These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Mining Barge SP Reimbursement

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#161 - 2013-02-11 04:42:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Krixtal Icefluxor
My Orca Flying Alt has absolutely never even mined a GRAIN OF SAND AND NEVER WILL................

.......and I really don't care for a reimbursement.

Things change and life goes on.




EDIT: Can I get some of the energy and wasted time back from starting over from when I had to use manual typewriters before word processing existed ? Nope.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
dark heartt
#162 - 2013-02-11 04:48:52 UTC
Rebecha Pucontis wrote:
[quote=Andski]The only reason I am focusing on the orca is because mining barge is generally a useless skill to a lot of pilots who have trained or intend to train for an orca.



You are generalising for your own benefit. There are also a lot of pilots who trained for mining barge V who used it to then get an Orca for you know... mining.

I have a fair few T2 ships that I have trained for that included skills I don't use (command ships come to mind immediately) and they are all getting changed with the new skill changes, but I don't expect to be reimbursed for those.

Stop being entitled. Just because you trained for a ship to do something that was not its original intention doesn't mean that you should get something back when they fine tune it. Yes just because people use the Orca as a hauler doesn't mean that it was designed as a hauler. Its original purpose is for mining support (not mining itself), so it made sense that the mining barge skill was a prerequisite for it.

http://tetrisisunrealistic.blogspot.com.au/
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#163 - 2013-02-11 04:50:50 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Which means that it is no longer an advantage.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Zero+Sum+Game

You still have the advantage of the other uses of that Skill over those who did not train that skill. Your willingness to use those advantages is irrelevant.


Except they got an advantage in how many skills they gained during that period over others, so it was still an advantage.


And now they no longer do. Which, if we go back to my original point:

1)You gained the advantage
2)You still have the advantage
Therefore
3)You don't get SP back.

You've changed 2) and... forgotten, I guess.

Lets compare:

1) You gained the ability to fly the Orca (an advantage) and mining barges (an advantage)
2) You still have the ability to fly the Orca (an advantage) and mining barges (an advantage)
3) No SP for you

1) You gained the ability to train faster than you otherwise could.
2) You no longer have the ability to train faster than you otherwise could.
3) You get your SP back.

See the difference?

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#164 - 2013-02-11 04:54:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Aren Madigan
RubyPorto wrote:
Aren Madigan wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Which means that it is no longer an advantage.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Zero+Sum+Game

You still have the advantage of the other uses of that Skill over those who did not train that skill. Your willingness to use those advantages is irrelevant.


Except they got an advantage in how many skills they gained during that period over others, so it was still an advantage.


And now they no longer do. Which, if we go back to my original point:

1)You gained the advantage
2)You still have the advantage
Therefore
3)You don't get SP back.

You've changed 2) and... forgotten, I guess.

Lets compare:

1) You gained the ability to fly the Orca (an advantage) and mining barges (an advantage)
2) You still have the ability to fly the Orca (an advantage) and mining barges (an advantage)
3) No SP for you

1) You gained the ability to train faster than you otherwise could.
2) You no longer have the ability to train faster than you otherwise could.
3) You get your SP back.

See the difference?


I also see your second example ending up with you having more SP than someone who didn't bother with the skill and played the same period of time. How convenient for you to keep ignoring that part as being an advantage. Keep rewording it though while ignoring my key counterpoints. You can reword it a thousand ways, it'll still mean the same thing.
Alahril
State War Academy
Caldari State
#165 - 2013-02-11 05:03:03 UTC
With this kind of logic all SP that are thouched by a change should be given backRoll
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#166 - 2013-02-11 05:03:44 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Aren Madigan wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Which means that it is no longer an advantage.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Zero+Sum+Game

You still have the advantage of the other uses of that Skill over those who did not train that skill. Your willingness to use those advantages is irrelevant.


Except they got an advantage in how many skills they gained during that period over others, so it was still an advantage.


And now they no longer do. Which, if we go back to my original point:

1)You gained the advantage
2)You still have the advantage
Therefore
3)You don't get SP back.

