A glass ceiling. It affects both bots and regular players. It affects regular, well-meaning players more. Bots will always win when they are not targeted as such. Nothing else to say. Just another fail. Plus the fact that mandatory ESS can hardly be called a sandbox element. Any measure that targets bots indirectly will fail, and only aggravate regular players.
9 Likes
All youâre doing with your post is proving my point to @Brisc_Rubal and Mittani that the koolaid talking points they are selling to you âfor funâ are creating a toxic environment against important game balance dialogue and discussion.
He stated pure truth.
And i see that you are still the same good old self-deluded Olmeca, thinking that if a goon criticizes him - it must be a relult of brainwashing by Mittani -.-
Dude, thatâs not a kool-aid talking point. Itâs a fact. You and I talked about your agenda number of times on TIS discord. I even told you that if you had your way, all youâd do is wipe out your own play-style. Then when it happened, you went on reddit to whine about it. And everyone saw it.
So really, stop trying to blame Mittens and Brisc for the fact that people actually remember how you behaved when you flounced off in a puff of excessive drama.
2 Likes
Yes, yes. Anybody who disagrees with you is creating a âtoxic environment.â
I donât see this ESS creating any significant conflict. There are plenty of things in the game now built around small gang warfare, and I know that a number of the other CSM members are working on a Lowsec/FW proposal that will likely be centered on that stuff. The amount of Dev time spent working on small gang things has been considerable.
There has been nothing close to the same level of development done for big blocs, and what has been done has been designed to nerf and destabilize that playstyle, despite - as amazing as it sounds I actually have to remind you of this - large numbers of players still be attracted to it and participating in it daily.
So hey, if we point out that we think something is a waste of time, then thatâs our opinion. Thereâs nothing toxic about stating an opinion. If we were telling people to unsub, mail bags of poop to Iceland, etc - that would be toxic. We donât do that.
6 Likes
How about a poll done in the form of mails:
People could vote and CCP could see how this is going to turn out.
Bring some democracy to the game.
2 Likes
The Goon linemember II replied to expressed no argumentative disagreement. He recited a koolaid ad-hominem talking point originated from your Meta Show in a way that blocks any rational and constructive discussion and debate around ESS changes. I pinged you so you can notice the repercussions of your work.
I am confident in the ESS/Ecosystem changes but I wonât debate on forums because an educated debate here is a long shot. Perhaps I will write an article on it somewhere.
1 Like
But you will post it on reddit which is known to be a place for seasoned philosophers and highly-intelligent people who are free from any preconceived ideas and are capable of independent thinking.
The rest of your message is literally âi´m above all thatâ, while providing zero arguments yourself.
What an absolute joke.
4 Likes
Says the man who apparently thinks that running a personal army of a hundred cheap, disposable AFK cloaking hotdrop alts so he and his friends can click three buttons and delete carriers in 30 seconds represents non-toxic gamplay, lol.
7 Likes
The âGoon linememberâ1 you replied to is the Fittings and Doctrines Director, and a Senior Editor at INN. And thatâs been made clear to you more than once, in the past. And Iâm not saying all that as some ridiculous way to blow my own horn. The people who need to know what I do, do. Rather, Iâm pointing this out in order to highlight something: Despite interacting with one another one-on-one more than a few times, you couldnât spare even the barest iota of attention to retaining information about who you were talking to. That simple fact is indicative of your obsessive myopia and relentless egotism. Everything is about you, and about your pet issue du jour.
I did not repeat an ad hominem2 talking point. I described your actions in words I used before it was said on the Meta Show, and I did so because it is an accurate description of your actions.
You consistently over-focused on supercapital ratting and Rorqual/Excavator balance, as evidenced by your own statements on the matter on /r/eve, TIS Discord, and the CSM minutes. You consistently demonized the very things you interacted with, and when CCP took actions that reduced the use of excavators and reduced the frequency of supercarrier ratting, you threw a hissy fit on /r/eve, posted a âI am the true victim!â screed that would do a 16 year old goth girl proud, and flounced on out, declaring that you were quitting the game.
An educated debate, as has been repeatedly demonstrated on TIS and elsewhere, is impossible when it involves you. If you donât like that assessment, perhaps you should review your own past behavior to first understand why even the people who once supported you for CSM now view you as a useless drama queen.
And Iâm sure youâll insist that all of this is more ad hominem3. And none of it is correct. Because youâve never been able to admit error. Youâve been confronted with conclusive evidence of your mistakes, and insisted you were right, and the well-documented examples were wrong. And youâll do it again. Because thatâs just who you are.
1. âLinememberâ isnât even a goddamned word. Itâs two words. Line member. But Iâm sure youâll insist that in fact your usage was perfectly correct, because youâre even worse than Vily at admitting you made a mistake.
2. Nope. Nope, canât do it. I was gonna let it go. I was even going to go ahead and copy the mistake and just act like it wasnât one, but Iâm that pedantic an asshole. Itâs what makes me a good editor. AD HOMINEM DOES NOT HAVE A GODDAMNED HYPHEN. I know youâre ESL or ETL or so, but please, if youâre going to go tossing around terminology to sound like you have a clue, get it right.
