On the Ecosystem Changes

[Avatar_Sky-on]

Daichi,
" Avatar Sky-on

Daichi_Yamato

2h

but the phrase ‘non-consentual pvp’ keeps coming up…
sure for the gankers it may be fun, but for the people who are not doing pvp because they don’t desire and seek pvp, being told ‘tough titties, if you stay on eve you -have- to pvp, even if you don’t like it’ is usually met with a simple K BAI!"
So I never said it hmm??

@Daichi_Yamato

Are you being deliberately ironic? The only one making ad hominem attacks is you.

Your opinion isn’t wrong because you made it, or that it’s different than mine.

so, since you are accusing me of Ad Hom, would you care to actually point out the Ad Hom??

@Daichi_Yamato

It’s wrong because it’s reductive of the choices and relationships between players. ‘ganker or victim’ is dishonest. I can be both and neither in the same day. I can form relationships and trade that involve neither. When i spend a day trading, am i a ‘ganker’ or a ‘victim’? I may lose my home today, but what if i burn down someone elses tomorrow? What does that make me?

That’s the point behind eve’s marketing slogans. Players don’t have to define themselves as anything. They can do whatever they find fun.

So, would you care to point out how I am wrong, by showing what nerfs they have been applying to the Gankers? They have been applying plenty of nerfs to make non gankers ‘victims’
And they can do whatever they like to have fun, like explore, or build, or trade… as long as they find doing so ‘fun’ with the nerfs that they put in place to make things ‘fun’ for the non-victims… hence why I made that asteriked comment earlier… I noytice you like to quote -parts- of things, but not the actual content with a point being made that you can’t just dismis, why is that?

[Daichi_Yamato]

@Avatar_Sky-on

So I never said it hmm??

Not only didn’t you not say it, you’re now claiming i called you disingenuous for saying this:

@Avatar_Sky-on

but the phrase ‘non-consentual pvp’ keeps coming up…
sure for the gankers it may be fun, but for the people who are not doing pvp because they don’t desire and seek pvp, being told ‘tough titties, if you stay on eve you -have- to pvp, even if you don’t like it’ is usually met with a simple K BAI!

But i called you disingenuous for this:

@Avatar_Sky-on

as long as the anything you want is to be a ganker, or a victim

@Avatar_Sky-on

so, since you are accusing me of Ad Hom, would you care to actually point out the Ad Hom??

@Avatar_Sky-on

I’d don’t come from the standpoint that if an opinion differs from mine that makes it inherently wrong… too bad you can’t say the same.

And now this:

@Avatar_Sky-on

I noytice you like to quote -parts- of things, but not the actual content with a point being made that you can’t just dismis, why is that?

You’re more concerned with attacking me than addressing what I’m saying.

@Avatar_Sky-on

So, would you care to point out how I am wrong, by showing what nerfs they have been applying to the Gankers? They have been applying plenty of nerfs to make non gankers ‘victims’

What has that got to do with the reductive argument you made that you can only be ‘ganker or victim’?

If I was to point out the nerfs to gankers like:

• The structure resist changes for freighters.
• The 3min warp timer
• public kill rights
• No ship insurance for gankers
• Increased speed with which concord respond

And other nerfs.

How does that relate to your disingenuous argument that there are only two choices in eve?

Or is it that you’re just another carebear whining about non-consensual pvp?

[Avatar_Sky-on]

you have yet to show that it is ‘diningenuous’…

unless you consider the opinion of “we are going to nerf anything that doesn’t put you into one of those two categories” as being 100% in line with “you can do whatever you wish”.

