EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2008-12-27 02:55
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-09-14 13:38
  • Number of Posts: 11,432
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 15,900

Jenn aSide

Security Status 5.0
  • Shinigami Miners Member since
  • ChaosTheory. Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Coralas wrote:
    Gimme Sake wrote:
    baltec1 wrote:


    There are lists of trustworthy and not trustworthy groups/players and stations available. You can always produce a list of your own and take those risks too. We have been dealing with this sort of scam for over a decade, no need to change anything.



    Yeah I know, I don't haul so don't really care.

    What bothers me is the lack of consequence for some actions and introduction of fail/risk proof mechanics; like magical structure invulnerability except for a short period when the loot fairy pops up on grid with a rabbit foot in her hand and starts shaking it, puppy leashes that also make ships magically invulnerable etc etc etc.

    As far as I'm concerned if there is an amount of risk then it should reflect/affect on everyone. Otherwise it is just an overlooked exploit sustained by convenient arguments.


    Its not possible to do that. Scams rely on asymmetric risk. Otherwise the scammer would ultimately fail to profit from scamming over any longer term.

    The fundamental asymmetry is knowledge of the difference between collateral value and real value of the hauled object.


    Well said.

    Thing is is it possible to avoid scams even this one. I deal with the issue IRL (scammers always go after the vulnerable, people in financial trouble, "pie in the sky" get rich quick types, desperate people trying to find 'love' and the elderly).

    We TEACH them how to avoid scams, for example with the elderly we tell them that if someone calls saying they represent a loved one and need money, call the loved one directly to see if it's true (it always isn't).

    We tell people to never send money to people they met on the internet who "were on their way to the airport but had a car crash and are in the hospital and now need money for treatment". That actually happens btw.

    We tell people to not give out passwords to people who call and say "I'm with your phone/internet provider and there is a problem", because real phone companies/ISPs NEVER ask you for your password over the phone and never call you about a problem like that anyways.

    In game as IRL it's as simple as giving people knowledge of the tools you already have to keep yourself safe. But the same way the government (people like me) can't keep people 100% safe from IRL scams despite all the laws we have against them, CCP can't prevent players from falling from scams that rely on them not reading a safety pop up.

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Gimme Sake wrote:




    I'm not losing anything, I objectively stick on to a topic. You and others, and since it is the same subjective discourse you all employ I'm going to suspect alts at work, keep diverting it towards a different meaning. Lacking logical arguments and making comparisons only valid to your biased perspective.

    If you don't scam why are you posting here at all?


    There is something wrong with you. You just said that if I don't scam why am I talking about this.

    Did you forget that in this thread you typed the words "I don't haul"? Why are YOU talking about it then?

    You're a hypocrite, and any respect I once had for you is gone.

    Quote:

    My pov on this thread is debathing wether there's a risk element that affect both parties involved in a pvp activity. Simple and succint. Please bring up objective arguments that support the reason for which an involved party should be invulnerable and don't pull up subjective comparisons. The fact that we liked other posts means just that our opinions converged on other subjects but it doesn't mean they can't differ.


    We are not differing. You are wrong and refusing to acknowledge it despite the fact that it's been explain to you. Don't worry, I know you aren't worth replying to further.

  • It's time to add a new kind of PVE missions (With smart AI) in EVE Gameplay Center

    Alaric Faelen wrote:
    Quote:
    I completely disagree with all of the above. If i want PVP I'll go find real people.

    I'm a PVE player, I wouldn't play EVE at all if it was as you describe.


    --So what you want is a complete lack of challenge or requirement for skill to play. Something as challenging as a mobile app game on your phone. Yay.

    Where you know exactly what enemies you face, know every trigger, and can min/max a ship so that it is completely useless as an actual combat vessel. Hey- why not ask CCP to just remove guns from the rats too...just gets in the way of AFKing.

    In other words- free isk.
    Zero challenge, just brainless farming any bot could do.
    And of course, living in terrified fear of any actual player. Because they actually present some modicum of challenge, and that is just too hard for some players it seems.



    This is the same claptrap PVPrs throw around as that walk around all puffed up at the idea that their way of smashing buttons is superior to someone elses way of smashing buttons.

    I like my PVE to be PVE, not fauxPVP. The challenge in real PVE is in finding new ways to do it, new fits, new approaches. "PVP-lite" PVE narrows the choices down to "omni tank, over heat and hope". Screw that.

    You can have that nonsense, I'll keep enjoying real PVE (thankfully a CCP Dev responded to me and confirmed that real PVE was also part of their plan).

