These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 we grrrrgoons going to do?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Isaac Armer
The Soup Kitchen
#541 - 2016-04-21 19:10:36 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
]And they shouldn't be. You certainly shouldn't have to write software to remain competitive, which is what you are suggesting.


I respect that that's your opinion, but I disagree. A sandbox environment adds a lot of complexity making it a better game. You don't have to know how to write code. You just have to know how to leverage people in game who do. That's the beauty of the multiplayer aspect. This isn't call of duty.

Quote:
I know right? Which is why when you asked me that exact question I said yes. Once again, you're inability to read has nothing to do with me.

Isaac "I can't be bothered to read opposibng arguments yet still have the nerve to claim they are wrong" Armer, everyone.


I hear what you're saying. I disagree with it. I would respect what you're saying more if you weren't cherry picking 3rd party software. Your stance is hypocritical, which is why I can't respect it.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#542 - 2016-04-21 19:53:21 UTC
Darek Castigatus wrote:
Yes thats exactly what I'm saying, the only thing that had to happen was that the Imperium needed to show weakness, which they did when the viceroy program failed and again when LSV kicked them out of lowsec entirely. Look I dont doubt IWIs contributions have helped bring in a bunch of people who might otherwise have sat out the war but as soon as the blood hit the water something like this was going to happen, it was just a matter of when and how big.
It might be the case that they would have wanted to, but without the isk to do so they may not have actually done it. The wya I see it, if a dude can afford a trillion a week to pay for mercs then no group is safe, and there's no in game means to fight back.

Isaac Armer wrote:
I respect that that's your opinion, but I disagree. A sandbox environment adds a lot of complexity making it a better game. You don't have to know how to write code. You just have to know how to leverage people in game who do.
Sandboxes still have their boundaries. At the end of the day if it were fully open then there should be no rules. What people can do they should be able to, so bots should be fully allowed if your want a sandbox with no boundaries.

Isaac Armer wrote:
I hear what you're saying. I disagree with it. I would respect what you're saying more if you weren't cherry picking 3rd party software. Your stance is hypocritical, which is why I can't respect it.
But I'm not cherry picking, I'm prioritising. Like I said, I'd be happy to see all third party software banned, but some I give more effort in fighting than others based on the impact they have. If anything you are the one with the hypocritical stance, since you're happy to have bots banned, but not happy to have IWI banned. Why is that? They are both third party software and both undeniably give an advantage.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Isaac Armer
The Soup Kitchen
#543 - 2016-04-21 20:00:28 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Sandboxes still have their boundaries. At the end of the day if it were fully open then there should be no rules. What people can do they should be able to, so bots should be fully allowed if your want a sandbox with no boundaries.

But I'm not cherry picking, I'm prioritising. Like I said, I'd be happy to see all third party software banned, but some I give more effort in fighting than others based on the impact they have. If anything you are the one with the hypocritical stance, since you're happy to have bots banned, but not happy to have IWI banned. Why is that? They are both third party software and both undeniably give an advantage.


I'm 100% convinced you don't listen to yourself when you talk now. Bots aren't people playing in game. IWI gains 100% of isk by player donations to other players actively at a keyboard in game. They haven't earned a red cent outside of the game.

I will repeat that slower, since you seem to have a comprehension problem. As long as it's a player making the ISK in game through in game means (which IWI is, given 100% of ISK trades hands by active players in game) there is no problem. Following your logic, we should ban people from paying ISK for putting together a google doc spreadsheet for an ore buyback program, which is just as ridiculous as what you're saying.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#544 - 2016-04-21 20:25:39 UTC
Isaac Armer wrote:
I'm 100% convinced you don't listen to yourself when you talk now. Bots aren't people playing in game. IWI gains 100% of isk by player donations to other players actively at a keyboard in game. They haven't earned a red cent outside of the game.
Market bots earn 100% of their isk by players buying and selling their items in game. Even mining bots collect only resources which are then sold. And in ALL of those cases - including IWI - the gaining of the income is increased over a normal player by the use of the third party application. Without the application IWI would not make that much isk.

Isaac Armer wrote:
since you seem to have a comprehension problem
That means absolutely nothing coming from the player who has repeatedly argued against arguments I never made.

