These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#321 - 2016-02-12 17:47:49 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
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.


Not at all. That said, you would have to exhibit some minimal effort in flying spaceships, less than ganking requires though.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#322 - 2016-02-12 18:49:16 UTC
Masao Kurata wrote:
Not at all. That said, you would have to exhibit some minimal effort in flying spaceships, less than ganking requires though.
Indeed, and you will keep saying that and keep saying "oh but I'm not going to tell AGs how, but if they knew, they'd be able to do it easily" and this will continue until the end of time because the reality is that you'd state something that everyone including the AGs already know but simply isn't feasible. It's quite simple mate, if you want to prove that playing as an AG is easy, go right ahead, if not then it's plainly obvious it's because you can't. Without that, being that I have experience in both ganking and anti-ganking, I'll stick with my original opinion that it's massively unbalanced in favour of ganking, which is further supported by the number of players willing to participate in each.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#323 - 2016-02-12 18:53:15 UTC
Of course it's feasible, but even if I wasn't quitting EVE I wouldn't do it myself. Killing carebears is the one true cause in this game.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#324 - 2016-02-12 18:55:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Masao Kurata wrote:
Of course it's feasible, but even if I wasn't quitting EVE I wouldn't do it myself. Killing carebears is the one true cause in this game.
Exactly, and since gankers quite clearly are carebears, you should have no problem becoming an AG.

Ed: I love by the way how you're literally going to ragequit because they are adding a bit of EHP to freighters, and you have the nerve to claim that AGs failing is down to effort.

(and by "literally" I of course mean "not" since nobody quits EVE, they just threaten to when they have a tantrum).

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Belligerent Undesirables
#325 - 2016-02-12 19:12:14 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Masao Kurata wrote:
Of course it's feasible, but even if I wasn't quitting EVE I wouldn't do it myself. Killing carebears is the one true cause in this game.
Exactly, and since gankers quite clearly are carebears, you should have no problem becoming an AG.

Ed: I love by the way how you're literally going to ragequit because they are adding a bit of EHP to freighters, and you have the nerve to claim that AGs failing is down to effort.

(and by "literally" I of course mean "not" since nobody quits EVE, they just threaten to when they have a tantrum).


Let it go

I think you're not talking about the wreck hp buff anymore Lucas
Don't make ISD lock this one too 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

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#326 - 2016-02-12 19:32:27 UTC
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Let it go

I think you're not talking about the wreck hp buff anymore Lucas
Of course I am, I'm talking about how the wreck HP buff negatively affects a style of play. It's nothing to do with me if gankers want to keep running in slinging insults around, making claims they refuse to prove and derailing the conversation.

And once again, you are choosing to be a part of the thread. Stop trying to further derail it just because you don't like it being open.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Belligerent Undesirables
#327 - 2016-02-12 19:36:06 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Let it go

I think you're not talking about the wreck hp buff anymore Lucas
Of course I am, I'm talking about how the wreck HP buff negatively affects a style of play. It's nothing to do with me if gankers want to keep running in slinging insults around, making claims they refuse to prove and derailing the conversation.

And once again, you are choosing to be a part of the thread. Stop trying to further derail it just because you don't like it being open.

You can't prove the gankers false either
You keep sending the ball when you lack an answer

We have stats that you turn away like a true antiganker.

I'm done here,
Praise James o7

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

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist

Globby
Never Ignorant Gettin' Goals Accomplished
Gimme Da Loot
#328 - 2016-02-13 17:24:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Globby
Lucas Kell wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Let it go

I think you're not talking about the wreck hp buff anymore Lucas
Of course I am, I'm talking about how the wreck HP buff negatively affects a style of play. It's nothing to do with me if gankers want to keep running in slinging insults around, making claims they refuse to prove and derailing the conversation.

And once again, you are choosing to be a part of the thread. Stop trying to further derail it just because you don't like it being open.


I'll post a couple undeniable facts for you:

Wreck shooting was an incredibly low barrier to entry (15 minute alt) method that had absolutely no counterplay unless the pilot made a very stupid and hard to make mistake. It was a method that consistently allowed a 2 million isk thrasher to deny hundreds of billions of loot that 15-40 people worked together to achieve. It was a punishment that could have completely broke the freighter ganking game.

Wreck shooting was absolutely in need of a nerf, and it was nerfed because it makes no sense to have one guy be able to thwart the efforts of 20 guys.

