The solution is even easier…
No Darlo in Eve.
7 Likes
I concur.
hey guys I dont want to work at this game make it easier please so i feel safe everywhere i go, thanks its not a big deal
2 Likes
The other player can be alpha though. With zero requirements to be paying plex or cash, the person with an alt has to commit more isk or real life cash to be able to multi box. But you can have 10 friends with 10 alpha accounts and zero plex or cash cost to their accounts.
How does that change the fact that the alt ganking character is omega?
“Omega” is not the same as “currently training character”. Case and point, your account can be omega, and you can be paused for all characters within that account and not be training anything. It’s a waste, sure, but it doesnt make your account not an omega account, or the alts within it, omega alts. Omega is just an indication as to the status of ALL the characters in the account.
Are you kidding me? So you are honestly going to say that logi, web and scout have ZERO impact for any gank?
I said mitigate the risk. Mitigate means less, or decrease. It doesnt mean zero. And you admit it in your very paragraph.
When a ganker needed more people, and therefore failed in their gank, that’s a win for the freighter pilot. I’m sure we both agree that ganks fail all the time. I know because I’ve been in ganks that failed. You can make a gank take a few more gankers, but if you dont have enough, or didnt know that the logi pilot was with the freighter pilot, then yes, you’re gonna fail your gank, which means the freighter lives, and the risk has been mitigated.
Even with just being selected against, because there are two freighters in system and you have logi and web but the other guy doesnt, still mitigates the risk because it lowers the chances you will be picked.
Then dont haul.
First off, you’re assuming that freighter pilots are somehow incapable of making friends who will help you scout and web and logi. I help friends and corpmates haul and escort ships all the time. I dont ask for isk. If your personal skills suck so badly that you need to pay to have people help you, then pay up or dont haul.
Secondly, prices are set by players, and accepted by players. If you dont like the price, dont accept the contract. If I put a contract up for 100,000 isk reward, 10 billion collateral, 30 jumps away and 300,000m3, no one would accept my contract. The fact that contracts get accepted and completed, all the times means its profitable. If you cant make a profit and seemingly constantly get ganked, there is something wrong with you. Fix your own problems or stop hauling.
Thirdly, I think mining is an extremely boring profession, and yet there is no shortage of miners, because many afk mine. It’s boring, but it also doesnt take much engagement to do the base aspect of it. You can manually warp and have nerflix on a second screen. You can autopilot through higher secs of space and come back later and manually do the lower 0.5-07 sec spaces. Just hitting jump to, every 2 minutes takes little effort. And people do it for the same reason why people mine, to make isk in a easy, effortless way. Freighter pilots aren’t looking for an exciting minigame to pop up at every gate, and I’m sure they will complain if it does. Its boring, because its effortless, and they want it that way.
1 Like
No, the solution is no Concord at all in hisec.
2 Likes
Because they make profit.
Again, everything is supply and demand, paid and accepted by players. If you need something large hauled across hisec, and you offer 10 million as a reward, but no one accepts, you increase the reward. And increase it. And increase it. Until someone accepts. And that someone, makes a good profit.
I didnt say their complaints are valid. If CCP adds a minigame for mining, or hauling, I’d be fine with that. But I’d also expect the afk mining/hauling crowd to complain.
But yes, if you cant defend your arguments against critics, then your argument is bad. Thing is, people complain that ships are too op, or freighters are too fragile, etc etc. And only by bringing actually good arguments and evidence, can you silence your critics.
1 Like
Which means that they would not pick that contract.
You can sell your ores for 0.01 ISK and “make profit”, but would you?
You have a huge misunderstanding here.
When the km sever is not synchronized with the game, it’s an issue, it’s not the normal case.
If you start arguing about the cases that are considered being an issue, then your argument is wrong because those cases are not to be considered.
The ESI statistics are as close as one can get for actual data.
1 Like
“as close as one can get”
What do you not understand? Oh yeah, you’re wrong and a waste of people’s time and boring and just… you’re just awful.
3 Likes
Then you are lying. Because it’s as guaranteed to be as accurate as anything else.
You can’t prove that it will ALWAYS be accurate. And still I can say that in normal circumstances, it’s always accurate. Normal being, eg, not under a DDoS.
You can’t prove that your computer will NEVER have a bug, yet you are using it.
1 Like
Keeping in mind nothing is going to happen and your wasting your time, when you get mad and rage quit don’t forget to mail me your stuff 
1 Like
It is.
Because your claim that “ESI is a rough number” is BS.
Also there was no talking of the DDoS in your original post :
^That ^ post is just BS. All the kills we be provided correctly by ESI, as far as ESI is reachable and can access monolith.
There can be errors, but basing your whole argument on the possibility of special case is BS.
1 Like
Scroll up and count the posts of mine, then yours then see which ones are the most full of rage and bile and attacks.
Lul.
{citation needed}
How comes ? EVERY system is accurate with a given precision.
If an unpredicted event happens, like the earth exploding, of course the ESI will not be accurate.
If you don’t understand such a simple logic, I’m sorry but you are an idiot.
1 Like
LMFAO!!! That was your 64th post in this thread alone and this one laughing at you and your stupidity will be my 34th in this thread. Considering how stupid you are you will no doubt keep raging here so in the next 10 mins or so you will have posted double (numerically) what I have here. Also, most of mine that were not constructively adding to the convo have been short and laughing - at you - and will continue to be. You, on the other hand, are about 3 posts away from some sort of rage-induced seizure.
Gj on simply scrolling to the top and looking at the counters btw.
Lul.
1 Like
I don’t need proof. It’s written in the ESI what it does, and nowhere does it say “it’s not accurate”, so YOU are the one who need to prove that it’s not accurate.
Yet you are looking for it in every post.
Not it’s not. It’s exact number under normal circumstances, which is what accurate means. Now you complain that it can’t ensure exact number in the case the earth explodes, only makes an idiot of you.
1 Like
You re the one claiming those figure are inaccurate. Prove it.
Prove that It needs to be proven.
That’s not. You literally claimed that you can’t be accurate if you can produce errors, which is the case of anything in the case the earth explodes.
The specific case of the earth was here to show how stupid you are. I did not claim you literally wrote “eath explodes”, claiming that I said so is a strawman.
1 Like
I never claimed they will be 100% accurate, on the opposite I said that they are as “accurate as anything else”. This sentence is a strawman.
You are the one claiming they are not accurate, the onus is on you.
1 Like
Hostorical what?
The ESI was introduced in 2016 after CCP engaged a third party to assist write it from the ground up based on an event-driven architecture rewrite for the underlying data.
There’s never been an historical “rough number” approach for any event-driven system, and certainly not the ESI.
Prior to that CREST was an improvement over the original XML API.
1 Like
No I don’t. That’s a strawman.
That’s unrelated.
The ESI is accurate, even without 100%. Prove otherwise.
1 Like