These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2721 - 2014-02-08 13:39:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
Tippia wrote:
Pinky Hops wrote:
Wait, what?

He edited about five paragraphs into "grr goons."
…or, to use your vernacular, he “shortened it” to a more pithy version.

Quote:
How else can I interpret that other than him admitting defeat?
By reading what he wrote and responding to it rather than invent your own interpretation and editing it in because you ran out of arguments and lost.


There was nothing to read from him.

I made a logical, sound argument. He changed my entire post into the simple words "grr goons" and then responded to that instead.

That's the equivalent of flipping the chess board during a game. Once you do that, it's over. You lost.

If he had responded to my actual post -- then maybe there might have been something to read of his. But flipping the chess board isn't a valid move within chess. I don't have to respond to that.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2722 - 2014-02-08 13:40:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Pinky Hops wrote:
There was nothing to read from him.
Blatantly false.

Quote:
That's the equivalent of flipping the chess board during a game. Once you do that, it's over. You lost.
So why are you doing it if not because you lost?
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2723 - 2014-02-08 13:44:29 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Pinky Hops wrote:
There was nothing to read from him.
Blatantly false.

Quote:
That's the equivalent of flipping the chess board during a game. Once you do that, it's over. You lost.
So why are you doing it?


Be more specific. What did I do, where? If you are going to repeat the prior argument, check my above responses - thoroughly. Already covered.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2724 - 2014-02-08 13:49:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Pinky Hops wrote:
Be more specific. What did I do, where?
Start here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4208523#post4208523

Notice how you keep going off-topic and onto some completely tangential (and horribly misinformed) rant about coalitions. Note how he on multiple occasions tries to get you back on topic. Note how you keep blatantly ignoring the points being made and refuse to offer anything that even remotely resembles an actual counter-argument, instead replacing it with more irrelevancies.

By your own standard, you lost. Multiple times. All he did was shorten your extraneous rant to it's essential core: “grr goons”.
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2725 - 2014-02-08 13:52:00 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Pinky Hops wrote:
Be more specific. What did I do, where?
Start here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4208523#post4208523

Notice how you keep going off-topic and onto some completely tangential (and horribly misinformed) rant about coalitions. Note how he on multiple occasions tries to get you back on topic. Note how you keep blatantly ignoring the points being made and refuse to offer anything that even remotely resembles an actual counter-argument, instead replacing it with more irrelevancies.

By your own standard, you lost. Multiple times. All he did was shorten your extraneous rant to it's essential core: “grr goons”.


If we're talking about nullsec, coalitions aren't "off topic."

Please explain. We'll start with your first sentence, and work our way down your terrible post.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2726 - 2014-02-08 13:54:43 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
If we're talking about nullsec
You weren't. Just read his posts and this time, don't mentally edit them. Just read.
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2727 - 2014-02-08 13:56:21 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Pinky Hops wrote:
If we're talking about nullsec
You weren't. Just read his posts and this time, don't mentally edit them. Just read.


This entire thread is about comparing nullsec to hisec.

If you don't think coalitions have a place in such a discussion, you are crazy.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2728 - 2014-02-08 14:08:36 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
This entire thread is about comparing nullsec to hisec.
Specifically, the discussion you two were having was about something he repeated over and over again, and which you consistently ignored. You read his posts and spotted it this time, I hope?

So yes, going off on a tangential (and misinformed) rant that has nothing to do with the comparison in question is thoroughly irrelevant; inventing your own interpretation because you ran out of arguments against what he was actually saying means you lost. Multiple times.
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2729 - 2014-02-08 14:11:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
Tippia wrote:
Pinky Hops wrote:
This entire thread is about comparing nullsec to hisec.
Specifically, the discussion you two were having was about something he repeated over and over again, and which you consistently ignored. You read his posts and spotted it this time, I hope?

So yes, going off on a tangential (and misinformed) rant that has nothing to do with the comparison in question is thoroughly irrelevant; inventing your own interpretation because you ran out of arguments against what he was actually saying means you lost. Multiple times.


So basically, you have nothing left to say or point out.

If you actually had something to say, you would say it, not make vague assertions about being misinformed or tangential.

The thread is about hisec vs nullsec. Coalitions have a part in that discussion.

It's super easy to just make up a bunch of crap to make the other person look bad. For instance:

You are misinformed and you don't read posts -- you invent crap and your arguments are twisted.

See, I can do that too! Roll

To be honest though, I think the fact that you and the others won't respond to any posts about coalitions except to edit my post with "grrr" is telling of how defensive you are about the subject.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2730 - 2014-02-08 14:15:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Pinky Hops wrote:
So basically, you have nothing left to say or point out.
Not until you actually take the time to read the posts, no. Have you read them?

Quote:
The thread
…consists of many separate topics. The two of you were having a discussion about one of them before you (very quickly) defected from it and went on an irrelevant tangent. Presumably, you rant out of arguments to respond to what he was saying. I.e. you lost.
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2731 - 2014-02-08 14:17:06 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Pinky Hops wrote:
So basically, you have nothing left to say or point out.
Not until you actually take the time to read the posts, no. Have you read them?

Quote:
The thread
…consists of many separate topics. The two of you were having a discussion about one of them before you (very quickly) defected from it and went on an irrelevant tangent. Presumably, you rant out of arguments to respond to what he was saying. I.e. you lost.


Coalitions have a part in this discussion. If you can't admit that, then you are the one that lost.

You can leave the thread now.

So now La Nairrez or whatever is done, and so are you.

Who is left?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2732 - 2014-02-08 14:19:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Pinky Hops wrote:
Coalitions have a part in this discussion.
So you didn't read it?
Because no, coalitions are not in any way relevant to the discussion the two of you had before you bailed out and replaced what he was saying with something completely different (that you are not particularly well-informed about to boot).

