I am not deliberately misrepresenting Lucas. I am not going to go digging through his old posts to get you a citation. He has made claims about his pedigree just now, so there would be no purpose in me finding other posts where he did the same thing.
You’re not saying for years in hundreds of posts that something is super easy and impossible to counter.
Literally just proves you can’t take anything he says seriously.
He clearly despises me after dunking on him for so long and not getting back at me even once. So why wouldn’t he take the easy challenge and make me lose 40bil? It’s something he could and would gloat about nonstop till the end of time
Truth is, he knew what he was saying was ■■■■■■■■ all along and had no faith he could win against a top tier player like me
Dracvlad, I’m more likely to take your opinions seriously if you can actually back up the claims you make. Telling me to find it for myself sounds like a less snide way of saying “it’s not my job to educate you.”
Now, that’s entirely fair, since constantly posting sources and citations can get tiresome. But you’d probably convince more people if you assembled a document with those sources and citations that you could throw at people and say “read this to understand what I mean”.
As for the example you did present; the ROF buff to destroyers definitely looks like it would help gankers. The talk I’ve heard about destroyers also indicates that this may have been a side effect to CCP’s attempts at making them actually useful in combat, rather than a targeted buff for gankers; word of mouse has it that they weren’t very good back when they got introduced and still have some problems today.
But I could very well be wrong on that assumption.
I was giving a hypothetical example, man. I don’t actually think that either side of the equation has an advantage over the other simply because I don’t know enough about them to make that determination. Now, with that said…
…what I do know of the game mechanics leads me to believe that this is true, in the sense that - generally speaking - it’s much harder to stop a gank than it is to pull one off successfully.
What I’m doing here is asking more experienced players to explain things to me, so that I can better understand the game’s mechanics and ecology. You haven’t done a very good job of explaining things, while posters on the ganker side, like Karak, have.
I am perfectly willing to change my opinions, provided that I hear a convincing argument.
Did you write down your system anywhere, and if so, can you shoot me a link?
E-Uni’s fitting pages say otherwise.
Based on the context, I’m pretty sure that he was talking about PVE fits. There’s no reason to fit one on most PVE fits. C5/C6 ratting, yes, to tackle the Drifter. Some of the newer stuff warps off and comes back, so it also might be useful there, but in High-Sec mission sites, where most MTU baiting occurs, there’s no use for a point.
Why is it my job to educate people, I am not here to indoctrinate people, I tell people to think for themselves and find out, it is much better that way than being told by others what to think. If you can’t do it then no loss.
I have already listed on the forums the buffs to ganking, but a list of buffs and nerfs is not the whole picture because as you correctly noted many buffs and nerfs are applied for different and correct reasons, like the wreck ehp change.
The ROF buff meant that the Catalyst could throw out more DPS then many BC’s, so it was a very cheap ship with significant firepower and it made ganking a lot cheaper. CCP did that and made no change to mining ship tanks, so there was an explosion of ganking. The best tanked ship was the Hulk, but a single Catalyst could blow one up and pod them too in 0.7 and lower. a 240m ship blown up with ease by a 1m ship. And it was left like that for two and a half years.
They were not very good and they were correctly buffed and as a ship class they work well now, but the buff was removing the ROF penalty and not adjusting elsewhere, such as mining ship tanks. This is why talking about buffs and nerfs is not always the right way to assess this. The issue is and always has been the lack of understanding by CCP in terms of balance.
Here is a good one, Clone soldier tags which remove negative security standings. It is now a cost in terms of ISK, not in time, this means that the security status of a tornado ganker can be removed to enable him to loiter. Previously they had to grind down their security status by killing rats. This severely weakened the penalty of a negative security status by making it trivial to remove.
You don’t know, it is obvious. I explained that bumping gave too much control over time and place continuously, now that is capped it is fine and gankers have adapted. Gankers have to be set up and ready to go meaning in place, so the system is full of red gankers which enables people to assess their risk better. The balance is now fine there.
There you go, progress.
I am not here to indoctrinate you. I am here to prompt you to think and look at it yourself, not push you into a way of thinking with honeyed words and generalisations, even though you think that is what I am doing, you make your own mind up, but please stop trying to create some sort of beauty contest between me and Karak or KM as you did previously.
Yes in this thread above that post you linked to, this is why I don’t believe I am here to educate you when you cannot educate yourself by what is there in your face. This was about the war dec system and what I had proposed in the War Dec Discord.
You come over as an idiot here, taking that out of context and not understanding what that meant, that was people running missions who don’t fit points, they drop an MTU to salvage and someone shoots it and goes suspect, when they shoot back which is a stupid thing to do as most are in BS and the baiters are in smaller ships that get under their guns. The mission runners loss mail never has a point on them which means if the baiter starts to lose he leaves, it is the definition of low risk.
Lets look at your trolling here:
Is what I wrote and you came up with this quote:
You are out of context trolling aren’t you, with the intention to make the person look stupid with the out of context quote. You are just a troll mate.
