Encounter Surveillance System Update

EVE Information Portal Announcements
, ,
673

Just a few comments.

  1. Hotdrop will easily deal with a carrier before response can be cynoed in, so only supers benefit from umbrella. And even they are under the risk of being dreadbombed.
  2. Even 10MN Phantasm can do it, because remember, nobody can MWD around there.

Just like in real life, a job that simply does not pay enough to survive will not get much people willing to do it. Everyone who’s able to get better income, will do it. And there is no shortage of jobs around New Eden, those mission hubs will employ everyone and his grandma.
Which leaves us with a conclusion, that the only way a job like this will be done is via automation, or in our case, bots. Humans will have to find something with a better income.

1 Like
674

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
675

All you’re doing with your post is proving my point to @Brisc_Rubal and Mittani that the koolaid talking points they are selling to you “for fun” are creating a toxic environment against important game balance dialogue and discussion.

676

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 -.-

677

Dude, that’s not a kool-aid talking point. It’s 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 you’d 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
678

Yes, yes. Anybody who disagrees with you is creating a “toxic environment.”

I don’t 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 that’s our opinion. There’s 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 don’t do that.

6 Likes
679

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
680

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 won’t debate on forums because an educated debate here is a long shot. Perhaps I will write an article on it somewhere.

1 Like
681

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 “i´m above all that”, while providing zero arguments yourself.
What an absolute joke.

4 Likes
682

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
683

The ‘Goon linemember’1 you replied to is the Fittings and Doctrines Director, and a Senior Editor at INN. And that’s been made clear to you more than once, in the past. And I’m not saying all that as some ridiculous way to blow my own horn. The people who need to know what I do, do. Rather, I’m pointing this out in order to highlight something: Despite interacting with one another one-on-one more than a few times, you couldn’t 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 ‘I am the true victim!’ 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 don’t 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 I’m sure you’ll insist that all of this is more ad hominem3. And none of it is correct. Because you’ve never been able to admit error. You’ve been confronted with conclusive evidence of your mistakes, and insisted you were right, and the well-documented examples were wrong. And you’ll do it again. Because that’s just who you are.

1. ‘Linemember’ isn’t even a goddamned word. It’s two words. Line member. But I’m sure you’ll insist that in fact your usage was perfectly correct, because you’re even worse than Vily at admitting you made a mistake.

2. Nope. Nope, can’t do it. I was gonna let it go. I was even going to go ahead and copy the mistake and just act like it wasn’t one, but I’m that pedantic an asshole. It’s what makes me a good editor. AD HOMINEM DOES NOT HAVE A GODDAMNED HYPHEN. I know you’re ESL or ETL or so, but please, if you’re going to go tossing around terminology to sound like you have a clue, get it right.

3. It’s 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 ‘you’re a worthless, disgusting human being, so nobody should take you seriously’, that would be ad hominem. But describing your actions, however critically, is not. And describing how people see you (e.g. ‘now view you as a useless drama queen’) is also not ad hominem. It is a description of others’ 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
684

I don’t 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 who’ll 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. That’s the definition of ad hominem. You don’t want to talk about ESS changes. You want to “Olmeca man bad”. Which is why I didn’t 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. I’m still keeping my cool. But according to you I’m the one with behavior problems. Thanks for providing what’s basically a summary of all my interactions with Goons.

685

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 don’t want your behavior described that way, don’t behave that way. It’s really very simple.

But again, nobody expects you to admit error or culpability, because that’s just not in your past patterns of behavior.

3 Likes
686

“That analysis is bad because the person who is analyzing is bad at analysis” is ad hominem. It’s 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.

687

Except that isn’t what was said. What was said was more along the lines of “This person’s previous analysis has been flawed due to inherent biases and a lack of capability to recognize or acknowledge those biases. As a result, this person’s analysis should be regarded critically and not merely accepted as the authority their biases lead them to present themselves as.” At no point did I say your current analysis was bad, or should be ignored—I didn’t 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 didn’t 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
688

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 that’s 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 other’s credibility all day. Won’t get us anywhere. Doesn’t even matter whether you choose to name this useless behavior ad hominem or not.

Anyway. I’ll leave you to your Grrr Olmec. See you at the siege of 1dq.

689

Don’t 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
690

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 inside…

Personally I’d love if CCP updated the ~10 year old pve content.

1 Like
691

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 can’t defend their own space.

1 Like
692

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