You've changed 2) and... forgotten, I guess.

Lets compare:

1) You gained the ability to fly the Orca (an advantage) and mining barges (an advantage)
2) You still have the ability to fly the Orca (an advantage) and mining barges (an advantage)
3) No SP for you

1) You gained the ability to train faster than you otherwise could.
2) You no longer have the ability to train faster than you otherwise could.
3) You get your SP back.

See the difference?


I also see your second example ending up with you having more SP than someone who didn't bother with the skill and played the same period of time. How convenient for you to keep ignoring that part as being an advantage. Keep rewording it though while ignoring my key counterpoints. You can reword it a thousand ways, it'll still mean the same thing.



Once again, you changed 2) and tried to pass it off without saying anything.

Being able to fly an Orca is an advantage over people who cannot fly an Orca.
Being able to train at 2700 SP/hr is not an advantage over people who can train at 2700SP/hr.

One's an advantage, one is not an advantage. You're trying to equate them.

The past utility of whatever advantage you had is irrelevant. Unless you're arguing that everything you ever moved with your Orca should be moved back to where it was because Orcas are changing, and that you have a negative ore balance to represent all the fleet boosting you ever did.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#167 - 2013-02-11 05:19:47 UTC
Except its not just past utility as you're still benefiting from it. And its quite a difference from an ISK advantage which is liquid, able to be adapted to anything, constantly rising, and falling with the markets. SP is permanent, unyielding, a solid asset that never goes away unless you do something stupid. Once you gain an SP advantage, it never goes away, thus any edge gained in it is an unending advantage. Not to mention the programming nightmare your example would provide. This? Not so much. In fact, these changes prove to be a massive disadvantage to many people as they have to throw their skill plans out the window briefly for one reason or another to not get screwed over, so in a way, its worse
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#168 - 2013-02-11 05:27:44 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
Except its not just past utility as you're still benefiting from it.


And you're still benefiting from whatever moves you made with your Orca. Losing ISK/utility later does not erase the fact that you once gained it. (Unless you feel that 4-3 is the same as 2-3)

You're arguing that the reimbursement of Learning skills is equivalent to your proposed reimbursement of the Mining Barge Skill.
That would only be appropriate IF you could no longer receive any benefit from having that skill trained (like my example of "Orca Pre-Requisite 5").

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
#169 - 2013-02-11 05:47:42 UTC
Rebecha Pucontis wrote:
Actually, the Orca is well known to be one of the best ships in the game for hauling goods, this is despite the nerf it recieved, it still remains superior to a freighter in many respects. Have a look on Agony and many other eve websites where it's recommended use is as a hauler and not as a mining ship, where it is generally stated that you are better off with another hulk than using the orca to mine.

And that's a problem. Despite my hauling alts having indutrial commandships at V, I think it would be a good move of CCP to completely remove the cargo bay on the Orca.

Make the ore bay 150k m3 in size and let it haul ore, minerals and gas. Then it would be a dedicated industrial ship, still have a lot of flexibility in it's role and the hauling thing can be solved with industrials in tiericide.

Remove standings and insurance.
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#170 - 2013-02-11 05:55:13 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Aren Madigan wrote:
Except its not just past utility as you're still benefiting from it.


And you're still benefiting from whatever moves you made with your Orca. Losing ISK/utility later does not erase the fact that you once gained it. (Unless you feel that 4-3 is the same as 2-3)

You're arguing that the reimbursement of Learning skills is equivalent to your proposed reimbursement of the Mining Barge Skill.
That would only be appropriate IF you could no longer receive any benefit from having that skill trained (like my example of "Orca Pre-Requisite 5").


And you didn't stop receiving benefit from the learning skills, nor did losing the learning skills screw up skill plans and you ignored the entire counter point on how SP and ISK aren't equivilant in the slightest. So allow me to simplify.

SP - Permanent
ISK - Temporary

Any benefit you gain from isk is temporary and it varies.
SP you're stuck with.

