Discussing points with some of the gankers isn’t the same as opposing ganking. I’ve also disagreed with anti gankers in this and other threads but that doesn’t mean I particularly pro ganking either.
My position is best described as ganking ambivalent with a caveat that I think high sec is too oversaturated at the moment which means too much of everything happening in high sec from mission running to ganking. Does that make sense?
Toxic elements in the ganking community are bad for the game but they are also bad for ganking so not sure why you’d defend them.
Salt mining isn’t exclusive to ganking. It’s usually taken up by anyone that has and advantage over others in numbers and isk etc. I see it a lot from Frat when they throw their weight around.
Taking half of a quote to alter the meaning aside. I do think high sec play is all low risk. It has its place though. It doesn’t mean im specifically anti ganking or anti mining or anti mission running. Just think it’s time more people graduated out of high sec and increased the amount of content everywhere else in the game.
See above comment for the final quote.
Not answering for your benefit (seeing as it’s clear you are a classic troll) but for the benefit of the person whom I originally asked the question of seeing as you chose to answer it for them.
They aren’t required but your not omniscient, to know what’s on the other side of the gate you need eyes on both sides of the gate or have to take the gate as it comes.
Since you have no experience, your opinion is worthless.
How upsetting a troll thinks my opinion is worthless. Would be extra upsetting if I gave any credence to your opinion.
You are just salty because nobody is listening to you.
And yet here you are still trolling me so I guess I have some rent free space in your head. Have a nice weekend.
Yep, you are definitely living rent free in this forum thread.
I was taught to say good game after games no matter what, and to not do so was considered unsportsmanlike.
Moreover, it seems to me like there are many reasons why people say GF/GC/GG:
Moreover, when I was newbro in Eve University, I’d occasionally get advice from gankers or war targets. I appreciated the advice, and thought these guys were class acts. Decided that’s how I wanted to be. Fast forward to when I’m a player killer, and start doing the same thing, and am surprised to find some extremely angry responses from people calling me condescending. Here I was trying to be helpful, friendly, and classy, and people are interpreting it as me being condescending.
Seems to me like there can frequently be a huge disparity between intent and interpretation, especially when someone is upset about a recent loss, and/or assumes that my play style is inherently griefing.
Very true re the difference between intent and interpretation. Particularly in a text based medium.
I’m not saying this is JJ, but it’s JJ.
He’s making sock puppets to bolster his weak position and trying to give it credibility.
It’s a low handed, cowardly way of argument. But people do see through it.
I travel the length and breadth of highsec and have found plenty of systems where I am the only person there. No, highsec is not over-saturated. If anything it needs more people.
Yeah, that’s not my argument. So, let me break it down for you.
There are two groups making what sound like very similar arguments on the surface. But do not be mistaken, as they are not the same.
And now you’re in here trying to twist my argument into something it’s not because that makes you and group two seem like you’re the ones who are being reasonable- like you’re the ones who support player freedom, and we’re against it, when, in actuality, the reverse is true. Pfft.
Yeah, you try to paint yourself as sympathetic and moderate voice, while arguing that ganking needs nerfs, that it has terrible game play associated with, proposing changes that get rid of it entirely, and repeating common nerf-ganker arguments. I don’t know how else I’m supposed to interpret this other than you being two faced, because you’re acting just like all the other guys who say they aren’t against ganking right before proposing nuking it into the ground and regurgitating nerf-ganking talking points.
Least you can do is be honest and argue in good faith.
That’s because the gankers are the bot ice miners
In fact, the probability of CONCORD responding is less than 100%.
There is a chance, statistically small but nevertheless real, that CONCORD will not respond. A number of factors could trigger this, all unlikely, and yet all possible. Therefore, even if we accept the erroneous notion that a 100% likelihood is not a risk, the risk of CONCORD responding is less than 100%.
If anyone wants to continue this moot philosophical debate, 100% is still technically a risk, because it would be foolish to state that a 0.01% chance is more of a risk. Regardless, 100% chances are nigh impossible, and the notion of a 100% chance is itself a fallacy. All events tend to have something less than a 100% chance.
If you were a project manager running any kind of project and a risk was assessed to have a 100% chance of happening then you would be moving that risk to the issue log instead.
What if an asteroid hits the planet before it happens or CCP switches off the servers, or cancels concord or some other infinitesimally small likelihood? Well quite simply your project sponsor/steering committee would be looking for a new project manager if you started wasting their time with stuff like that. Concorde is to all intents and purposes a foregone conclusion and any practical business person (who wasn’t a troll) would be calculating that loss into their project.
Ian Malcom here can start going off about chaos theory or whatever justification for saying there is a chance you can keep your catalysts. However I’m fairly certain you are arguing from a point of defending your playstyle and not just being a troll mr Jones.
I’m actually going to leave this thread now. I don’t think we are breaking any new ground, I’ve been pretty clear many times over about my stance which is no ganking doesn’t need a nerf, I just want more people in low sec and null to interact with.
Enjoy all your last words and for those that are inclined miss quotes, trolly snipes and charachter assassinations. Apart from shipwreck Jones and Vokan I’m fairly sure none of you are discussing in good faith and I mean the anti gankers too in this.
Bye enjoy your weekends.
That is not very nice and not true. I get accused just like you of not discussing in good faith because I have a different view to them based around balance. I get all the same attacks that you just got in this thread and as a result I have to be combative to get my points heard over the noise and chaff thrown at me.
The main thing I disagreed with you about was making hisec less affluent, because at the end of the day quite a few people roam into lowsec and nullsec from hisec and you would damage those people.
But thanks for participating in this, you saw exactly how they operate did you not?
I have a question though, what exactly is a ganking nerf? Would you call removing tethering from hisec a ganking nerf? It was never meant as a ganking buff by the way, but it was one.
Would you call adjusting the loot scooping so that the loot has to start in the ships own cargo bay before being placed in a DST a ganking nerf, what is a ganking nerf to you?
Ok I’ll bite and come out of retirement for one last comment. Did you or did you not thank me for arguing constructively instead of trying to make you out as mad?
Stop for a second and really consider if that wasn’t passive aggressive and rather low. You don’t need to answer me this was a one and only post retirement post on this thread.
What is a ganking nerf? A nerf whose intent is purely to affect the specific playstyle of ganking. In my opinion.
Now seriously go enjoy your weekend, get some fresh air if you can and some space from the forums and going round and round, repeating the same conversations over and over like you are in some kind of hell.
I’m going to the summer exhibition.
It was nice to have someone discuss properly about this subject and to watch you be patient even after all the attacks you got, I respected you for doing that. I am not sure why my appreciation of your efforts and making an observation that you would be accused of being mad at some point would happen is wrong, in fact they went down the post with your main route, a tried and very useful attack designed to remove any weight to your points.
Would you count tethering as ganking related as such. When it was added it was a huge buff and removed AG gameplay, but it was never meant to be a buff to ganking, so removing it in hisec would be a nerf to ganking as it would only be removed for that reason, though there is a good reason to remove it totally in fact. It is a complicated game with complicated interactions.
Enjoy your weekend, respect to you.
