There's more than 1 type of ship which can (and does) work in lowsec, even solo.

No, it isn't. It's "endorsing" your idea of "lowsec PVP", because you want to get easy kills with low risk and high reward (aka your average bear).
Feel free to make a list and pass gates with tryhard instalocking loki fleets camping, I'll look forward that.
Spoiler : you'll die in a frigate, in a frigate.

Lord Zim wrote:

I don't want "easy kills" (since I don't gatecamp), I don't want "elite PVP" (no, "blobs" isn't "elite PVP"), and I don't want "easy afk money" (I haven't had a single ship reimbursed in a very, very long time; then again I make my isk mostly AFK in Jita).

But thanks for making incorrect assumptions.

I'm happy to know you are irrelevant to this discussion since you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

Malcanis wrote:
At no time will I be be advocating to CCP that they rebalance the game around people who can't deal with solved problems like losec gate camps.

I never said I can't deal with lowsec gatecamps, I said it's a bad/toxic design did you even read my posts? I bet you didn't.
Malcanis in charge of endorsing low risk, high reward pvp.
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#731 - 2013-03-30 09:32:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
that's maybe because outside of plinking at tackled supercaps that somebody else is killing in the once-per-epoch big fight that manages to take place in lowsec, casual PvP in lowsec is reduced to camping because there is literally nothing else considering that the place is a desert

as far as PvE goes, great, you have l5s which require a gang or a carrier to run, and if you have a gang you're far better off running incursions and if you have a carrier you'll make more ISK running 0.0 anomalies

incursions are awful in lowsec so let's not even go there

if people aren't doing these things then there are no "targets" which means that basically all casual PvP is reduced to camping a gate or a station, and they don't do those things because they are more rewarding elsewhere with the same amount of effort

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#732 - 2013-03-30 09:36:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
Also fyi Fozzie announced a nerf to remote sensor boosters, which make those instalocking loki camps possible

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#733 - 2013-03-30 11:05:41 UTC
Andski wrote:
that's maybe because outside of plinking at tackled supercaps that somebody else is killing in the once-per-epoch big fight that manages to take place in lowsec, casual PvP in lowsec is reduced to camping because there is literally nothing else considering that the place is a desert

as far as PvE goes, great, you have l5s which require a gang or a carrier to run, and if you have a gang you're far better off running incursions and if you have a carrier you'll make more ISK running 0.0 anomalies

incursions are awful in lowsec so let's not even go there

if people aren't doing these things then there are no "targets" which means that basically all casual PvP is reduced to camping a gate or a station, and they don't do those things because they are more rewarding elsewhere with the same amount of effort

You are 100% right.
Andski wrote:
Also fyi Fozzie announced a nerf to remote sensor boosters, which make those instalocking loki camps possible

Holy **** the tears on that thread, delicious.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#734 - 2013-03-30 11:48:14 UTC
Afk Moon Goo wrote:
You are missing the point, you can avoid gatecamps easily if you want but it'll restrict the numbers of ship you can fly in LS solo pvp, also if you don't you will lose your ship in a pvp environment disregard of your pvp skill, it's a bad design.

Please, elucidate on exactly how you would "not restrict the number of ships you can fly in LS solo PVP". I'm especially interested in hearing how you'd solve the problem of, say, a BS flying through a gate camped by frigates, followed by a frigate flying through a gate camped by frigates. Or hell, even noobships, since they can fit warp disruptors on noobships.

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

RIP Vile Rat

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#735 - 2013-03-30 12:33:23 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Afk Moon Goo wrote:
You are missing the point, you can avoid gatecamps easily if you want but it'll restrict the numbers of ship you can fly in LS solo pvp, also if you don't you will lose your ship in a pvp environment disregard of your pvp skill, it's a bad design.

Please, elucidate on exactly how you would "not restrict the number of ships you can fly in LS solo PVP". I'm especially interested in hearing how you'd solve the problem of, say, a BS flying through a gate camped by frigates, followed by a frigate flying through a gate camped by frigates. Or hell, even noobships, since they can fit warp disruptors on noobships.


Since I have clarified my position, perhaps you two could continue this in another thread.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#736 - 2013-03-30 13:03:57 UTC
Actually, no, there's no point, it should've ended on my part with "gatecamping isn't a problem with/for lowsec", since that's all there is to it.

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

RIP Vile Rat

Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#737 - 2013-03-30 23:16:01 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Actually, no, there's no point, it should've ended on my part with "gatecamping isn't a problem with/for lowsec", since that's all there is to it.


Considering your sig, and learning it's a Goon, maybe you're posting about the wrong topic all together. Since it is the antics of Goons to troll and cause mischief, and they don't even try to hide it.

_"In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." _ ~George Orwell

Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#738 - 2013-04-01 11:19:05 UTC
It goes without saying that Malcanis will be on my recommended ballot.

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#739 - 2013-04-01 11:21:35 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
It goes without saying that Malcanis will be on my recommended ballot.



And yet you said it anyway.

See, this is the kind of meticulous attention to communication that I hope to promote in the CSM, and it's clearly already working!

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Frying Doom
#740 - 2013-04-01 15:24:42 UTC
I just noticed you added qualified to your thread

Gratz

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!