Not going to happen.
Fine, then I’m not going to bother reading it.
Go roll your eyes at someone else.
Maybe you will stop quoting me to ask me to repeat my answer to a question that I’ve answered a dozen times already too?
rolleyes
1 Like
rolls eyes
Because it allows players to gather resources so that they can engage in PvP.
That’s an irrational answer to the question.
You are supposing that PvPers should only engage PvPers equally, whereas PvErs should have an advantage (as you stated they do) vs PvPers.
You are caught in your own dead-end, Teckos.
So reducing the ability to gather resources makes sense to you in a game centered on PvP with actual loss of resources when one loses a PvP engagement?
And thanks for reading a bunch of nonsense into my post that was not there nor implied.
Do you think in EVE, as a PvP game, that PvErs should have the advantage vs PvPers?
Considering the only advantage is a small one yes. Gathering resources is integral to the game. It is what allows for the in game economy.
I do not agree with that.
The advantage should be on the part of the PvPer, not the PvEr.
Destruction drives the economy, not production.
PvE is generally at a disadvantage. Specialized ships that die quickly and some which have little or no PvP capability at all. Being in well known locations in the game. So local tells them about a second or so that a hostile has entered system before that hostile can do anything. Fine. Yes, I can accept that. As does CCP, and most players.
Wow. That is just bad. You need both.
1 Like
vs
Get your story straight, Teckos.
The nullbear is showing its stripes.
I never said you didnt need both.
I said it is destruction that drives the economy, not production.
They have an advantage in terms of intel. A small one. Every other aspect has PvE at a disadvantage to a PvP ship. My story is straight.
Both drive the economy. You are making a meaningless distinction. In game people produce things so people can destroy them. To the xtent that production has a slight, very slight, edge is what allows that process to continue.
2 Likes
Oh and Salvos saying something is generally disadvantaged but does have one advantage is completely acceptable.
1 Like
That would be rationalized with delayed Local.
No, it is destruction that drives it.
The less destruction occurs, the less the value of any production is.
Inversely, if more destruction occurs, the greater the value of any production is.
This is ■■■■■■■■ hairsplitting and semantics, and you know it.
This is a PvP game, Teckos.
It is already rationalized.
You sound like the philosophers from 250 years ago who thought things have value because of the labor embodied in them. They were wrong and you are wrong.
And I never said we need more production or less destruction. That is you reading things into my posts again. Production engenders destruction which engenders more production. Ironically it is you who wants to upset this process and quite possibly lead to more destruction initially and less production which will inevitably lead to less destruction.
3 Likes
Delayed Local requires more effort from everyone to acquire intel in the period before the delay expires.
There are many means for this, for both hunter and prey.
Prey will still have the home-field advantage, regardless.
This is what you famously often refer to as “opportunity cost”.
It is indisputable, that in EVE, the more destruction occurs, the greater is the demand for production.
The less destruction occurs, the less demand there is for production.
This is a PvP game that revolves around ship and asset destruction, fundamentally.
Again incorrect. Hunters already use dscan, probes, dotlan, etc. Your suggestion puts no extra burden on hunters. It does put an additional burden on the hunted.
Do not take away that very slight advantage. And I say this as someone who has hunted ratters and miners. Mostly in groups but solo too. I say this because I want more prey not less. Let them have their advantage so the feel some degree of safety so they will venture out and make themselves vulnerable. And when they make a mistake some hunter will be there to kill them (hopefully).