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Gimme Sake wrote:
    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Gimme Sake wrote:


    In Frosty's words "There's no risk for the scammer other than messing up a contract". That's just one sided gameplay.


    ". That is just one sided gameplay". Which is the other thing you are doing that is like the anti-gankers.

    People that hate something ALWAYS focus on the 'lack of cost and one sided unfairness" of the thing they dislike.

    You and I both have been telling the anti-gankers "it doesn't matter what it 'cost' the ganker, your job is to not get ganked in the 1st -place, USE THE TOOLS YOU HAVE instead of running to CCP for help" for several years now, which is why I'm shocked to see you using the anti-gankers playbook about an issue/game mechanics you don't like.

    It smacks of hypocrisy TBH.




    "There is no risk for the ganker, the catalyst getting CONCORDED is insignifigant"


    You just mentioned a loss. Insignifiant YOU SAY, but a LOSS none the less.

    SO it is YOU the one who considers losing a catalyst insignifiant. Not me.


    All your preconceptions about my posts come from comparing my arguments with antigankers' and that is all the demeanor of your posting. You want to divert an eventual debate about game mechanic exploits towards a certain zone oozing of subjectivity.

    I can do that too you know. I can compare you with the people in the T3c rebalance thread where the supreme argument is CCPlease dun nurf mah pwnmobile.

    Because basically that's what you, your alts and other two or three players are trying to do in this thread:

    Crying CCPlease dont nerf my scam mobile.


    WTF is wrong with you man? You can't be serious. And you know I don't do scams (or ganking or other bad guy stuff). Hell, i don't do high sec at all.

    And alts? Again, WTF man, I don't post on my alts here?, you think that the people telling you you are wrong about this are my alts? You think I'd stoop to doing the thing I laugh at others for doing?

    You've known me on this forum for years, we've liked each others posts over and over, we've jointly confronted the whiney entitled losers who can't play a video game to the point of asking for help from CCP. You know better.

    You really need to take a break, you're losing it.

  • My never ending addiction. in EVE Communication Center

    Jhered Stern wrote:
    I remember back in 2003 someone saying that this game was not going to last another 6 month due to lack of content. World of Warcraft was going to ruin this game. Yet here we are in 2017 and the average number of players is still about the same as it was back then if not more.


    We are only 2 months and 6 days from the next annual "EVE IS DYING! day".

    It was "WoW is going to ruin this game", but there is now a long list behind it:

    Black Prophecy

    Jump Gate

    SWG

    SWTOR

    Star Trek Online

    Elite : Dangerous

    No Man's Sky

    Star Citizen

    And those are just the ones of the top of my head lol. If EVE were old enough you'd probably have seen someone say "PONG is definitely going to kill EVE" lol.

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Gimme Sake wrote:


    In Frosty's words "There's no risk for the scammer other than messing up a contract". That's just one sided gameplay.


    "There is no risk for the ganker, the catalyst getting CONCORDED is insignifigant. That is just one sided gameplay". Which is the other thing you are doing that is like the anti-gankers.

    People that hate something ALWAYS focus on the 'lack of cost and one sided unfairness" of the thing they dislike.

    You and I both have been telling the anti-gankers "it doesn't matter what it 'cost' the ganker, your job is to not get ganked in the 1st -place, USE THE TOOLS YOU HAVE instead of running to CCP for help" for several years now, which is why I'm shocked to see you using the anti-gankers playbook about an issue/game mechanics you don't like.

    It smacks of hypocrisy TBH.

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Gimme Sake wrote:



    No, I dont dislike citadels, only some mechanics that were introduced along.

    The ganker argument is false. Gankers lose their ships in the process, lose security status and have to avoid local gate/station station police to travel. There is a consequence to their actions and there are ways to prevent or even counter being ganked.


    You know, that, I know that, but that's not what they think and not what they say. Likewise you aren't taking into account a lot of 'costs' for the citidel scammers either. That's the point.

    Quote:

    The argument of antigankers is probably catalysts are cheap but so is replacing a retriever. I'm pretty sure a bot miner doesn't really care about losing a ship or two because the profit makes it inconspicuous. There's nothing that can't be solved in Eve through the hardening the f up and making another alt. This highly intelligent adaptive process is available to both gankers and miners.


    As is not taking courier contracts from citadels you can't trust, and/or using security alts etc etc.

    Quote:

    Why do you keep comparing me with the antigankers?