@Lucas Kell I'm not going to speak up to how antigankers could still (very much so) cost effectively wreck shoot and deny hundreds of billions of loot. It just costs a reasonable amount to do and requires you to bring more than one guy (more like 2). It is still disproportionately more cost effective than ganking though for (loot destroyed)/(ship cost). (I'm not in the business of helping my competition.)
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#329 - 2016-02-13 18:03:52 UTC
Globby wrote:
I'll post a couple undeniable facts for you:
Thanks, although your definition of undeniable is different from most people's.

Globby wrote:
Wreck shooting was an incredibly low barrier to entry (15 minute alt) method that had absolutely no counterplay unless the pilot made a very stupid and hard to make mistake. It was a method that consistently allowed a 2 million isk thrasher to deny hundreds of billions of loot that 15-40 people worked together to achieve. It was a punishment that could have completely broke the freighter ganking game.
And a wreck looter could counter this by simply looting the wreck faster than the guy shooting it. It was the EVE equivalent of a quick draw. You're making out like you lost all of your loot to a bunch of 15 minute thrasher alts, which you and I both know is complete rubbish. Following the change two people now need to coordinate a strike and both land the hit before the one person can loot it. That is a considerably harder task.

Globby wrote:
Wreck shooting was absolutely in need of a nerf, and it was nerfed because it makes no sense to have one guy be able to thwart the efforts of 20 guys.
They never could thwart the efforts of 20 guys. The gankers aren't looters, they are combat pilots. To thwart them, the one player would have to be able to stop the gank, which they can't. No, the one thrasher pilot could thwart the efforts of the one looter, that was all.

Globby wrote:
@Lucas Kell I'm not going to speak up to how antigankers could still (very much so) cost effectively wreck shoot and deny hundreds of billions of loot. It just costs a reasonable amount to do and requires you to bring more than one guy (more like 2). It is still disproportionately more cost effective than ganking though for (loot destroyed)/(ship cost). (I'm not in the business of helping my competition.)
It's quite ironic you talking about the value of the loot in the wreck like it should be a factor, when you spend so much time telling gank victims that they shouldn't expect to live just because their ship is valuable. This is exactly the same thing. You're saying "my loot is valuable, therefore it should cost you a lot to destroy". Ridiculous.

Clearly deniable.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Globby
Never Ignorant Gettin' Goals Accomplished
Gimme Da Loot
#330 - 2016-02-13 18:52:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Globby
Your naivety is showing.

*Loot mechanics do not allow you to loot a wreck for a tick or two after it spawns. It is impossible to beat a insta-lock thrasher to the punch. It is 100% game mechanically impossible if the wreck shooter is competent. The wreck isn't 'openable' for one to two seconds, but is completely shootable. There is no quickdraw, it's dependant on whether or not the wreckshooter is competent.

I guess you have a point, with respects to them not stopping the gank, but there was absolutely no way to stop them from shooting the wreck. I've laid out the 100% sure fire way to shoot a wreck without any counter play many times.

I'm not saying it should cost a lot to destroy, I'm just saying that there is a balance to what a 15 minute alt in a 2 million isk thrasher should be able to do (ie not destroy/deny hundreds of billions in isk over 4 months.)

1) Wreck shooting was an incredibly low barrier to entry (15 minute alt) method that had absolutely no counterplay unless the pilot made a very stupid and hard to make mistake. (see * for details)

2) It was a method that consistently allowed a 2 million isk thrasher on an alt to deny hundreds of billions of loot that 15-40 people worked together to achieve.

3) It was a punishment that could have completely broke the freighter ganking game.

Please point me to which of the three numbers above are incorrect.

Lucas Kell wrote:
It's quite ironic you talking about the value of the loot in the wreck like it should be a factor, when you spend so much time telling gank victims that they shouldn't expect to live just because their ship is valuable.


I don't say that, in fact I say the opposite, don't fly a capital ship without support. If 20+ guys want you dead and you're alone, the game shouldn't continue to make it harder for an actual organization to capitalize on a single guy's stupidity. (ESPECIALLY WHEN DSTS AND JUMP FREIGHTERS ARE NEARLY 100% SECURE HAULING TENS OF BILLIONS LOL)

lucas kell wrote:
You're saying "my loot is valuable, therefore it should cost you a lot to destroy". Ridiculous.


