Why do you think that would happen?
That’s wrong, you dont care much about changes when they dont affect you, period. PvP’ers dont have much to lose because they dont risk much, if any, ever. If they deleted high sec piracy pirates wouldnt be able to adapt and they’d whine all day just as much as miners do now, because the gameplay does not exist anymore.
That’s true.
Hop into a bunch of T1 frigates and start shooting, no one cares what your killboard looks like.
A killboard of genuine red attempts is better than never trying in the first place.
That’s not true, but the 10:500 thing would simply never happen to a properly trained and guided player.
So the fear is very much misplaced. I’d say that like 99% of all players on the receiving end of piracy/wars are deathly afraid of the pirates and the mercs. They only man up when they ball up into significantly larger groups, but even then usually still lose due to lack of competence.
I mean I literally fly around in a Venture looking for kills sometimes, and everyone I encounter still flees from me.
If a newbie player trying to learn the game receives ■■■■ for their killboard when flying T1 frigs the newb need to leave the corp ASAP and go to one of numerous corps that would welcome them.
High-sec PvP groups aren’t new-player training groups (some used to be, before the whole citadel war HQ thing, in fact I ran a small one myself). That said, I don’t think Cilly is a newb or needs to train in frigates. Way past that stage, and can get directly into solo-hunting with certain ships. Maybe in the beginning it would be better to focus on shield-extended setups, and then move on to armor repair tanks, as there’s an extra layer of complexity involved in managing capacitor, but aside from that there shouldn’t be any special caveats.
PvP is much more about mentality than player skills in terms of ship control.
I don’t think the guy who lost his Thrasher to Concord after missing me in an attempted gank would agree with that.
Personally I risked my 60m Gnosis attacking a bait ship at Dodixie…the attack was so even that it went on for 4 minutes before he re-docked in the station.
He didnt risk his thraser, he knew he’d lose it. He simply couldnt manage to get the kill. It’s more like ammos, i know ammos have a cost and i have to spend some to use my guns, you know you’re going to lose the ammos but what you get out of it might vary. Risk doesnt mean loss, you know you’ll lose your ship when you suicide gank, hence the suicide part. You’ll lose the ship but you never risk anything.
This is an irrational argument. Do you think gankers would have more risk if the odds of CONCORD responding were reduced to 0.00000001%?
He was fairly new…it was all about 6 weeks ago… but I’ve noticed has since gone on to be quite a successful ganker in the Chelien area with the Genetically Modified group. We had quite a cordial chat…his final words were ‘see you again sometime’…lol. That is how chat ought to go…not all the abuse stuff.
A risk of 100% is not called a risk. This is called a certainty, taking a risk means it might happen or it might not.
What kind of stupid argument is that
Risk is defined as the probability that an adverse consequence will occur. Probabilities range from 0 to 1 (inclusive), or from 0% to 100%.
If you truly believe gankers need more risk, I will agree that we should reduce the probability of a CONCORD response. Gankers can finally experience ‘risk’.
I’m already active in hunting people who AO has a bounty on. Even had chats with some of them and learned a bit. Yep, I’m waaay past the frigate stage, I actually have some quite impressive setups, but my biggest problem is seeing people in ships I don’t have or have never flown and not knowing what their capabilities are. As the people I am hunting are mostly solo gankers and quite experienced…I need to get more clued up on their ships.
But in some ways its also a bit of an honour to lose a ship to anyone really experienced.
Wrong, probabilities of 0% and 100% are certainties. Nothing else than those can happen so they are not ‘risk’
A certainty is a probability.
If you want to pay me, I will direct you to a website about mathematics.
Otherwise, you can wallow in stupidity and ignorance.
So you are saying that when you are using ammos to shoot down npc’s you are ‘risking’ losing those ammos. That’s a interesting take on the word risk, basically removes all its significance. But you are wrong so it doesnt matter.
I ask you again…
Will gankers incur more risk if we reduce the probability of a CONCORD response from 100% to 0.0000000000000000000001%?
If this is your definition of ‘risk’ - I want more risk!
Can you sometimes try to argue with real arguments instead of falacies.
I notice you aren’t answering my question.
It sounds like you are evading the question, because you know I am right, as does every other person who is reading this.