(post deleted by author)
4 Likes
LIAR .
1 Like
LIAR ²
1 Like
Thereâs your problem. Donât do that, itâs a game.
Do you join a COD forum going âkilling people is inhumane, youâre all murderersâ?
2 Likes
Please explain the existence of Concord and the red safety button.
(If CCP did not intend ganks to happen, they could have just made it impossible to attack people in high sec space. No need for a Concord response to be developed in that case!)
I already told him in another post and he kept dodging the question.
Donât expect any kind of honesty from him. He does not post to be right, he posts to look right, even when he is wrong.
He is the sole reason other threads were closed : he kept spamming complete BS and did not address any of the issues of those claims. Just keeping spamming the same stupidity again and again.
âIâm entitled to my stupid opinionâ. No he is not, he is just an idiot.
Technically, in the beginning CCP didnât really think it through (nothing has changed much tbh) so they created concord to âstop people from attacking each otherâ in high sec. The fact that âstopping peopleâ isnât really a binary thing where it just wonât happen any more wasnât really on their radar.
It wasnât intended gameplay, it just emerged from that and they went âehh, weâll allow itâ, just making it more and more difficult over the years.
3 Likes
yes, they literally thought it enough for it to remain unchanged until now.
Thatâs not the definition of emergent.
To be emergent needs to not have been thought of at all.
If the devs thought a tiny bit about it, and they did to implement the concord system, then itâs not - by definition - emergent.
What is emergent gameplay, is the bumping of freighters to prevent them from warping until 10 hours later a fleet is available to gank them. THAT was never thought of by the devs.
1 Like
Can someone please explain to me what a webbing alt is and how they work? Iâm cluelessâŚ
This is something Iâve never heard of.
Thanks!
Thatâs why there are usually limits placed on getting free items. But without any such restrictions, itâs an open invitation. Something done in bad class isnât necessarily amoral.
Nah. Gankers are concerned with a slippery slope, considering how ganking has been getting repeated nerfs over the years. In fact, when freighters were originally changed to be able to choose between bulkheads and expanders, there wasnât that much pushback, because the baseline was kept fairly intact.
This would be the preferred outcome, but keep in mind that it will actually lead to an increase in ganking due to the ignorance/noncompetitive nature that ganking targets usually possess. Itâs like when CCP made that massive pass on mining barges, but players to this day are still not choosing to fit them defensively at the expense of yield.
This sounds good on paper, but is impossible to accomplish in practice in an environment where people lose progress. This isnât like a sport, where two teams meet, and one wins while the other doesnât. The nature of EVEâs PvP requires the element of setback. While people can grow to tolerate that, no one ever grows to enjoy it.
That wasnât the consideration, though. The consideration is whether the criminal enjoyed the act. Well, in EVE, criminals almost exclusively enjoy it, while in real life, most criminals actually donât enjoy it. This is, of course, an extension of the argument for why killing people in a video game doesnât make someone a sociopath or psychopath in real life.
Warping happens if you reach 75% of your max speed while going in the direction you want to warp to. Normally reaching 75% takes a lot of time especially so in the case of Freighters.
Lets assume a base speed of 100m/s, for ease of use. So that freighter would have to reach 75m/s to warp and that will take like 40 seconds or so. But after a few seconds heâs already doing, say, 18 m/s so if he then suddenly gets double webbed while doing âa bitâ of speed, his max speed drops from 100m/s to ~20m/s and then SUDDENLY his current speed is more than enough, more than 75% of his max speed, to warp.
So what happens is the freighter aligns and after a few seconds you drop 2 webs on it and it just âfucks offâ instantly.
1 Like
Yes, but why program the game to allow crime in the first place and also program a feet to punish people committing crime, if you could much easier make it impossible to do crime instead? CCP clearly indended crime to happen, and then punish them, instead of preventing crime.
1 Like
no, you can apply the webs instantly. Use 3 webs or serp ship.
all the other modules should be made for instant lock(1 tick) of the freighter. So you freighter aligns, 1s after that it is locked, 1s after that itâs in warp.
(itâs 1s because the initial align is just always after a tick)
Which literally means that a criminal killing his target was intended from the very beginning of the game.
Which literally means that your claim about it being emergent gameplay, is in total opposition to the facts. You are LYING because you know those fact since you make a claim about them not existing.
Careful with such statements! Even if the other party is completely wrong, it may be that they do believe their own claims. And lying implies saying false things intentionally.
Edited name out may not be lying - perhaps heâs just not very bright.
Edit after getting flagged: Apparently it is inappropriate when I say that someone may not be lying when they believe their own nonsense.
He is. He claims that concord was not âthought ofâ while it requires more time to code concord rather than just prevent the criminal actions.
He is also lying, because he was told that several times already and just want to distort the meaning of the terms in order to make himself right even when he is wrong. He was told that his interpretations is invalid and does not care, so he KNOWS.
Oh Iâm not trying anymore, I already said what I thought was needed. And this was not an attack to you, this was an argument against the other party that you apparenty blocked.
It hasnât.
The only direct buff to ganking I can think of is tags, which, for a cost, allows greater freedom of movement for gankers in certain situations (useful for battlecruiser-level ganks against extremely valuable targets). For the most part, this is a feature of limited utility.
The only other âbuffsâ to ganking were indirect, because they dealt with ship stats for combat ships that have more utility than just ganking.
Feel free to name any other buffs you can think of.
For now. Once it comes to pass, you will regress to your anchor argument that ganking has to go because of player dissatisfaction.
strawman. He did not specify direct, so yes ganking has received buffs recently, and massively more buffs than nerfs. For example, the last update with torps buffs buffed all the torps ships, even if the shipsâ stats were not changed.
The reduction of resists patch did buff ganking, because now most ships lost EHPs so became cheaper to gank.
The increase in DPS for void also was a buff to ganking, for the same reasons as above.
However it does not mean that there is an issue with ganking receiving buffs.
I agree that gameplay should be more active and engaging, but I donât see what that has to do with the ban on input broadcasting. Why one or the other? Thatâs a false choice, we need both.
1 Like