It is on Zkill, and their pods too on my alt, yes, they obviously pass their data to Zkill. It is for CODE to find out who my alts are, if they cannot do that they are pretty dumb…
As for the other one I mentioned, two of the three I shot are on zkill under Dracvlad and the other five died to Concord and don’t show. As I do not update Zkill on my characters and corps it is no big deal to me.
Here we are a man with a brain, who hits the nail right on the head on what I was talking about, but he is not trolling unlike you.
It’s nice to know that you’re accidentally misrepresenting me. Maybe you should just not misrepresent people altogether.
I think you are a liar. I don’t think I am misrepresenting you at all. I cannot be sure, though.
OK, what have I lied about?
I will sift through a seemingly endless inundation of drivel just to find one gem like this.
Your tears are my food, Dracvlad.
Educate =/= indoctrinate. When evidence and explanation d are provided to me, I examine them and form my own conclusions based on them. Karak has responded with examples and evidence when I asked for it. Not every time, but enough that I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and believe he knows what he’s talking about.
By contrast, you like to make broad, sweeping statements with few definite examples, which leads me to think that you don’t actually know what you’re talking about.
Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe you have given examples and my eyes just slid over them while reading this thread, that’s happened to me before. If so, feel free to point them out and then mock me for it.
I can actually understand that, somewhat. Enforcing consequences is good, but making the consequences for a valid type of play (piracy) too severe is unfair to the players who want to be pirates.
I don’t think enough industrialists and traders do business in lowsec to make being a pirate there appealing, but highsec is full of them. I could be wrong, though.
If I’m not wrong, then I sure as hell wish I knew how to convince people to break out into lowsec more…
Thank you, that actually makes sense to me.
Hell no, I’m not trolling you. That part of your sentence stood out to me because from what I remember, most of the fits on E-Uni have a scrambler/disruptor. Looking at that, I presumed that packing one was normal and I was just the weird outlier until @Gergoran_Moussou said otherwise in the post you quoted.
I presumed incorrectly, and now it’s been corrected. There was no malice in my actions at any point, and I’m sorry for giving you that impression.
Wait, am I misunderstanding you or are you saying that you wrote it down in the wardec discord? Because it’s really hard to search a chat system like that for specific posts.
I’m still not used to the alt skullduggery in this game. My sole alt has the same last name as my main and I just use him to haul stuff. I don’t think I’d ever be able to keep everything straight if I did more than that.
Valriran, let’s try to be more concise, ok?
I consider it a scrubby thing to do but if it’s allowed by the rules then it is what it is. EVE is a reflection of human nature. It’s essentially how humans would behave in unregulated space. The only concern I have is for the health of the game in the long term. With all the alts, I doubt there is more than 10k players and new player retention is hard enough with the mountain (or two) that they have to climb in terms of being able to play the content. I certainly wouldn’t beat yourself up over it though.
Just admit you fear us, Drac.
Fair enough. I’m still used to forums where double-posting is considered bad etiquette if it isn’t infraction-worthy, so when I come read this thread I feel the need to quote everyone I’m responding to at once.
How’s your day been?
…why does your post say it’s replying to me?
Dude, can we just agree that Drac is a chicken?
Here is the thing, I believe that CCP did that to encourage people to operate more in lowsec, but instead it is mainly used to remove negative security standings in hisec and reduce the consequences, but made it easier for gankers and made it harder to do anything about them.
Is that a sweeping statement, well yes it is. But have you gone after Tornado gankers? In fact the only way to stop them is to ignore the Tornado and murder their loot scooper. Of course there are kill rights, but they are very good at clearing them.
What if CCP took the time to split out in their database the security hit from lowsec as compared to hisec and only applied the tags to the lowsec part of it.
Total rubbish, your reading and comprehension is at fault.
This is an example of that, you were looking to troll by saying that. My sentence clearly said mission runners, and yet you decided to ignore that.
You are doing the same thing here, I wrote a reply to Karak when he told me that the current system is my system and I detailed what I had proposed in this thread, yes in this thread above that post you linked to and was the point of view I had when I was in the war dec discord. You have selectively read it with an unconscious bias against me to make yet another silly dig about looking for it on discord when it is in this thread.
I was also against removing neutral logistics. I liked the fact that they went suspect and you could shoot them. In effect what this change did was favour the bigger groups like PIRAT.
At last, and they are ganking by using a suicide point, it is good balance now.
If I was in a Venture…
So you refuse to name any of your alts out of cowardice? Got it.
If I were you, I would fear the New Order too.
BAWK BAWK BAWK BAWK BAWK BAWK
I dare not step into a Venture.
Ahhhhh, carebears complaining about core aspects of EVE Online.
It’s like the rooster’s crow.
Is this an admission that you are a carebear, since you’re currently whining that Drac uses anonymous alts effectively?