Sadly it turned into a farming exercise by certain multi-boxers on your side well before the changes I pushed for came into place.
that was ccp’s doing with sp extraction leading to infinite free gank alts. That killed so much of old EVE it is not even funny but ccp decided to go that route, don’t blame us for doing what ccp wants. Personally I think that was the final nail in old ccp’s coffin but heh what do I know I just kill pods.
4 Likes
No, it happened before that, it just made it easier with skill injectors.
When I quote people’s posts it’s so everyone can see what I’m responding to, and I express my confusion when I don’t understand something because it might result in someone explaining it to me. When I understand things, I’m better able to contribute to the discussion.
…well, what passes for a discussion in this thread, at any rate. It looks like many of the participants are more interested in spewing venom and bile at each other than having a productive discussion.
1 Like
How have we folded? I’m not feeling folded, to be quite honest. Losing the fortizar was unfortunate, but no more than losing a mobile depot we didn’t want to bother maintaining. Rackner posted months ago, “How is that thing still alive?”
It’s not much of a victory to occupy an objective which no longer has any strategic value. It’s like being at the battle of Stalingrad, boldly declaring your intent to scale that big hill, and then coming back years after the war to ‘achieve’ your goal.
I’m anticipating in the future we may see a nerf to freighters, as developers take note of the situation. It’s only a matter of time before they decide they want to see more dead freighters. We will be there when CCP calls for help.
4 Likes
Your alliance folded by not even attempting to do a defence, we were expecting suicide catalysts at least, not once did you do that.
Haha what an odd analogy in terms of Stalingrad, are you telling me that CODE has given up on it’s goals completely, in which case you have definitely folded.
It was there, it was marked for destruction and as soon as the bumping mechanic was changed I joined AG and set in motion the change in AG to go take it down.
Yeah that was obviously the plan, just stop completely and cry that it is too hard, hoping for CCP to change the game in your favour from what is currently good balance.
In your opinion. You keep forgetting to mention this. Fact of the matter is that the status quo will change eventually. If now is “good balance” in your opinion, then whatever change will come will be, in your opinion, not balanced yet again. Considering the futility of this “exercise” in the long run, I call “Insanity by definition, currently interrupted by an exception”.
2 Likes
My definition of balance is based on a number of key issues in regards to the previous system of unlimited bumping, the first is no consequence blocking of a ship in space, the second is being able to define totally the battle space in terms of when and where, the third is that the actual freighter pilot had at the end of the day only one option, to dock up and log if he knew that there was a bumper on a gate. At least with this system a freighter pilot can jump in be bumped for three minutes and then continue on his way. If people are not set up to gank that freighter then they lose their prey.
There was no other gameplay in Eve that enabled this type of forever point.
If CCP reduce the EHP then I would accept that even though I think it is about right. But change the bumping mechanic back to what it was and give them such a huge strategic advantage, no.
The insanity is people who think that having such an advantage was correct balance and good game play.
Oh…, in my opinion by the way.
PS Throwing insanity at me like that makes you rather trollish…
wait ein minuten bitter, do you really think that the decline of Code. killing freighters has anything to do with the nerf? Ah, so the downward spiral that started long before wasn’t because of peopling getting banned for drunk shenanigans or just got busy in real life or just invented the wheel with karmafleet… Nah nvm
You can’t just add a token “in my opinion” at the end of the post. It’s obvious that you don’t mean it and just throw it there so I shut up about it. That’s something narcissists tend to do, by the way.
Your definition of balance is irrelevant. What matters is what CCP considers as balance. Did they claim that the points you’ve listed are key issues? Why would someone work with his own definition, as if there was a point in having one outside of the one CCP cares about?
Your post also contains inaccuracies. Allow me to show you:
This is the case for every single good engagment, because good attackers will always try to push everything into their favour. This is not actually specific to freighters. What is the argument here? That it should be different for freighters, because they can’t defend themselves? Should “nature” buff the gazelle, because the lion can kill it too easily when it’s drinking water at the lake?
This is incorrect. Some have other options, some don’t. You claim that every single freighter pilot only has one option, which is incorrect. Some freighter pilots can log on an alt to web themselves. Some freighter pilots can take another route. Some freighter pilots don’t get ganked, because they’re part of the group that’s not getting “overlooked”. That includes alts, but also alts of friends.
I agree that it shouldn’t be a thing for people to “ping a fleet” so everyone logs on, jumps into an already set-up ship, ganks the freighter and leaves again. That’s probably not how it always happens, but I’m sure it does happen. I agree that endless bumping is disruptive to the player being bumped, though I disagree with a three minutes timer.
Just to remind myself and everyone else: The reason for this change had nothing to do with freighter bumping, but with people getting stuck in collision boxes. There is actually no reason to assume that CCP in any way or form cared about “balancing freighter ganking”, which leaves room for the possibility that it is not actually balanced.
