These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[February] Wreck Hitpoint Rebalance

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#301 - 2016-02-09 20:03:26 UTC
Lol last time I went to AG chan:
"Me: hi
You plebs: OMG HE HAS A MINING PERMIT. HE'S A SPY KICK HIM FOREVER

So that supports the fact you'll kick anyone even if they're only permit holders (which doesn't mean shiz really)

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#302 - 2016-02-09 20:25:09 UTC
Masao Kurata wrote:
Or y'know when you just try to answer questions, correct misunderstandings, teach mechanics relevant to the discussion or suggest tactics.
Purely based on your responses in this thread, I very much doubt you were as reasonable as you say.

Masao Kurata wrote:
Not my war, my war's against carebears.
Sound's perfect, it's pretty obvious that's what gankers are.

Dom Arkaral wrote:
Lol last time I went to AG chan:
"Me: hi
You plebs: OMG HE HAS A MINING PERMIT. HE'S A SPY KICK HIM FOREVER

So that supports the fact you'll kick anyone even if they're only permit holders (which doesn't mean shiz really)
Well actually it means a fair bit. Not to mention that they have code members coming in to troll quite frequently, it's no surprise they have zero tolerance for code members showing up.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#303 - 2016-02-09 20:30:30 UTC
Hmm, think I'm about done trying to reason with the troll. Fortunately it won't matter when this thread is locked because it was a fait accompli as of the first post.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#304 - 2016-02-09 20:47:54 UTC
Masao Kurata wrote:
Hmm, think I'm about done trying to reason with the troll. Fortunately it won't matter when this thread is locked because it was a fait accompli as of the first post.


Change has gone through anyway.
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#305 - 2016-02-09 21:03:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Dom Arkaral
Lucas Kell wrote:
Masao Kurata wrote:
Or y'know when you just try to answer questions, correct misunderstandings, teach mechanics relevant to the discussion or suggest tactics.
Purely based on your responses in this thread, I very much doubt you were as reasonable as you say.

Masao Kurata wrote:
Not my war, my war's against carebears.
Sound's perfect, it's pretty obvious that's what gankers are.

Dom Arkaral wrote:
Lol last time I went to AG chan:
"Me: hi
You plebs: OMG HE HAS A MINING PERMIT. HE'S A SPY KICK HIM FOREVER

So that supports the fact you'll kick anyone even if they're only permit holders (which doesn't mean shiz really)
Well actually it means a fair bit. Not to mention that they have code members coming in to troll quite frequently, it's no surprise they have zero tolerance for code members showing up.

Permit holder =/= CODE. Member or New Order supporter...
Some folks just get it to get some peace

Edit: And I'm done as well, enjoy the buff Cool

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Berry Nice
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#306 - 2016-02-11 21:26:00 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Sound's perfect, it's pretty obvious that's what gankers are.


You seem to logically side with the gankers on this topic though, against your criticism of gankers. You say that "Changes should be made not because of how things are, but of how things would be." In fact, there is no counter to wreck shooting, and it was obviously broken and uncounterable, and was changed because it was so unfair and one sided. However, ganking is easily stoppable with a single person, let alone 5-6 people.

If there was as concerted an effort towards anti-ganking as there was towards ganking itself, the winner 100 times out of 100 would be anti-gankers as they have to do so much less than gankers themselves.

Being the good guy isn't profitable, nor should it be. Stopping things from happening isn't what eve was meant to be, and that is why so many fewer people anti-gank than gank.

If you watch anti-gankers, they don't fail because they're unable to succeed, it's because they're terrible players.

They don't understand game mechanics, they don't know how they can help, and they get discouraged by the inept and stupid leadership that drives them away.

There are three things as an anti-ganker you can do, and each one of them fundamentally hurts a gank fleet substantially to the point of failure. (And yet I never see any of this things actually attempted)
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#307 - 2016-02-12 11:54:02 UTC
Berry Nice wrote:
In fact, there is no counter to wreck shooting, and it was obviously broken and uncounterable, and was changed because it was so unfair and one sided.
Loot the wreck. it's a pretty good counter than seems to be working for most people.