    Because you are doing what they are doing. The gankers say "there are no counters, therefore there is no option but CCP doing something about ganking". You said in this very thread that "the tools to counter are crap" and advocate a CCP intervention (dropboxes) rather than just telling people to be careful, read the warning pop up and play smarter.

    I'll tell you like I tell the white knight anti gankers: I'm not trying to be mean to you, I'm explaining to you that i believe you're making a mistake. In your case (and unlike the anti-ganker types), while I don't think you will ever grow to love citadel mechanics, I do think you will eventually look back on this discussion and realize that what I'm saying to you is true.

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Gimme Sake wrote:
    baltec1 wrote:


    There are lists of trustworthy and not trustworthy groups/players and stations available. You can always produce a list of your own and take those risks too. We have been dealing with this sort of scam for over a decade, no need to change anything.



    Yeah I know, I don't haul so don't really care.

    What bothers me is the lack of consequence for some actions and introduction of fail/risk proof mechanics; like magical structure invulnerability except for a short period when the loot fairy pops up on grid with a rabbit foot in her hand and starts shaking it, puppy leashes that also make ships magically invulnerable etc etc etc.

    As far as I'm concerned if there is an amount of risk then it should reflect/affect on everyone. Otherwise it is just an overlooked exploit sustained by convenient arguments.



    This answered my question. You don't like citadels to begin with, and that dislike is coloring your judgement and making you post things that make no sense.

    That's why what you are saying looks so much like what the anti-ganker types say, because they are also responding emotionally to something they can't stand (not just ganking, but the idea that the activity doesn't have any risk for the ganker AND the false idea that ganking also negatively affects both new players and the general amount of players).

    Put that emotion aside for a second and look at the things you are posting. I'm serious, go back to that one post and replace the word "Citadel" with the word "Catalyst" and read it to yourself again. You're too smart to be reacting this way.

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Gimme Sake wrote:


    What some people in this thread advice is "The counter is simple, don't accept citadel contracts." That's like telling a new player don't go to null there are bubbles instead of advising him to fit a ceptor. That's a bear set of mind.


    I don't know why you can't see the flaws in what you are saying, you used to be one of the clear thinkers.

    Look at your own example. In that one you're telling the new player to take INDIVIDUAL ACTION (fit a ceptor) for their own benefit.

    But with this courier stuff you are telling people "don't even try to take individual action" (like avoiding citadels while you still can), you are saying that the ONLY answer is CCP intervention (new mechanics/drop boxes), which would be just like telling a new player "if you want to go to null, don't, even interceptors can die, just beg CCP to magically teleport you and your asset to null sec"...

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    baltec1 wrote:
    This has been the case with null outposts for over a decade, why should the game change to protect people unwilling to take a loss when they take a risk?



    but but but, it's high sec. High sec is supposed to coddle your ass and make you feel all warm and safe in a game about the harshness of space, death, destruction and epic backstabbing be relatively safe!!!

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Mr Mieyli wrote:


    Disastrous how? You just repeat yourself that 'catering to the stupid' is going to kill eve. This video proves the world is full of stupid people, who don't read warnings. They'll still complain when their reality comes crashing down. If you don't want the complaints in the first place, you design to tolerate 'stupid' people. Now of course, this is not to say 'make eve simple', but it is to say that there should be a shallow end where stupid people can be themselves and have a good time.


    EVE is not and should not ever be a game with a shallow end. It's a game for adults who should be expected to figure things out. /That idealistic egalitarian "make something everyone will enjoy" thing is as unrealistic in EVE as it is IRL, and CCP's pursuit of that since 2012 is the real shame of all of this.

    Must every game be mushy hand holding "we don't think you are grown enough to enjoy a strict game" bull crap?

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Teckos Pech wrote:


    You can't patch out stupid.

    As a result everyone wanting to remove this mechanic are implicitly rewarding stupid.

    Good job.


    Which is exactly the point of my opposition. I watch stupid get rewarded all day in real life , then I found EVE, a game that punished stupid.

    And then I met people on the EVE forum that want to reward stupid. Which is stupid lol.

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Mr Mieyli wrote:
    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Jones Beach wrote:

    There is a big red warning that you get when you consider accepting this type contract telling you that you might not be able to complete it because the destination is player owned. What more do you need?


    Apparently, that big red WARNING is not enough lol.


    Watch this video and notice how many warnings there are of the bridge height, and how it doesn't help. If they raised the bridge, problem solved.

    This is relevant to eve where many mechanics exist to trip you up, with some warning, where a better solution would be fixing the mechanic in question.