You just go by your guts and don’t even ask yourself if that’s okay. It’s not. You don’t even apply mathematics. What is the formula which helps defining balance? Do you really believe that less freighters being killed, which equals more freighters and items surviving, is better than more freighters being killed and less items surviving? What about all the manufacturers who benefit from items being destroyed?
Why is there no sign that tells me you actually ever cared about looking at the bigger picture? Why? Have you looked at the data the market provides? Freighter prices in relation to the cost of manufacturing and how they change with the amount of freighters getting destroyed, or not? Have you? Why not? How is this not an important part of “balance”? You believe your personal definition of balance is more important than CCP’s?
You never cared about looking at how many freighters and items are getting killed, compared to how many freighters and items are staying alive. That is what you look at when you care about balance, Dracvlad! It’s important! It’s the most important part, actually! That and nothing else. If bumping had caused an imbalance, it would have been reflected in the market data. CCP even specifically noted that the change is related to something completely different, indicating that there was absolutely no sign of an imbalance.
Was infinity bumping stupid? Sure! Does that mean it caused an imbalance? No!
All you care about is how “bumping is too easy” and you never even considered: “maybe the problem is that there is no reasonable way of actually killing them beyond continuously bumping them”, which is what someone would actually do when he cares about balance.
When the outcome of your demand is that less destruction is happening, without considering how little destruction already is happening, then your idea of “balance” was nothing but you deluding yourself about your motivations. You definitely cared about the bumping part, but there is absolutely zero sign you’ve cared about actual balance in terms of construction and destruction of freighters and items.
It is now balanced in your opinion, which appears to be “wrong”, but that’s absolutely fine by me.
3 Likes
Trolling again with the first sentence, you decided to throw that comment about opinion.
Your balance is simplistically based on overall game destruction, my balance is based on options and play for the freighter pilot. Pretty obvious that we will not agree on balance.
That is your insanity, not mine, to think it is balanced to apply the overall game destruction on freighter pilots, especially hisec ones doing contracts, ROFL…
During an exchange in these forums with CCP Hilmar I asked him about freighter bumping and he was aware of the issue, that the change was applied to prevent new players getting stuck was the main reason for this I expect that freighter balance was also part of this decision.
And the level of control that bumping allowed in terms of the battle space was well above anything else in this game. Why should freighter gankers be special snowflakes?
I have to step in and take my dear Zora in defense, not because she needs it! And not because I got an awesome Christmas gift! No, because YOU sir are just circling around when she shows you some logical errors in YOUR thinking. Read yet again what she wrote and I’m sure you will see what I mean.
And marry Christmas
1 Like
LOL, circling around it, I have defined precisely my issue with that mechanic over many posts and in many threads, it is people like you that circle around it. Her most important argument is overall game destruction, my argument is the balance play that a freighter pilot should expect to have in terms of counters and options.
I also believe that people will be blowing freighters up again when the value of the cargo starts to increase due to perceived safety. Don’t forget that a number of freighter gankers gave up before this change due to the lack of viable targets.
At this moment a freighter carrying more than 1bn cargo is not worth attacking because of a three minute timer and the loss of a noob ship with a point, how stupid is that. Why was it OK to gank before and not ok to gank after… There is no logic in your replies.
A Noob ship and a point can reset this timer. Pathetic
What have I circled around?
And you’re still on that nerf trail. How come the freighter ganking went down long before?
Do you even read what people post?
Which leads to the point that thinking destruction is the key balance to say this nerf was wrong is just way off base because it came down to a lack of players and very few being dumb to be suitable targets for the easy kill brigade who then could not sustain their multi-boxers.
To be honest, yes most of the time! In your case? I’m sorry but sometimes you lose me with all your advanced word and small tantrum about that you won.
There is no point in even trying arguing with a narcissist. But unlike other people around here, he’s not harmful at all and actually plays the game in a meaningful way. He can have his opinion just like everyone else. What rubs us is not his opinions, but how “definitive” he presents them. He can not help himself in that regard. There really is no point in arguing. He can not understand the “problem”, because it’s a “problem” of self-perception. It’s fine from my side, though, because he’s not really harmful to us, the game or the community and I applaud the things he does in the game.
So to make this abundantly and sufficiently clear: He’s a nice guy in my eyes. I have a real life friend who is quite like him. 
4 Likes
As if.
My dear! just to go a little off topic. You are an educated person, I’m sure you have read “The Alchemist” doesn’t he seems like the lake that no longer can see its own beauty when Narcissus die?
You two have no idea.
I have a fast aligning fast warping runabout which is an Ares, and I decided to call it CODE suck, but in the Inventory it says Code Suck (Ares) Totally not deliberate, but made me laugh.