Isaac Armer wrote:
As long as it's a player making the ISK in game through in game means (which IWI is, given 100% of ISK trades hands by active players in game) there is no problem.
Oh, you mean like ISBoxer did for example? Oh wait.. Hell, try to make an EVE bank which allows characters to transfer isk to each other and charge them an isk fee for it, see how quickly you get shut down.

Isaac Armer wrote:
Following your logic, we should ban people from paying ISK for putting together a google doc spreadsheet for an ore buyback program, which is just as ridiculous as what you're saying.
Well since I've already agreed that all third party apps should be disallowed, that makes total sense. Again though the priority for their removal would be based on how much benefit they give and how available they are to other players, so I'd get rid of IWI before I get rid of ore buyback applications, but I'd get rid of ore buyback programs before I got rid of killboards for example.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Isaac Armer
The Soup Kitchen
#545 - 2016-04-21 20:44:39 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
even more stuff


1. market bots aren't players. They are computer programs interacting directly with the game client. IWI is real players interacting real time with zero computer program interfacing with the client. Try again.

2. ISBoxer is yet again a computer program interfacing with the client, not a player, again irrelevant to what IWI is doing.

3. Your argument that "all third party apps should be shut down" would destroy EVE as it is today. You're intelligent enough to know that that simply won't happen, so you're using that to try and justify your thinly hidden agenda of complaining about people in game who you haven't figured out how to beat yet.

Try again slugger.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#546 - 2016-04-21 21:48:58 UTC
Isaac Armer wrote:
stuff
Whatever way you swing it they are all third party applications designed to facilitate increased income. Stop being such a hypocrite.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Isaac Armer
The Soup Kitchen
#547 - 2016-04-21 21:59:20 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Whatever way you swing it they are all third party applications designed to facilitate increased income. Stop being such a hypocrite.


I support all of them being legal, as long as the ISK changes hands in game, no computer program is controlling a client, and no RMT is going on. How am I a hypocrite, exactly? Do you know what that word means?
Starrakatt
Empire Assault Corp
Dead Terrorists
#548 - 2016-04-22 01:31:19 UTC
You all are just feeding the troll, and he enjoys it.

Stop being puppets he strings along.

Do like I did.

Block him.

Join Celtic Anarchy!

Sneaky bastard.
Chewytowel Haklar
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#549 - 2016-04-22 01:37:34 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Isaac Armer wrote:
stuff
Whatever way you swing it they are all third party applications designed to facilitate increased income. Stop being such a hypocrite.


Perhaps you should stop being one as well? Your alliance was the one that started this major war, attracted these bankers attention after your own members pre-emptively hacked their IWI server. You are the reason Goons campaign into LoSec was lost, and why a now massive army is sitting in Goon space roflstomping it. If anything you look like a huge sore loser. Maybe you should admit that you guys screwed up majorly and cost your own alliance and the Goons everything they had going for them?

But nah, let's just pretend IWI are the big evil bad guys. I mean sure they can chose to fund whatever war they want, but if they do I suppose everyone can thank you for it.

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2016/04/21/eve-online-world-war-bee-mittani/3/
Josef Djugashvilis
#550 - 2016-04-22 07:22:33 UTC
The goons will not recover or have any meaningful future in Eve until Mittens is handed his cup of Hemlock.

Many of them know this, but are too scared to come out and say it in public for fear of been seen as 'disloyal' to the tribe.

This is not a signature.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#551 - 2016-04-22 07:36:26 UTC
are you saying the goons 0.0 dream is over?

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#552 - 2016-04-22 07:40:39 UTC
because the last guy that said that stopped playing when, in fact, our 0.0 dream was not quite over

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Geronimo McVain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#553 - 2016-04-22 07:46:40 UTC
What is the Mittani best in: Media war.

What is going in here: constant complaint over IWI. And declining the victorys of MBC because it is "only" because of the IWI money.

Here rockpapershotgun is a good article that shows the huge involvement of IWI but also shows that it's certainly not the only reason.

No matter whats your opinion of the war: it's good for EVE because there is a lot of movement and all of goon space is taken there are huge space areas that need new masters. So even if goon are done, and they are far from this, there will be war in north for a long time until it is all settled. The best thing, for eve, would be if the goon would pack and start somewhere else from scratch because that would stir up even more of Null. Constant denying of fun and just harrassing the winners on the other hand would be bad in the long run for both sides and Eve in general.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#554 - 2016-04-22 09:08:29 UTC
Isaac Armer wrote:
stuff
You support some third party programs but not others, hypocrite.