By your own standard, you lost.
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2733 - 2014-02-08 14:21:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
Tippia wrote:
Because no, coalitions are not in any way relevant to the discussion the two of you had before you bailed out and replaced what he was saying with something completely different.


You'd have to cite specific examples of me "bailing out" or doing "replacements."

You lost. Get over it. Leave the thread.

You can't handle coalitions being discussed in a topic about comparing hisec vs nullsec. That's a problem.

No amount of spamming or tantrums will save you from this one.
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#2734 - 2014-02-08 14:21:37 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
This entire thread is about comparing nullsec to hisec.


Pinky Hops wrote:
So basically, you have nothing left to say or point out.

If you actually had something to say, you would say it, not make vague assertions about being misinformed or tangential.

The thread is about hisec vs nullsec. Coalitions have a part in that discussion.

It's super easy to just make up a bunch of crap to make the other person look bad. For instance:

You are misinformed and you don't read posts -- you invent crap and your arguments are twisted.

See, I can do that too!


Actually what the OP was about was nerfing HighSec. It became an evaluation of high sec vs. null sec personal income.

If you believe that coalitions play a part in that fine, but you've not adequately drawn a line from one to the other, provided no data to support your suggested premise, and as such it boils down to baseless claims that most are going to interpret, rightly or wrongly, as "grr goons".

If you want to interject that nullsec coalitions play a role in the matter being discussed please explain how that role influences the disparity between nullsec and highsec income. I would also appreciate any available data on the subject as I enjoy absorbing and digesting that kind of data to form my opinion on the matter as a whole.

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2735 - 2014-02-08 14:26:10 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
You'd have to cite specific examples of me "bailing out" or doing "replacements."
I already did. You didn't read it, just like the first time.

Quote:
You can't handle coalitions being discussed in a topic about comparing hisec vs nullsec.
It's not that I can't handle it, it's that it has no relevance to the discussion you were having. Did you read it? Did you spot the reoccurring theme that you consistently skipped and couldn't respond to? That's where you bailed out and started editing his argument because you ran out and lost.
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2736 - 2014-02-08 14:32:38 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:
Actually what the OP was about was nerfing HighSec.


If you nerf highsec you buff nullsec. Balance is a scale. You can't talk about one without talking about the other.

Kimmi Chan wrote:
It became an evaluation of high sec vs. null sec personal income.


No, it became an evaluation of income. "Personal income" is a twist and doesn't really mean anything. Personal income as opposed to what? Group income?

It's just a way of arbitrarily deleting certain revenue streams from "counting." For instance, suddenly moons don't "count." because moons are not "personal income."

In a sense it's true - because most moons are not own by individuals, especially not the amazing ones. However, there are still thousands of players who have their own personal moons reacting or mining away....

Kimmi Chan wrote:
If you believe that coalitions play a part in that fine, but you've not adequately drawn a line from one to the other, provided no data to support your suggested premise, and as such it boils down to baseless claims that most are going to interpret, rightly or wrongly, as "grr goons".


Of course coalitions play a part in it. Coalitions hold nearly all the sov in the entire game.

Let's say hypothetically nullsec manufacturing was heavily buffed. Now all of the sudden if I want to participate in that sandbox, I am essentially forced to join one of the large coalitions.

What else would be an option? NPC Null is awful. Start my own corp and just go take sov? You need thousands of players to do that these days.

Now what about more standard things, like ratting? Do you think having the ability to dock up helps you to do that more efficiently? Who gets to dock up in null?

In before you claim my logical conclusions are "baseless"
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2737 - 2014-02-08 14:39:34 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
No, it became an evaluation of income. "Personal income" is a twist and doesn't really mean anything.
…aside from being a deciding factor in where players choose to make their money, which is the behavioural pattern that is out of balance.

Quote:
Of course coalitions play a part in it. Coalitions hold nearly all the sov in the entire game.
And how do you draw a line from them to the balance of personal income?

Quote:
What else would be an option? NPC Null is awful. Start my own corp and just go take sov? You need thousands of players to do that these days.
NPC null is where many of the major alliances today got started. They made it, so why can't you? Also, do you know why you need thousands of players to do so these days?
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#2738 - 2014-02-08 14:42:25 UTC
Pinky Hops' idea of an argument:

Quote:
Having 3 - 4 alts and repeatedly bumping a thread doesn't turn this into a controversy of some kind. It just demonstrates you have enough free time to continuously bump a terrible thread until it is 130 pages long.

Most people I know would much rather see the sov system become fixed, rather than some lame/pathetic attempt to "balance" highsec with nullsec.


Blatant logical fallacies

Quote:
If you want a giant nerf of highsec ot fly, or a giant buff to nullsec, here's what needs to happen:
Drastically reduce the power of all major coalitions. Cripple their infrastructure, make it so they have to split off into small groups.

You know what would be really imbalanced? Being forced to join a coalition to experience all the content within the game to it's full potential.
So sure, you want big buffs to nullsec? Then you should be prepared to sake some huuuuge nerfs to your coalitions.


statement with no premise

Quote:
Are you saying you are so incredibly ignorant of the EVE economy that you think missions and LP rewards are the standards of income balance?


horseshit
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2739 - 2014-02-08 14:45:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
Benny Ohu wrote:
horseshit


Tell me more about how shooting red squares is the only way of making ISK.

Hint: this is why you are poor.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2740 - 2014-02-08 14:47:19 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
Hell me more about how shooting red squares is the only way of making ISK.
…which of course, he didn't say.
Why do you keep editing other people's arguments?