And I'm sure you're going to repeat yourself on how it should then be applied to nerfs and yadda yadda yadda, but its one thing to change one's play style willy nilly. This isn't what that is. This is them changing the skill lines where they more match up to play style, which is fine and dandy, makes for less useless skills being gained in the future, but it doesn't change that they still had to get that skill in the first place and the ONE use it had for them is no longer there, so its just a wasted skill now, not even serving even the slightest purpose for those people anymore, not as a prerequesite, not as anything. The ONE thing I would have conceded some on is the fact that it allows them to skip some prerequisites, but even that is numbed a bit by the fact that they either need them or need to level to V NOW, and how in most cases, the new ones are shorter.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#171 - 2013-02-11 06:20:10 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:

And you didn't stop receiving benefit from the learning skills, nor did losing the learning skills screw up skill plans and you ignored the entire counter point on how SP and ISK aren't equivilant in the slightest. So allow me to simplify.

SP - Permanent
ISK - Temporary

Any benefit you gain from isk is temporary and it varies.


So you are arguing that 4-3 is equal to 2-3. How cute.

Quote:
SP you're stuck with.

And I'm sure you're going to repeat yourself on how it should then be applied to nerfs and yadda yadda yadda, but its one thing to change one's play style willy nilly. This isn't what that is. This is them changing the skill lines where they more match up to play style, which is fine and dandy, makes for less useless skills being gained in the future, but it doesn't change that they still had to get that skill in the first place and the ONE use it had for them is no longer there, so its just a wasted skill now, not even serving even the slightest purpose for those people anymore, not as a prerequesite, not as anything. The ONE thing I would have conceded some on is the fact that it allows them to skip some prerequisites, but even that is numbed a bit by the fact that they either need them or need to level to V NOW, and how in most cases, the new ones are shorter.


You're making the same arguments that Super pilots made when their ability to use drones was eliminated. They actually had a better argument due to being stuck in the ships. And yet...

You still have the ability to fly Mining barges. Whether you make use of that ability or not is irrelevant. You still have the ability to use Orcas, so you are no worse off.

You do not need to train to level 5 now. CCP has said that if you have the skill injected now, you will be able to train that skill later (having Command ships 4 with negligible leadership skills and being in an Int/Mem map, I double checked that).

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Ris Dnalor
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#172 - 2013-02-11 06:26:34 UTC
Rebecha Pucontis wrote:
As the orca is now having it's mining barge V prereq removed, and many who trained up to use an orca have none of the required skills for mining and have no desire to mine, and simply trained the orca for the purpose of hauling and acting as a mobile command platform, then would it be acceptable for CCP to refund this now useless skill and let players decide if they need mining barge at V or not.

Personally my feeling is that it would be good of CCP to refund this skill, and also any other skill which has been effected in this manner. The orca is a particular example as mining barge is completely useless to a lot of people who trained up for an Orca.

But also I think it would be fair to let pilots affected by the new changes decide if they want to keep the existing skills which are no longer pre reqs and if they want the SP to invest in somthing they will have use for.

The arguments against will be you had some use of the ships, so you must now pay the price. But imagine a character who has just freshly trained for an orca for example, they will have had little use from the orca to justify a month of extra training. Or imagine a player who wishes to train for an orca within the next 6 months. The current choice they face is either train for an orca now and face a month of useless training, or wait 6 months until skill changes have been implemented, if indeed they do get implemented in 6 months.

I propose CCP should give the option as they are doing with BC's and Destroyers, to refund players effected by the changes in skill requirements. I think this would be a fair policy to implement given the fundamental changes which are going on here.

I am sure there will be those who disagree with this also, and if that is the case than I respect that view, and would kindly ask for others to respect opposing views also.


If CCP reimbursed every skill that was nerfed/changed over the past 10 years, I would be able to re-allocate every skillpoint I have :P rots of ruck to ya in your quest!