It's actually not what I said, but yeah keep distorting the argument. You fail to realize wreck shooting is still completely viable, it just is a little harder to do now that it can't be done by a 15 minute alt in a 2 million isk thrasher.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#331 - 2016-02-13 19:20:35 UTC
Globby wrote:
*Loot mechanics do not allow you to loot a wreck for a tick or two after it spawns. It is impossible to beat a insta-lock thrasher to the punch. It is 100% game mechanically impossible if the wreck shooter is competent. The wreck isn't 'openable' for one to two seconds, but is completely shootable. There is no quickdraw, it's dependant on whether or not the wreckshooter is competent.
And yet, still gankers managed to obtain the vast majority of their loot. Funny that.

Globby wrote:
I guess you have a point, with respects to them not stopping the gank, but there was absolutely no way to stop them from shooting the wreck. I've laid out the 100% sure fire way to shoot a wreck without any counter play many times.
What do you mean there's no way to stop them? You could gank them, surely? I mean seeing a thrasher on grid with your target should give you a good idea of what happens next. You opting to perform a gank while there is an obvious wreck popper about is about the equivalent level of competency of a freighter fitting for cargo, filling up and hitting autopilot.

Globby wrote:
I'm not saying it should cost a lot to destroy, I'm just saying that there is a balance to what a 15 minute alt in a 2 million isk thrasher should be able to do (ie not destroy/deny hundreds of billions in isk over 4 months.)
Yes you are, that's exactly what you are saying. You quite clearly said that when you complained " It was a method that consistently allowed a 2 million isk thrasher to deny hundreds of billions of loot". You use the argument that the value of the target is irrelevant to the level of isk and effort used to destroy it, and I'm simply reiterating that.

Globby wrote:
1) Wreck shooting was an incredibly low barrier to entry (15 minute alt) method that had absolutely no counterplay unless the pilot made a very stupid and hard to make mistake. (see * for details)

2) It was a method that consistently allowed a 2 million isk thrasher on an alt to deny hundreds of billions of loot that 15-40 people worked together to achieve.

3) It was a punishment that could have completely broke the freighter ganking game.

Please point me to which of the three numbers above are incorrect.
All three. 1 because it can be countered in multiple ways with ease, 2 because the value of the loot is irrelevant and the wreck shooter didn't change what the 15-40 people worked to achieve, they destroyed what one looter tried to achieve, and 3 because it's been around for ages and hasn't shown signs of even remotely weakening ganking let alone breaking it.

Globby wrote:
I don't say that, in fact I say the opposite, don't fly a capital ship without support. If 20+ guys want you dead and you're alone, the game shouldn't continue to make it harder for an actual organization to capitalize on a single guy's stupidity. (ESPECIALLY WHEN DSTS AND JUMP FREIGHTERS ARE NEARLY 100% SECURE HAULING TENS OF BILLIONS LOL)

It's actually not what I said, but yeah keep distorting the argument. You fail to realize wreck shooting is still completely viable, it just is a little harder to do now that it can't be done by a 15 minute alt in a 2 million isk thrasher.
It's exactly what you said, and you are repeating that here, otherwise the value of the thrasher would not be mentioned.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Globby
Never Ignorant Gettin' Goals Accomplished
Gimme Da Loot
#332 - 2016-02-13 19:45:08 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
And yet, still gankers managed to obtain the vast majority of their loot. Funny that.

How is this relevant? Do you have any evidence? Why even post something so incorrect and refutable?

Lucas Cuck wrote:
What do you mean there's no way to stop them? You could gank them, surely? I mean seeing a thrasher on grid with your target should give you a good idea of what happens next. You opting to perform a gank while there is an obvious wreck popper about is about the equivalent level of competency of a freighter fitting for cargo, filling up and hitting autopilot.


This isn't how it works, and I'll write it out once again, how impossible it is to counter.

The thrasher sits at a ping, or bounces pings until the gankers land on target. This means he isn't killable if he is remotely competent up until the gank starts to happen. As soon as the gank starts to happen, he warps down to the target and holds his session time invulnerability (10 seconds.) Either the freighter dies and he locks and shoots the wreck before anyone else can kill him, or the gankers fail and there was no point for a wreck shooter anyway.

Lucas Kell wrote:
You use the argument that the value of the target is irrelevant to the level of isk and effort used to destroy it, and I'm simply reiterating that.


Killing a target with a bunch of loot in it isn't irresponsible, hauling with 20 bil through a known dangerous system is. There is a huuuuge difference between these two attitudes.

