I’m not sure if you’re trolling or not, but here’s my take:
Even if you think more destruction is good, that doesn’t mean that it’s always good under all circumstances. Do you like losing ships to DC’s? What about losing ships to exploits and cheaters, or stealth changes to content. Do you think it’s a good idea for career agents to send newbros into invaded systems where they get instablapped by trig gate camps? Yes, we like playing a brutal, PvP-centric game with a harsh death mechanic, but that doesn’t mean we want our losses to feel cheap or onerous (or designed to make us spend money).
Yes, nerfs feel terrible, but they sometimes are the best ways to solve problems. Now, you may disagree on whether or not a particular nerfed fixed a problem, or whether it was the best solution to the problem, but the Rorq, Fax, HAW, and resist nerfs were designed with a purpose in mind. So, what does this change hope to achieve? How would it make the game better? Will it do anything other than piss off a bunch of veteran industrialists and raise prices? Hell, OP didn’t even bother to explain why he thought it might be good for the game. He just left it here for me to find… like a booger on a handrail.
Also, what do you mean “suddenly” sensitive? People have bitched and moaned about every nerf.
Anyway, here’s an interesting video about nerfs and buffs.