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

EvE = Everybody Vs. Everybody

  • Qolde
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#173 - 2013-02-11 06:28:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Aren Madigan
RubyPorto wrote:
Aren Madigan wrote:

And you didn't stop receiving benefit from the learning skills, nor did losing the learning skills screw up skill plans and you ignored the entire counter point on how SP and ISK aren't equivilant in the slightest. So allow me to simplify.

SP - Permanent
ISK - Temporary

Any benefit you gain from isk is temporary and it varies.


So you are arguing that 4-3 is equal to 2-3. How cute.

Quote:
SP you're stuck with.

And I'm sure you're going to repeat yourself on how it should then be applied to nerfs and yadda yadda yadda, but its one thing to change one's play style willy nilly. This isn't what that is. This is them changing the skill lines where they more match up to play style, which is fine and dandy, makes for less useless skills being gained in the future, but it doesn't change that they still had to get that skill in the first place and the ONE use it had for them is no longer there, so its just a wasted skill now, not even serving even the slightest purpose for those people anymore, not as a prerequesite, not as anything. The ONE thing I would have conceded some on is the fact that it allows them to skip some prerequisites, but even that is numbed a bit by the fact that they either need them or need to level to V NOW, and how in most cases, the new ones are shorter.


You're making the same arguments that Super pilots made when their ability to use drones was eliminated. They actually had a better argument due to being stuck in the ships. And yet...

You still have the ability to fly Mining barges. Whether you make use of that ability or not is irrelevant. You still have the ability to use Orcas, so you are no worse off.

You do not need to train to level 5 now. CCP has said that if you have the skill injected now, you will be able to train that skill later (having Command ships 4 with negligible leadership skills and being in an Int/Mem map, I double checked that).

Either that changed or there has been some miscommunication within the devs, I know fairly recently there was a dev post that said otherwise. But I'm seeing the one from Fozzie that says you're right. I'll concede on that bit then, though it is an example of why they need these things more front, center and visible. Can't say I completely disagree with the super pilots either though... except in my belief that supers should be rare ships to the point that seeing just one is a thing to be feared, rather than a fleet to rival even the major factions, but hey, that's something different entirely. Actually, I'm not even clear on why they lost the smaller drones at all really. Can't imagine a dedicated fleet would have had much trouble wiping them out, but meh.

Kiiiind of getting annoyed with the people who are trying to compare this to a skill nerf though, strawman if I ever saw one.
Kate stark
#174 - 2013-02-11 07:03:36 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
Montevius Williams wrote:
No, it would not be acceptable. Games change. Just because a change happened that someone doesnt like, they should not be reimbursed in anyway.

Just becasue a ship gets nerfed/buffed in EVE, does not mean you should be compensated
Just becasue a Warrior in WoW gets nerfed/buffed does not mean you should be compensated


In WoW if there's a significant change, usually talents get refunded... and that's with something that's almost no time investment. I would think something that has far more time investment would be a little more deserving of one. Which, is kind of the thing. It isn't just a nerf or buff, its a complete change in the requirements of a skill. Something that could have been used for other things that suddenly translates into A LOT of wasted time. So it isn't an unreasonable request in the slightest. Its just a matter of if one agrees with it or not. Is it ok to basically tell someone that over a month of their time was completely worthless to them now? I have trouble saying yes to that.


the difference is, in wow you can change your talents at any time for a small fee of ingame currency, you can't do that in eve, therefore the whole "in wow.." argument is apples and oranges, and should be ignored and any one comparing the two games should be mocked relentlessly.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#175 - 2013-02-11 07:16:54 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Aren Madigan wrote:
Either that changed or there has been some miscommunication within the devs, I know fairly recently there was a dev post that said otherwise. But I'm seeing the one from Fozzie that says you're right. I'll concede on that bit then, though it is an example of why they need these things more front, center and visible. Can't say I completely disagree with the super pilots either though... except in my belief that supers should be rare ships to the point that seeing just one is a thing to be feared, rather than a fleet to rival even the major factions, but hey, that's something different entirely. Actually, I'm not even clear on why they lost the smaller drones at all really. Can't imagine a dedicated fleet would have had much trouble wiping them out, but meh.