Lucas Kell wrote:
All three. 1 because it can be countered in multiple ways with ease, 2 because the value of the loot is irrelevant and the wreck shooter didn't change what the 15-40 people worked to achieve, they destroyed what one looter tried to achieve, and 3 because it's been around for ages and hasn't shown signs of even remotely weakening ganking let alone breaking it.

1) it can't, read above. give an example (hint: probers don't work, shooting it before it shoots the wreck after landing is impossible due to session timer and tick rates, smartbombs are inviable because you'd have to cover every single entrance angle and it would take like 40 dudes in battleships to MAYBE to it)
2)The gankers all work together to destroy and loot freighters. Looting freighters is important to continue ganking, otherwise you go bankrupt. They killed it to loot it, and if you couldn't loot any freighters there would be almost no suicide ganking.
3) Sure it's been around since forever, but it only recently started happening (6 months or so) But it has indeed, destroyed hundreds of billions. There were only two people regularly doing it, imagine if there were 5 or 6.

lk wrote:
It's exactly what you said, and you are repeating that here, otherwise the value of the thrasher would not be mentioned.

The point to my argument is that a single 15 minute alt in a 2 million isk thrasher can do something that is 100% uncounterable (read above, don't debate this point without providing evidence like the last two times) and deny hundreds of billions of loot, and if there were enough of them ganking would die.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#333 - 2016-02-13 20:58:46 UTC
Globby wrote:
How is this relevant? Do you have any evidence? Why even post something so incorrect and refutable?
Pretty much down to anecdotal evidence and first hand knowledge. Doesn't to stop you making wild claims that anti-ganking is easy, and that no competent player has ever attempted it. The thing is , miniluv are very proud of their self sufficiency and talk about their paying out 20 plex a month to top pilots or whatever it is, same with most gankers claiming they are making plenty of isk, until of course someone that;s not a ganker makes such a claim, then you're all suddenly poor.

Globby wrote:
This isn't how it works, and I'll write it out once again, how impossible it is to counter.

The thrasher sits at a ping, or bounces pings until the gankers land on target. This means he isn't killable if he is remotely competent up until the gank starts to happen. As soon as the gank starts to happen, he warps down to the target and holds his session time invulnerability (10 seconds.) Either the freighter dies and he locks and shoots the wreck before anyone else can kill him, or the gankers fail and there was no point for a wreck shooter anyway.
And yet, when watching this very thing occur, I've seen the thrasher get popped on many occasions, and I've seen the loot taken on many occasions. In fact the thing I see the least of is the wreck popping. Oh I supposed once again that comes down to your unsubstantiated claim that every AG is completely incompetent. Also, warping doesn't give you a session timer. Oh, and since you suggest to anti-gankers to kill the gankers while they bounce safes, you can hardly use that one as an excuse either.

The reality is this is much like the complaining about gate campers. It's a race to the button, and sometimes you lose. Well, it was a race to the button, now it's 2 people's coordination vs one person looting a wreck. You got your change to make wrecks almost immune to interference, now prepare for he nerfs to balance it.

Globby wrote:
Killing a target with a bunch of loot in it isn't irresponsible, hauling with 20 bil through a known dangerous system is. There is a huuuuge difference between these two attitudes.
No but killiing that target with a bunch of AGs trying to volley your loot is. It's called risk mate, and it exists in almost all of the mechanics.

Globby wrote:
1) it can't, read above. give an example (hint: probers don't work, shooting it before it shoots the wreck after landing is impossible due to session timer and tick rates, smartbombs are inviable because you'd have to cover every single entrance angle and it would take like 40 dudes in battleships to MAYBE to it)
2)The gankers all work together to destroy and loot freighters. Looting freighters is important to continue ganking, otherwise you go bankrupt. They killed it to loot it, and if you couldn't loot any freighters there would be almost no suicide ganking.
3) Sure it's been around since forever, but it only recently started happening (6 months or so) But it has indeed, destroyed hundreds of billions. There were only two people regularly doing it, imagine if there were 5 or 6.

1. It can
2. The gankers gank and one person cannot stop that. One person loots and one person can (or could) stop that. People have always been able to do it and gankers still managed to loot a huge number of freighters, so obviously there wouldn't be almost no suicide ganking. What this is almost none of is anti-gankers since it' insanely difficult and completely unrewarding.
3. I'm sure it has destroyed a tiny fraction of the amount looted..