Berry Nice wrote:
However, ganking is easily stoppable with a single person, let alone 5-6 people.
It's not though, is it. Let's see you stop a whole bunch of ganks "easily" on your own. Even with a massive pile of anti-gankers, usually it just means a few more bodies or a second run are needed.

Berry Nice wrote:
If there was as concerted an effort towards anti-ganking as there was towards ganking itself, the winner 100 times out of 100 would be anti-gankers as they have to do so much less than gankers themselves.
Prove it. Make the effort and prove that anti-ganking is as easy and consistent as you say, show me the balanced rewards, and I'll happily admit defeat. The reaslity is that anti-gankers aren't as organised because the players skilled enough to organise it know well enough that it's too badly balanced to be worthwhile.

Berry Nice wrote:
Being the good guy isn't profitable, nor should it be. Stopping things from happening isn't what eve was meant to be, and that is why so many fewer people anti-gank than gank.
It's a game. Good guy or bad guy, you should be rewarded for your effort and risk.

Berry Nice wrote:
If you watch anti-gankers, they don't fail because they're unable to succeed, it's because they're terrible players.

They don't understand game mechanics, they don't know how they can help, and they get discouraged by the inept and stupid leadership that drives them away.

There are three things as an anti-ganker you can do, and each one of them fundamentally hurts a gank fleet substantially to the point of failure. (And yet I never see any of this things actually attempted)
Once again, prove it. I see the the exact opposite way,that they are terrible players because they are unable to succeed. You seem to think it's super easy, so it shouldn't be too hard for you to prove it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#308 - 2016-02-12 12:29:12 UTC
Lucas Kell
The change went through, get over it or gtfo

There's nothing left to talk about here
CCPlease lock this tearnought

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#309 - 2016-02-12 13:22:37 UTC
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Lucas Kell
The change went through, get over it or gtfo

There's nothing left to talk about here
CCPlease lock this tearnought
There clearly is something for people to talk about hence the continued discussion (and the counter being planned by CCP). If you don't want to be part of it, then don't. Threads don't have to be locked just because you don't want to post in or read them.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#310 - 2016-02-12 13:55:53 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Lucas Kell
The change went through, get over it or gtfo

There's nothing left to talk about here
CCPlease lock this tearnought
There clearly is something for people to talk about hence the continued discussion (and the counter being planned by CCP). If you don't want to be part of it, then don't. Threads don't have to be locked just because you don't want to post in or read them.


This thread isn't about the change since page 5, it's now about anti-ganking and you telling people to prove you wrong.......

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#311 - 2016-02-12 15:02:46 UTC
Dom Arkaral wrote:
This thread isn't about the change since page 5, it's now about anti-ganking
The change directly affects anti-ganking so it follows. Again though, if it offends you so to read it, don't.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#312 - 2016-02-12 15:08:02 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
This thread isn't about the change since page 5, it's now about anti-ganking
The change directly affects anti-ganking so it follows. Again though, if it offends you so to read it, don't.

Anti-Ganking = saving the freighter
AG =/= killing that freighter's possessions

Lol

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#313 - 2016-02-12 16:01:57 UTC
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Anti-Ganking = saving the freighter
AG =/= killing that freighter's possessions
True enough. That means there are zero mechanics AGs can you to stand a reasonable chance of affecting gankers with a modicum of consistency. That's why as a last resort they volley the wreck.

Also, following your logic, ganking =/= looting a wreck, therefore prior to this change it took:

1+ players to loot vs. 1+ players to volley the wreck
however now it takes
1+ players to loot vs. 2+ players to volley the wreck

Imbalance.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#314 - 2016-02-12 16:04:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Dom Arkaral
Lucas Kell wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Anti-Ganking = saving the freighter
AG =/= killing that freighter's possessions
True enough. That means there are zero mechanics AGs can you to stand a reasonable chance of affecting gankers with a modicum of consistency. That's why as a last resort they volley the wreck.

