EVE General Discussion

"Adapt or die" only works when the option to adapt remains on the table. If high-sec aggression (the basis of the topic by the way) is removed entirely, then I'm not entirely sure what I'd be adapting to at that point.

What you see as much-needed balance changes, I see as a gradual but intentional decline that the game has been undergoing. I don't know how long you've been playing, but to put things in perspective, it was much easier to suicide-gank five years ago than it is today. Suicide-ganking was also much less common, because much fewer people did stupid stuff like haul stacks of officer gear in an untanked haulers on autopilot.

And therein lies the realization you must make: CCP has been paving over its sandbox not because this "balancing" has been terribly needed, but because newer players more and more choose to deal with in-game problems by appealing to the developers, instead of using the tools already provided for them.

Am I quitting EVE? No, I haven't said that I am, but I did say that I would if this game no longer keeps me entertained. Would I be obligated to continue doing something that no longer results in enjoyment?

I mean, you're kind of putting me in a position without a way out over here. I'm to be ridiculed if I quit, but at the same time I'm barred from defending my stake in the game by arguing in favor of maintaining the sandbox.

So let's say CCP removes high-sec aggression entirely. Now, I can't adapt because the ability to do so has been removed (you can't adapt to not being allowed to shoot someone by shooting them in a different manner). I can't quit because that would make me a hypocrite due to previous use of the "arguments" you quoted above. I also can't argue my case on the forums because doing so (apparently) would mean that I'm not willing to adapt in the first place.

What exactly am I supposed to do?

You can logically and rationally debate things without ultimatums if your capable of seeing things in anything other than black and white terms as I have been trying to explain.

Well looks like ill have to kill more carebears to make up for this.

Your posts haven't had to do with explanation as much as they had to do with personal attacks and troll-baiting. I mean, I went back and reread your posts, and I still can't find a single instance of you presenting an argument. Pretty much everything you said was about how I'm such a baddie.

Personally for me due to experience all I need to do is read the words Destiny Corrupted next to the portrait, that is usually all the evidence I need. trollol

Anyone terribly interested, read Destiny's posts in "Crimewatch mechanics" or "Bombs and Bubbles in high sec" and determine for yourself.

Otherwise, I don't want to have to go all e-lawyer on your fail posts in the forums to make a point, or resurface numerous previous discussions covering the same topics over and over again, if anything for personal sanity since it is you I'm debating it with who consistantly shows little or no adaptation to discussion, I've literally better things to do than bash my head against a brick wall.

This persistance when you aren't offering any new arguments to the table as have been previously discussed is just a sign that despite discussion you have made a choice, fair enough your stance, why would I want to spend ages in detail debating with someone I know is unmutable? In this sense the only baddie behaviour is believing that repetition is a way to force your argument accross.

Sorry but I've made the point I want to make even if in generalised terms. Metrics and design considerations are being discussed with CCP and seems they agree with me in terms of future changes to mechanics that effect suicide ganking. Sure the game will continue to "evolve".

Ah yes, the good old "I have many very very valid points but I won't explain them because you're a troll" response, coming from a person who admitted to trolling in this thread no less.

Edit: Also loving the continued and unrelenting barrage of personal attacks against a person whose posts are apparently too "fail" to even be addressed in the first place.

Keep it going, chum. Maybe someone will actually buy into your "pro-pvp" arguments, at which point I imagine you will coil around them, unhinge your jaw, and swallow them whole like a serpent.

no no, Ego Vs Ebriosity

Proof of an ability to adapt to Goon suggestion:

---

For PvP and like to encourage more of it?

Want to validate a potential Career path in ≡v≡ with new income potential that is ideally designed as simply a transferance of ISK from one pilot to another?

Actually like situations where ships shoot back and "really" improve your KB resume?

You agree that pilots should adapt to challenging situations in ≡v≡ where acceptance of risk is an everyday seperator of those getting ahead on the curve?

Or simply want to make ≡v≡ less boring?

Support: Bounty Hunting for CSM7.

≡v≡ is acceptable clarification, thanks you for your cooperation.

Edit: Obviously I meant 'thank you'

Why would you waste time with 5 RRs, use 6 cheap DPS and eat the cost for the reward of lulz.