Globby wrote:
The point to my argument is that a single 15 minute alt in a 2 million isk thrasher can do something that is 100% uncounterable (read above, don't debate this point without providing evidence like the last two times) and deny hundreds of billions of loot, and if there were enough of them ganking would die.
Except it's not. The point to your argument is that you want easy risk-free isk and you get upset at the thought of not getting that. You're a carebear, plain and simple. EVE is not supposed to be easy, get used to it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Globby
Never Ignorant Gettin' Goals Accomplished
Gimme Da Loot
#334 - 2016-02-13 21:44:56 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Pretty much down to anecdotal evidence and first hand knowledge. Doesn't to stop you making wild claims that anti-ganking is easy, and that no competent player has ever attempted it. The thing is , miniluv are very proud of their self sufficiency and talk about their paying out 20 plex a month to top pilots or whatever it is, same with most gankers claiming they are making plenty of isk, until of course someone that;s not a ganker makes such a claim, then you're all suddenly poor.


Totally irrelevant to the point at hand, but yeah keep claiming i say things I don't say at all, or claim I say things that other people have said.

lucas dumb wrote:
Also, warping doesn't give you a session timer. Oh, and since you suggest to anti-gankers to kill the gankers while they bounce safes, you can hardly use that one as an excuse either.


1) You again, ignore the crux of the issue and voice your anecdotal evidence as a contrary to the game mechanics which are absolute. According to game mechanics, as long as the thrasher is competant (which is REALLY easy in this situation) the thrasher NEVER loses. Your lack of proper arguments against it shows that.
It is a fact that:
After landing from warp, as long as you do nothing your ship is invulnerable and unlockable for 10 seconds.
A wreck is unable to be looted for a minimum of two seconds (a lot more in tidi and lag, which generally happens during ganks).
A wreck can get killed before a looter even has a chance to open the wreck itself.

ALL OF THESE CAN BE TESTED ON YOUR OWN AS PROOF.

lk wrote:
Oh, and since you suggest to anti-gankers to kill the gankers while they bounce safes, you can hardly use that one as an excuse either.

I never said this, why do you keep lying?

"No but killiing that target with a bunch of AGs trying to volley your loot is. It's called risk mate, and it exists in almost all of the mechanics."
but there is no way to prevent this other than secretly killing things without anyone knowing?

lk wrote:

The gankers gank and one person cannot stop that. One person loots and one person can (or could) stop that. People have always been able to do it and gankers still managed to loot a huge number of freighters, so obviously there wouldn't be almost no suicide ganking. What this is almost none of is anti-gankers since it' insanely difficult and completely unrewarding.

The only time looting succeeded is when there were no wreck shooters or they screwed up. There was no 'outplaying' wreck shooters, and you continue to ignore that argument and post lies and falsities about it. Give me a counter baby and i'll refute it with knowledge from actual game experience.

lk wrote:
Except it's not. The point to your argument is that you want easy risk-free isk and you get upset at the thought of not getting that. You're a carebear, plain and simple. EVE is not supposed to be easy, get used to it.


this guy lol

You're so out of touch and don't actually argue. If I didn't know any better I would just assume you were trolling but unfortunately I'm quite aware of your intelligence.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#335 - 2016-02-13 22:05:37 UTC
Globby wrote:
Totally irrelevant to the point at hand, but yeah keep claiming i say things I don't say at all, or claim I say things that other people have said.
Lol, gankers making isk hand of fist is irrelevant to the balance of gankers. Good one.

Globby wrote:
1) You again, ignore the crux of the issue and voice your anecdotal evidence as a contrary to the game mechanics which are absolute. According to game mechanics, as long as the thrasher is competant (which is REALLY easy in this situation) the thrasher NEVER loses. Your lack of proper arguments against it shows that.
It is a fact that:
After landing from warp, as long as you do nothing your ship is invulnerable and unlockable for 10 seconds.
A wreck is unable to be looted for a minimum of two seconds (a lot more in tidi and lag, which generally happens during ganks).
A wreck can get killed before a looter even has a chance to open the wreck itself.

ALL OF THESE CAN BE TESTED ON YOUR OWN AS PROOF.
Actually, I simply stated the fact that wreck looters can and do get popped, and that your reasoning for being unable to was incorrect. The fact remains that the moment they are able to take any action, so are you. If it were possible to with 100% certainty destroy every wreck, that would have been done consistenly for a long time. However it isn't, it's a small (and now much smaller) chance to destroy the wreck if and only if the gankers choose to gank with you around.