    This is exactly the kind of thinking that is disastrous in a video game. Why can't you see it, why can't you see that DEVs trying to make it easier for people does not work? What has happened in the past is CCP tried to fix the game for dumb people and the dumb people kept being dumb and the smarter people got bored (and some left).

    And why do you want a game full of stupid people that can't figure out how to read a sign like the people in your video?

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    Jenn aSide wrote:
    i'm not taking shots, I'm asking what you base your beliefs on. you are awfully sure of yourself for someone who has yet to try many things in the game, and frankly that's just a dumb way to be.


    I have lived in NS.

    What is your next shot?

    Also critique for not having tried many things in the game?
    Is this EVE we are talking about again?
    There is an endless amount of things to try.
    Do you claim to have tried them all, Ms. PvE?


    Then why did you say "I am finally ready to go to null sec" in that post a few days ago. Would you like my to link it for you? Feel free to edit it if you like, EVE-search is a wonderful thing...

    Again, i get it, you don't like jump drives. But the issue here is scamming and how many (of course not all) high sec people are much more susceptible to it because of their personal traits, not jump drives. You need to learn more about null sec mechanics before talking about them.

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:


    Church of HTFU


    What do you have against self reliance, personal responsibility and people not crying their eyes out because they are bad at a video game a trained monkey could play? I'd rather be a choirboy in the Church of HTFU than a bishop in the Church of helplessness you seem to adhere to.



    I see how you couched your question. Are you working for a losing political party? Your tactics and rhetoric is how you get the opposite results of your expectations.

    What do you have against real risk and cost in a game that is sold on those ideas? But it is just a game after all. When you log off you are nobody. Like everybody else.



    I like it when you start talking gibberish, it means what I'm saying is getting through to yo and you don't like it (easy to do with SJWs). Now answer the question, what do you have against self reliance, personal responsibility and people not crying their eyes out because they are bad at a video game a trained monkey could play?

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    Ill buy that once transit between HS markets and NS suppliers is remedied with sufficient risk.
    What does that have to do with what's being talked about? We get it, you don't like jump drives, but that has nothing to do with the fact that scammers exist in high sec because that's where the unaware people tend to live.


    I already addressed the Citadel/courier scam being legit.

    Simple.
    Dont accept courier contracts to Citadels you dont trust.
    Case closed.

    This has to do with the rest of your rhetoric regarding the relationship in mechanics between HS exploitation by NS.


    You haven't lived in null sec yet by your own words, how do you know any of this?


    Is that your best shot?


    i'm not taking shots, I'm asking what you base your beliefs on. you are awfully sure of yourself for someone who has yet to try many things in the game, and frankly that's just a dumb way to be.

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:


    Church of HTFU


    What do you have against self reliance, personal responsibility and people not crying their eyes out because they are bad at a video game a trained monkey could play? I'd rather be a choirboy in the Church of HTFU than a bishop in the Church of helplessness you seem to adhere to.

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    Ill buy that once transit between HS markets and NS suppliers is remedied with sufficient risk.
    What does that have to do with what's being talked about? We get it, you don't like jump drives, but that has nothing to do with the fact that scammers exist in high sec because that's where the unaware people tend to live.


    I already addressed the Citadel/courier scam being legit.

    Simple.
    Dont accept courier contracts to Citadels you dont trust.
    Case closed.

    This has to do with the rest of your rhetoric regarding the relationship in mechanics between HS exploitation by NS.


    You haven't lived in null sec yet by your own words, how do you know any of this?

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    Ill buy that once transit between HS markets and NS suppliers is remedied with sufficient risk.



    What does that have to do with what's being talked about? We get it, you don't like jump drives, but that has nothing to do with the fact that scammers exist in high sec because that's where the unaware people tend to live.

  • Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting. in EVE Communication Center

    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    Jenn, well said otherwise, but come on.

    Its not just HS enjoying the mechanics there, its everyone else too exploiting it with even greater leverage.

    HS is a playground for NS.

    Everyone knows this.



    What's being discussed doesn't happen with any frequency outside of high sec. This is because much more commerce between neutral parties happens in high sec. People trade with allies and friends outside of high sec with the exception of some low sec market activity.

    Other than some hilarious "you locked me out after I bought a carrier form you" stuff in low sec citadels, this is a high sec thing. Like most complaints on this forum...

    The problem is high sec fosters a false "expectation of safety" that scammers use to beat people with. You can't fix that without fixing the 'victims'.