Kiiiind of getting annoyed with the people who are trying to compare this to a skill nerf though, strawman if I ever saw one.


1. There's a popular fleet composition called Slowcats, which consists of Spider tanking Carriers with sentries assisting an FC. Imagine if, instead of having a 3m EHP buffer, they had a 30m EHP buffer, couldn't be tackled by anything that can receive RR, had the ability to morph into Dreads without sieging (FBs), have a virtually unlimited drone bay (5000m3 left by taking max-1 Fighters/FBs + massive CHA), and could launch roughly twice the number of drones (for twice the alpha). Yeah. I can't imagine why that would be broken either.

2. Super pilots can still use drones. Just like you can still use mining barges. Their choices (to remain in the pilot seat of a Super) and your preferences (to not fly ships that you have the ability to fly) are irrelevant to the question of reimbursing SP.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Ra'Shyne Viper
Native Freshfood
#176 - 2013-02-11 07:19:59 UTC
Montevius Williams wrote:
No, it would not be acceptable. Games change. Just because a change happened that someone doesnt like, they should not be reimbursed in anyway.

Just becasue a ship gets nerfed/buffed in EVE, does not mean you should be compensated
Just becasue a Warrior in WoW gets nerfed/buffed does not mean you should be compensated


this right here, wtf is wrong with people

DUST 514 player

Ingame name: Vin Vicious
Kate stark
#177 - 2013-02-11 07:21:28 UTC
Ra'Shyne Viper wrote:
Montevius Williams wrote:
No, it would not be acceptable. Games change. Just because a change happened that someone doesnt like, they should not be reimbursed in anyway.

Just becasue a ship gets nerfed/buffed in EVE, does not mean you should be compensated
Just becasue a Warrior in WoW gets nerfed/buffed does not mean you should be compensated


this right here, wtf is wrong with people


expecting actions to have consequences? yeah, how dare people expect that.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#178 - 2013-02-11 07:31:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Aren Madigan
RubyPorto wrote:
Aren Madigan wrote:
Either that changed or there has been some miscommunication within the devs, I know fairly recently there was a dev post that said otherwise. But I'm seeing the one from Fozzie that says you're right. I'll concede on that bit then, though it is an example of why they need these things more front, center and visible. Can't say I completely disagree with the super pilots either though... except in my belief that supers should be rare ships to the point that seeing just one is a thing to be feared, rather than a fleet to rival even the major factions, but hey, that's something different entirely. Actually, I'm not even clear on why they lost the smaller drones at all really. Can't imagine a dedicated fleet would have had much trouble wiping them out, but meh.

Kiiiind of getting annoyed with the people who are trying to compare this to a skill nerf though, strawman if I ever saw one.


1. There's a popular fleet composition called Slowcats, which consists of Spider tanking Carriers with sentries assisting an FC. Imagine if, instead of having a 3m EHP buffer, they had a 30m EHP buffer, couldn't be tackled by anything that can receive RR, had the ability to morph into Dreads without sieging (FBs), have a virtually unlimited drone bay (5000m3 left by taking max-1 Fighters/FBs + massive CHA), and could launch roughly twice the number of drones (for twice the alpha). Yeah. I can't imagine why that would be broken either.

2. Super pilots can still use drones. Just like you can still use mining barges. Their choices (to remain in the pilot seat of a Super) and your preferences (to not fly ships that you have the ability to fly) are irrelevant to the question of reimbursing SP.


Except if a choice is based on existing features and suddenly the whole reason they got them was for a particular purpose it was removed entirely? Yeah, I can see why people would expect reimbursement since its not a simple nerf, you're removing an option entirely in that case. On the other hand, given what you described... that really sounds like the main reason they would have trained them for supercapitals in the first place would have been a flavor of the month thing. One that its very clear would have eventually gotten the nerf hammer 0.o... geez.