Globby wrote:
I never said this, why do you keep lying?
It's constantly being claimed that the gankers can just be killed, like it's that easy. Yet now, you destroying one single destroyer is apparently too much.

Globby wrote:
but there is no way to prevent this other than secretly killing things without anyone knowing?
Obviously yes, as some players manage to prevent it. You can volley the ship of the field, you can simply loot the wreck first, you can avoid the gank while the loot popper is there. Hell, you could infiltrate the anti-gank group with a 15 minute old alt, say "I'll pop the wreck!" then don't and run away laughing.

Globby wrote:
The only time looting succeeded is when there were no wreck shooters or they screwed up. There was no 'outplaying' wreck shooters, and you continue to ignore that argument and post lies and falsities about it. Give me a counter baby and i'll refute it with knowledge from actual game experience.
Wait, so you mean all of those times I was present for a gank, there was a loot popper on field and they got the wreck but not before the looter managed to nab the loot, you're saying those times the loot actually got popped and what, the looter quickly ran off and bought the lost loot to cover his failure? You realise you;re not the only one with game experience, right?

Tsk tsk, personal attacks to boot. Get better arguments and you won't need to resort to such measures.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Belligerent Undesirables
#336 - 2016-02-13 22:36:25 UTC
[quote=Lucas Kell]
just shut up dude, no one cares

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

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist

Globby
Never Ignorant Gettin' Goals Accomplished
Gimme Da Loot
#337 - 2016-02-13 23:01:22 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Lol, gankers making isk hand of fist is irrelevant to the balance of gankers. Good one.


We're talking about Wreck EHP, and how thrashers one shotting wrecks without a counter is unbalanced and was rightfully changed. Fixing something stupid broken isn't determined by who is affected or what is being screwed over.

Also, I need not remind you that if everyone instead of ganking ratted in nullsec at the end of the day they'd all walk out with considerably more money than if they had spent it ganking even very profitable freighters.

lk wrote:
Actually, I simply stated the fact that wreck looters can and do get popped, and that your reasoning for being unable to was incorrect. The fact remains that the moment they are able to take any action, so are you. If it were possible to with 100% certainty destroy every wreck, that would have been done consistenly for a long time. However it isn't, it's a small (and now much smaller) chance to destroy the wreck if and only if the gankers choose to gank with you around.

They misplayed it. Please think of a gameplay counter to the situation two posts above and come back to me. Just because some guys suck at doing something doesn't mean it's balanced and there is counter-play.

lk wrote:
It's constantly being claimed that the gankers can just be killed, like it's that easy. Yet now, you destroying one single destroyer is apparently too much.


Like I said, you ignore the argument, yet again and post nonsense. I told you there is no counter, gave you a 100% sure fire recipe to succeed 100% of the time, and you have yet to post a counter, because it doesn't exist. You are consistently wrong on game mechanic issues and have definitely lost all credibility here.

lk wrote:
but there is no way to prevent this other than secretly killing things without anyone knowing?
Obviously yes, as some players manage to prevent it. You can volley the ship of the field, you can simply loot the wreck first, you can avoid the gank while the loot popper is there. Hell, you could infiltrate the anti-gank group with a 15 minute old alt, say "I'll pop the wreck!" then don't and run away laughing.

lk wrote:
Wait, so you mean all of those times I was present for a gank, there was a loot popper on field and they got the wreck but not before the looter managed to nab the loot, you're saying those times the loot actually got popped and what, the looter quickly ran off and bought the lost loot to cover his failure? You realise you;re not the only one with game experience, right?


Except that, hey guess what, this just means the wreck shooter messed up.

Do this before you reply:

1) Re-read my previous post and read the little bit of how wreck shooting works, and how people shoot wrecks. Give me a counter gankers could do to stop this from happening.
2) Test each of the 'facts' you don't believe on sisi.
3) Don't post 'anecdotes' or 'first hand experiences' as a response to dismiss reality.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#338 - 2016-02-13 23:55:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Globby wrote:
We're talking about Wreck EHP, and how thrashers one shotting wrecks without a counter is unbalanced and was rightfully changed. Fixing something stupid broken isn't determined by who is affected or what is being screwed over.

Also, I need not remind you that if everyone instead of ganking ratted in nullsec at the end of the day they'd all walk out with considerably more money than if they had spent it ganking even very profitable freighters.
Except the obvipous counters of course.

