EVE General Discussion

Would you say that if more supply was available it would increase trading competition?

Would you say that the aspect of suicide ganking you seem to profit from both as a "vulture" looter and a station trader bias your opinion?



Destruction is helpful it does generate demand, doesn't have to suicide ganking and again I beleive there is more significant chaos that is contributing to these things in other PvP arenas alone. And I'm advocating change the conflict systems to help promote this destruction.

The idea that it doesn't remove competition however is not. You are simply representing a one sided argument to this. My beleif due to selfish interests as a station trader and wanting to remove competition from your point of view.

Terrible players ruin the experience of themselves. There's no cure for that.

It's nice of you to mention my manifesto, but it should be noted that there's nothing whatsoever in it about providing additional protection for people who disregard warning messages. It does have scope for adding more warnings, though.

Because it is fun? And your argument doesn't really hold true because it assumes a kind of balance that simply doesn't exist in EVE: bigger isn't better; more expensive isn't more powerful; marginal improvement comes at a huge cost. Again, the fact that you can nuke huge assets with a very small investment is very deliberate part of the balance — it means you have to actually play (a little) smart rather than just buy your way out of trouble.

Oh, and the asset holder trying to “maximise his role for purpose” is pretty much the same thing as him failing his risk analysis. In almost all cases, his maximisation effort stops at “cramming the maximum amount of crap into the ship” without doing the second, far more important part: ”…that the ship can safely handle without turning into a loot piñata”.

No, I'm not. I'm saying that if you load your ship up with shiny stuff and don't adopt strategies to protect that stuff, you are failing your risk analysis, so it is hardly surprising (and most certainly not an issue) if someone comes along and robs you.

Sure. Doesn't change the fact that the targets are the ones making things easy for the attackers, when they could equally well make it hard for them. I'm also saying that, in spite of this, ganks are rather rare these days: as mentioned elsehwere, you could make a pretty penny stealing gank loot back in the day because it happened with some regularity — these days, it's not worth the (significant) waiting time.
Problem is: stating that ganking is a problem is not an attempt at seeing equality — it's demanding further inequality in favour of the victims based on absolutely nothing in the way of a rational argument. The actual problem is that the victims refuse to take the matter of security into their own hands and then blame everything and everyone but themselves for that failure. If actual equality was the goal, then ganking would be significanly buffed… and I get the feeling that this isn't the goal for the gank whiners.
Ehm… make up your mind? You say that I'm wrong and then you say the exact same thing I'm saying. So which one is it? Am I wrong or is it the target's fault?

I know new players who started doing exactly that.

Can flipping and ganking.

We need more of these players and less carebears.

So, OP...How's all that GTC-financed ISK working out for you?

/Me giggles....Locator agent running

Is urp-splosion tyme naow?

No. You struck a whole lot of nothing with your fallacies and faulty suppositions. Just because you didn't like the answers doesn't mean the questions are unanswered or avoided.

If you simply don't understand the answers, just say so.

Well we both know then that the reason why I use a forum alt then is to avoid the meta gaming malicious strikes due to posting on the forum then don't we.

This is usually because "knuckle scraping" types use the opportunity to grief in this way to demonstrate their point as opposed to debate. So yes, I'm intelligently avoiding that hassle. See above for case and point (though might be humour of course).

If the General discussion could afford a serious discussion with an expectation of "mature" participation, it might not be an issue and your point might be valid. Unfortunatley its not, and your naive propoganda campaign is therefore not helpfull. Especially when you tend to simply use it purely for a spam alternative to points you don't like.

Also, if the CSM can avoid having to declare names in their minutes to avoid drama, I don't see why the forums should not be afforded a similar purpose.

Done.
If you don't understand the answers, just say so, and ask for clarification.

And I'm currently happy with both the population and level of enjoyment, and I'm down in Nullsec which is plenty more dangerous than Hi-sec. We don't want people like you numbing this game down for the new generation because you think its the fun and right thing to do - it isn't. Stop complaining and find solutions to your own problems instead of whining about ship losses that could EASILY be avoided.