Kate stark wrote:
Aren Madigan wrote:
Montevius Williams wrote:
No, it would not be acceptable. Games change. Just because a change happened that someone doesnt like, they should not be reimbursed in anyway.

Just becasue a ship gets nerfed/buffed in EVE, does not mean you should be compensated
Just becasue a Warrior in WoW gets nerfed/buffed does not mean you should be compensated


In WoW if there's a significant change, usually talents get refunded... and that's with something that's almost no time investment. I would think something that has far more time investment would be a little more deserving of one. Which, is kind of the thing. It isn't just a nerf or buff, its a complete change in the requirements of a skill. Something that could have been used for other things that suddenly translates into A LOT of wasted time. So it isn't an unreasonable request in the slightest. Its just a matter of if one agrees with it or not. Is it ok to basically tell someone that over a month of their time was completely worthless to them now? I have trouble saying yes to that.


the difference is, in wow you can change your talents at any time for a small fee of ingame currency, you can't do that in eve, therefore the whole "in wow.." argument is apples and oranges, and should be ignored and any one comparing the two games should be mocked relentlessly.


Games are compared for the same reasons movies and books are. Because standards are set by predecessors. This doesn't magically change because its a game. Mocking a person only because they make a comparison you don't like is about the height of ignorance, and again, as I mentioned, I was pretty much throwing that guy's logic out the window. Hell, your reasoning shows why the lack of such reimbursements are more in EVE, because there is no in game recourse. Which, fine, prevents flavor of the month some, but again, this is different from a nerf, by far different. Wayyyy out of the ballpark. Not even sure its the right ball for the game... I think that's a football I see flying out of there, not a baseball.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#179 - 2013-02-11 07:41:22 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Aren Madigan wrote:
Except if a choice is based on existing features and suddenly the whole reason they got them was for a particular purpose it was removed entirely? Yeah, I can see why people would expect reimbursement since its not a simple nerf, you're removing an option entirely in that case. On the other hand, given what you described... that really sounds like the main reason they would have trained them for supercapitals in the first place would have been a flavor of the month thing. One that its very clear would have eventually gotten the nerf hammer 0.o... geez.


You chose to train for an Orca at a cost of ~40d training. That cost is sunk. You remain able to fly an Orca.

Quote:
Games are compared for the same reasons movies and books are. Because standards are set by predecessors. This doesn't magically change because its a game. Mocking a person only because they make a comparison you don't like is about the height of ignorance, and again, as I mentioned, I was pretty much throwing that guy's logic out the window. Hell, your reasoning shows why the lack of such reimbursements are more in EVE, because there is no in game recourse. Which, fine, prevents flavor of the month some, but again, this is different from a nerf, by far different. Wayyyy out of the ballpark. Not even sure its the right ball for the game... I think that's a football I see flying out of there, not a baseball.


Great. Then you agree that CCP should continue its 10 year long history of not reimbursing SP when the skill continues to provide a benefit.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Kate stark
#180 - 2013-02-11 07:47:34 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:

Games are compared for the same reasons movies and books are. Because standards are set by predecessors. This doesn't magically change because its a game. Mocking a person only because they make a comparison you don't like is about the height of ignorance, and again, as I mentioned, I was pretty much throwing that guy's logic out the window. Hell, your reasoning shows why the lack of such reimbursements are more in EVE, because there is no in game recourse. Which, fine, prevents flavor of the month some, but again, this is different from a nerf, by far different. Wayyyy out of the ballpark. Not even sure its the right ball for the game... I think that's a football I see flying out of there, not a baseball.


no, things are compared because there's a similarity.
talent refunds in WoW and skill points in EVE are not of the same ilk, and therefore cannot be compared.

mocking a person isn't the height of ignorance, it's what you do to stupid people, you mock them. it shames them in to bettering themselves in the future. because, clearly, years of education hasn't done it's job so we must resort to alternatives.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.