If you're going to completely ignore everything I say and keep stating the same BS, then I will too.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#555 - 2016-04-22 10:08:18 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
...If you're going to completely ignore everything I say and keep stating the same BS, then I will too.

Everyone has known this for a while.

You completely ignore what others say and keep stating the same BS.

Maybe now you've realized that you'll stop, but I doubt it.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#556 - 2016-04-22 11:41:02 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Everyone has known this for a while.

You completely ignore what others say and keep stating the same BS.

Maybe now you've realized that you'll stop, but I doubt it.
Except of course that's not what's happened at all. I read the questions, I give full answers, then people like Isaac completely ignore everything said and throw up another straw man. People like you then sit around chiming in with insults and memes. I'm up for a civil discussion, but apparently that's too difficult for many people on here.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#557 - 2016-04-22 12:41:46 UTC
And another war thread gets Lucas'd.

Not surprised.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Isaac Armer
The Soup Kitchen
#558 - 2016-04-22 13:02:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Isaac Armer
Lucas Kell wrote:
You support some third party programs but not others, hypocrite.

If you're going to completely ignore everything I say and keep stating the same BS, then I will too.


You're really stretching now mate. This is just getting sad. What third party programs, assuming they don't pass commands to a game client did I say I didn't support?

Are you a troll, really, really bad at propaganda, or just angry enough you need to argue online to get your rocks off? I'm genuinely curious.

I know how you'll respond. "but, you don't support bots, hypocrite!" If that's really all you have, give it a go bud.
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#559 - 2016-04-22 15:31:33 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Darek Castigatus wrote:
Yes thats exactly what I'm saying, the only thing that had to happen was that the Imperium needed to show weakness, which they did when the viceroy program failed and again when LSV kicked them out of lowsec entirely. Look I dont doubt IWIs contributions have helped bring in a bunch of people who might otherwise have sat out the war but as soon as the blood hit the water something like this was going to happen, it was just a matter of when and how big.
It might be the case that they would have wanted to, but without the isk to do so they may not have actually done it. The wya I see it, if a dude can afford a trillion a week to pay for mercs then no group is safe, and there's no in game means to fight back.


That's a fair point except for one thing, IWI have no reason to wardec anyone unless they specifically go out of their way to **** IWI off just like SMA did. Lenny only went ahead with the merc program because Eep and Ironbank said they would back him and why would they do that if he decided to dec someone who has done nothing to affect IWI in any way.

Youve been obsessing so much over the fact they CAN do this thing that you've been ignoring the factors governing if they WOULD do that thing. I shouldnt have to say this but IWI is in the business of making money and its the height of bad business practice to go around blowing up your customers when thats your overall objective. There has to be an overwhelmingly good reason to go against their interests like that and outside of cases where people deliberately poke the bear I just dont see that happening.

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#560 - 2016-04-22 16:07:02 UTC
Darek Castigatus wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Darek Castigatus wrote:
Yes thats exactly what I'm saying, the only thing that had to happen was that the Imperium needed to show weakness, which they did when the viceroy program failed and again when LSV kicked them out of lowsec entirely. Look I dont doubt IWIs contributions have helped bring in a bunch of people who might otherwise have sat out the war but as soon as the blood hit the water something like this was going to happen, it was just a matter of when and how big.
It might be the case that they would have wanted to, but without the isk to do so they may not have actually done it. The wya I see it, if a dude can afford a trillion a week to pay for mercs then no group is safe, and there's no in game means to fight back.


That's a fair point except for one thing, IWI have no reason to wardec anyone unless they specifically go out of their way to **** IWI off just like SMA did. Lenny only went ahead with the merc program because Eep and Ironbank said they would back him and why would they do that if he decided to dec someone who has done nothing to affect IWI in any way.

Youve been obsessing so much over the fact they CAN do this thing that you've been ignoring the factors governing if they WOULD do that thing. I shouldnt have to say this but IWI is in the business of making money and its the height of bad business practice to go around blowing up your customers when thats your overall objective. There has to be an overwhelmingly good reason to go against their interests like that and outside of cases where people deliberately poke the bear I just dont see that happening.

"have no reason" does not work in Eve Online, mate..... Reason is always here: 'wreck their dreams' CCP(c)

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"