3. Itâs not. Describing your actions is not ad hominem. Detailing the fundamental flaws in your methodology (in this case, your inability to look past, or separate your analysis from, your personal interests) is not an ad hominem. If I had said âyouâre a worthless, disgusting human being, so nobody should take you seriouslyâ, that would be ad hominem. But describing your actions, however critically, is not. And describing how people see you (e.g. ânow view you as a useless drama queenâ) is also not ad hominem. It is a description of othersâ opinion of you, and even if that opinion contains ad hominem, describing it is, itself, not an ad hominem attack.
Finally, even my initial reminder was not an ad hominem attack, as I did not, at any point, attempt to say that your argument was invalid because of some personal quality of yours. I quite clearly made the point that your analysis is suspect because your past analysis has been flawed and subject to demonstrable, fatally self-deceptive bias. The strength of your argument, with no supporting evidence, rests on your capability as an analyst, and your track record is⌠poor.
9 Likes
I donât really know/remember who you are. But this sounds like a linemember. There is nothing wrong with being a linemember. Not sure why that offends you.
I did not repeat an ad-hominem talking point.
If you are part of INN, I congratulate you for helping Mittani create a telEvEangelist space cult whoâll parrot his pragmatic (but false) talking points to the grave. You guys successfully brought to IRL death of rational debate and devaluation of truth to EvE. Notice how this chain started when I made a comment about ESS changes and you made a comment about me. Thatâs the definition of ad hominem. You donât want to talk about ESS changes. You want to âOlmeca man badâ. Which is why I didnât want to go into in-detail discussions of ESS changes here.
Notice how my response to Brisc prompted a huge text of insults and hatred from you. Iâm still keeping my cool. But according to you Iâm the one with behavior problems. Thanks for providing whatâs basically a summary of all my interactions with Goons.
No. You presented analysis, and I reminded people of your track record with analysis. That is not ad hominem.
Again, no. Your response to Brisc prompted clarification of your mistakes, and explanations of why you are wrong, along with further descriptions of how your former supporters view you. Accurately describing your behavior is not an insult. If you donât want your behavior described that way, donât behave that way. Itâs really very simple.
But again, nobody expects you to admit error or culpability, because thatâs just not in your past patterns of behavior.
3 Likes
âThat analysis is bad because the person who is analyzing is bad at analysisâ is ad hominem. Itâs my IRL job to know that.
Not to mention anyone can say the same about anyone else. We dislike argumentative fallacies because they derail rational debate. No rational debate on an Eve change has ever started with someone saying the other person is bad.
Except that isnât what was said. What was said was more along the lines of âThis personâs previous analysis has been flawed due to inherent biases and a lack of capability to recognize or acknowledge those biases. As a result, this personâs analysis should be regarded critically and not merely accepted as the authority their biases lead them to present themselves as.â At no point did I say your current analysis was bad, or should be ignoredâI didnât even imply that. I only drew attention to your past performance.
And that is not ad hominem. Your past analysis has been fatally flawed. Because of that past performance, all future analysis is suspect. Heck, I didnât even say your analysis was bad. You might be right. You might not. I just encouraged people to keep in mind your past performance when deciding how much weight to give your current offering.
5 Likes
You just expanded my summary of your point lol. What you are describing is ad hominem in the way you are describing it. I know it feels normal to you because thatâs what you probably do every day.
If you think my analysis is flawed then argue against my analysis. Not my credibility. We can attack each otherâs credibility all day. Wonât get us anywhere. Doesnât even matter whether you choose to name this useless behavior ad hominem or not.
Anyway. Iâll leave you to your Grrr Olmec. See you at the siege of 1dq.
Donât hold your breath. Let me know when PAPI works up the balls to hit any of the keepstars in our supercapital range, much less tries to lay siege to five of them simultaneously.
1 Like
Dread pve in null sucks balls, only time you see a dread in an anom is because someone is baiting or tried to do it and is now stuck. Even if you manage to kill the spawns efficiently, there is little chance you do it within cycle(s) so you left with 2 options- kill remaining rats with 200 dps (and waste time) or siege again (and waste time).
Acceleration gates give an advantage to the ratter: cloakies get de-cloaked, more warning time, no cynos insideâŚ
Personally Iâd love if CCP updated the ~10 year old pve content.
1 Like
Big issue here : You should allow Caps to respond to protect their own bounties.
If Person A is ratting in a Captial or Upwards, then if Person B tries to steal from the ESS Person A should be able to warp to the ESS to protect their ticks.
The way this has been planned actually PREVENTS fights while discouraging ratting because anybody in a big ship canât defend their own space.
1 Like
Really ? It gives an advantage to the thief, any responder has to get to the gate and then take it. In addition if their ratting in anything bigger that a BS they have to dock up, change ships and then respond.
1 Like
why are you surprised that they are messing with 0-0 its a sandbox game where we do as we like in 0-0 just as long as we do what they want. because they own the game they have the right to fâk with it as much as they like your thoughts and even these forum messages do not matter a fâk.
they do not now nor have they ever cared a single bit about what we think about the game. they gonna do this and then when they loose thousands of players they will be like ( errrrm we may have got this wrong ) change it back and then raise the prices again to compensate the losses they take from this. just like the blackout.
3 Likes