Also, following your logic, ganking =/= looting a wreck, therefore prior to this change it took:

1+ players to loot vs. 1+ players to volley the wreck
however now it takes
1+ players to loot vs. 2+ players to volley the wreck

Imbalance.

Tell me, how many people did it take to get said loot? Aka kill the ship
Cool

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#315 - 2016-02-12 16:30:02 UTC
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Tell me, how many people did it take to get said loot? Aka kill the ship
Cool
LOL, so the way you are playing this is that if AGs show up and shoot at the gankers but the ship dies anyway, then they volley the loot off the field as a last resort, those are two separate actions, but if gankers gank a ship then one of the gankers ships who wasn't shooting the target goes and loots the loot, that is all part of the same action.

That's probably the best example of double standards I've seen in a long while. Either dealing with the loot is part of both playstyles, or neither.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#316 - 2016-02-12 16:35:57 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Tell me, how many people did it take to get said loot? Aka kill the ship
Cool
LOL, so the way you are playing this is that if AGs show up and shoot at the gankers but the ship dies anyway, then they volley the loot off the field as a last resort, those are two separate actions, but if gankers gank a ship then one of the gankers ships who wasn't shooting the target goes and loots the loot, that is all part of the same action.

That's probably the best example of double standards I've seen in a long while. Either dealing with the loot is part of both playstyles, or neither.

Drop the ball son, it's all ogre Lol

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#317 - 2016-02-12 16:47:45 UTC
I accept your admission of defeat.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#318 - 2016-02-12 17:04:40 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
I accept your admission of defeat.

LOL

prove it Blink

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#319 - 2016-02-12 17:04:49 UTC
I have been seriously considering giving you exact instructions to stop over 90% of freighter ganks. It is not very hard and demonstrates that you are just a bunch of miners and ratters with no ingenuity whatsoever.

But CCP is doing it for you and you would never show any humility anyway. No matter how much you would owe your new success to a ganker, you would never admit it, there would just be more gloating and I really hate skillless, clueless plebs gloating. So go back to your actual superpower: whining to CCP until they kill highsec pvp. Then you can enjoy your safe zone for a few months, get bored and quit EVE. Then as the ecosystem goes to hell with predation removed and more players quit, you can gloat about how you helped kill EVE.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#320 - 2016-02-12 17:17:14 UTC
Masao Kurata wrote:
I have been seriously considering giving you exact instructions to stop over 90% of freighter ganks. It is not very hard and demonstrates that you are just a bunch of miners and ratters with no ingenuity whatsoever.
Sure you are. I'm also sure that if you did, it would fall into the category "easier said than done" where you have a proposal that sounds great on paper but is nearly impossible to pull off with any effect in reality.

Masao Kurata wrote:
But CCP is doing it for you and you would never show any humility anyway. No matter how much you would owe your new success to a ganker, you would never admit it, there would just be more gloating and I really hate skillless, clueless plebs gloating.
Why would I need to show humility? I'm not an AG. I gank vastly more than I AG.

Masao Kurata wrote:
So go back to your actual superpower: whining to CCP until they kill highsec pvp. Then you can enjoy your safe zone for a few months, get bored and quit EVE. Then as the ecosystem goes to hell with predation removed and more players quit, you can gloat about how you helped kill EVE.
I don't want to rid highsec of PvP, you're just having an over the top knee-jerk reaction to the proposal for a discussion on balance. If anything I and pushing for more PvP as I want improved active mechanics for AGs to fight off gankers and better rewards to encourage them to do so. But I can assure you that if ganking were killed off I would still not get bored and quit. The forums would be slightly cleaner, and I wouldn't have to listen to so many people saying "OH THE TEARS!" every time someone said anything in local, but no, I would certainly nto get bored and quit. Mainly because I rarely undock a ship in highsec that isn't blinky red anyway.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.