And if you performed anti-ganking, you'd be completely broke, yet you seem to think that doesn't need any balance passes.

Globby wrote:
They misplayed it. Please think of a gameplay counter to the situation two posts above and come back to me. Just because some guys suck at doing something doesn't mean it's balanced and there is counter-play.
See, this is always the way with people like you. You lose and it's unfair, couldn't be helped, clearly the system is broken. They lose, it's because they were incompetent. It's laughable.

Globby wrote:
I told you there is no counter
And were wrong.

Globby wrote:
Except that, hey guess what, this just means the wreck shooter messed up.
See above. This is just your bias showing, nothing more. In your mind you are perfect so beating you is proof of a flaw, but your enemy is incompetent, so them failing is entirely their fault. You seriously need to get over yourself. I trust CCP to balance out the system based on the facts, not on your twisted perception.

Globby wrote:
Do this before you reply:

1) Re-read my previous post and read the little bit of how wreck shooting works, and how people shoot wrecks. Give me a counter gankers could do to stop this from happening.
2) Test each of the 'facts' you don't believe on sisi.
3) Don't post 'anecdotes' or 'first hand experiences' as a response to dismiss reality.
Do this before you reply:
1) Understand that you losing isn't a sign of a flawed system, and that risk is an inherent part of the game for most people, and should be for you too.
2) Look objectively at how difficult both ganking and anti-ganking are and their relative reward structures and make reasoned, unbiased criticisms
3) Chill out brother, it's just a game.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Globby
Never Ignorant Gettin' Goals Accomplished
Gimme Da Loot
#339 - 2016-02-14 19:09:08 UTC
You still haven't given me a counter. Give me a counter, anything at all. Please give me a counter play and I'll tell you how fundamentally wrong you are. I've been asking for three posts and you've still yet to post a single one.

Your entire argument is just "but you said this" when I never said it, or "your ganker bias is showing" without actually debating the arguments themselves.

I want to know your mindset here, because I'm genuinely interested. You either 1) know you're wrong, and you're still just sitting here 'trolling' and pretending to be dense, or 2) you're genuinely ignorant of game mechanics and too dense to accept that you're wrong and you're talking about irrelevancies to conceal this.
Globby
Never Ignorant Gettin' Goals Accomplished
Gimme Da Loot
#340 - 2016-02-14 19:22:12 UTC
"Hmmm, he said something entirely correct so I'm going to completely ignore what he said and talk about something he didn't say, but I'm going to claim he said to save face."

-And if you performed anti-ganking, you'd be completely broke, yet you seem to think that doesn't need any balance passes.
- Doesn't to stop you making wild claims that anti-ganking is easy, and that no competent player has ever attempted it.
-Oh, and since you suggest to anti-gankers to kill the gankers while they bounce safes, you can hardly use that one as an excuse either.
-It's quite ironic you talking about the value of the loot in the wreck like it should be a factor, when you spend so much time telling gank victims that they shouldn't expect to live just because their ship is valuable.



"I'm going to make baseless claims based on (probably false) anecdotal evidence and talk about things that are impossible to debate to further conceal my naivety."

-Except the obvipous counters of course. (x10)
-Wait, so you mean all of those times I was present for a gank...
-Pretty much down to anecdotal evidence and first hand knowledge.
-And yet, when watching this very thing occur, I've seen the thrasher get popped on many occasions, and I've seen the loot taken on many occasions.
-And yet, still gankers managed to obtain the vast majority of their loot. Funny that.



"I'm going to say something completely incorrect and refuse to provide any logic or proof that it is correct. I'm not even going to test it myself."

-Except the obvipous counters of course.
-You can volley the ship of the field
-you can simply loot the wreck first
-you can avoid the gank while the loot popper is there
-Hell, you could infiltrate the anti-gank group with a 15 minute old alt, say "I'll pop the wreck!" then don't and run away laughing.



"muh bias"

-See, this is always the way with people like you. You lose and it's unfair, couldn't be helped, clearly the system is broken. They lose, it's because they were incompetent. It's laughable.
-See above. This is just your bias showing, nothing more.
-You seriously need to get over yourself. I trust CCP to balance out the system based on the facts, not on your twisted perception.
-Chill out brother, it's just a game.



"Let me post any kind of logic or game mechanic that could counter wreck shooting at all, instead of spreading lies, misinformation, and ignorance to everyone reading these forums."

- ?