So, I make a statement, and you say it’s disingenous whining, instead of addressing my points, and then when I point out that yes I did indeed say something that you claim I didn’t say, and provide you with proof that yes indeed I did say it… you take a quote from 6 steps further down in the chain -past- when you made the claim of disingenuous whining, as being what you were referring to… so how long have you been temporally dislocated?

when you accuse me of an Ad Hom attack, and I ask you to quote it and prove that I made an Ad Hom attack, you change what you say to that’s I’m attacking you without addressing what you are saying… are you trying to say that your own quoted words are -not- what you are saying that I’m addressing, or that you are trying to deny that you said them?
what about the other points -I- brought up, that you have not addressed, because thy were valid points you couldn’t refute… are you responding to the points I’m making, or just projecting what you are doing wrong as being done by me… like accusing me of Ad Hom, but not being able to quote a single Ad Hom, but -you- say things like “Or is it that you’re just another carebear whining about non-consensual pvp?”

[Daichi_Yamato]

@Avatar_Sky-on

unless you consider the opinion of “we are going to nerf anything that doesn’t put you into one of those two categories” as being 100% in line with “you can do whatever you wish”.

So planetary interaction wasn’t nerfed. Ganker or victim?

Hauling wasn’t nerfed. Ganker or victim?

Missions weren’t nerfed. Ganker or victim?

What if i am suicide ganked today, but kill someone in low sec tomorrow- am i a ganker or victim?

You are becoming less and less coherent in your thoughts.

@Avatar_Sky-on

what about the other points -I- brought up, that you have not addressed, because thy were valid points you couldn’t refute…

You are so incoherent it’s impossible to know what exactly you are referring to. But it’s clear you haven’t had any valid points since you suggested CCP weren’t great at marketing. Everything else has been dishonest or nonsense.

We’re now somehow arguing about ganking nerfs because you are just that bad at stringing thoughts together.

@Avatar_Sky-on

“Or is it that you’re just another carebear whining about non-consensual pvp?”

You have a bee in your bonnet about suicide ganking and non-consensual pvp. That is clear.

[Avatar_Sky-on]

@Daichi_Yamato

Hauling wasn’t nerfed. Ganker or victim?

so… Haulers don’t have to suddenly go into more dangerous areas to haul out minerals that are no longer in HS?? So which are you trying to stand by, you being wrong, or you prevaricating?

your lack of ability to be honest, or rationally think is not me becoming ‘less and less coherent’, after all this time you still haven’t been able to respond to an entire sentence, instead of just a fragment of a sentence… so who is it being incoherent?

@Daichi_Yamato

You are so incoherent it’s impossible to know what exactly you are referring to. But it’s clear you haven’t had any valid points since you suggested CCP weren’t great at marketing. Everything else has been dishonest or nonsense.

@Daichi_Yamato

And that’s fine.

What would you say to a COD player that doesn’t like military style games?

Or a NFS player that doesn’t want to drive cars?

The core feature of eve is full time pvp in a sandbox environment. It is as essential to the eve experience as cars are to racing games and guns are to FPS games.

If you don’t like it…why are you here?

@Avatar_Sky-on

True,
but perhaps the marketing department shouldn’t be trying to sell the game as “a sandbox, where you can do anything you want to have fun *”

• as long as the anything you want is to be a ganker, or a victim

@Avatar_Sky-on

Daichi,
you are making wrong comparisons here…
“What would you say to a COD player that doesn’t like military style games?”
when what you have is more along the android phone games that ‘sell’ the game by having you try and solve logic puzzles to get by traps, and when you actuaally get the game it’s “hey, look we are -totally- different than bejweled, because we use pig heads instead of jewels”

See, I made a point…
you countered the point
I responded with a counter to your point
you can’t counter the point, so jump on an entirely different topic/tack…
so this is your great example of me being ‘incoherent’??
seems more it’s a case of you not being able to process thoughts sequentially…

@Daichi_Yamato

You are so incoherent it’s impossible to know what exactly you are referring to. But it’s clear you haven’t had any valid points since you suggested CCP weren’t great at marketing. Everything else has been dishonest or nonsense.

We’re now somehow arguing about ganking nerfs because you are just that bad at stringing thoughts together.

so, when I point out that things are skewed in favor of gankers, or making folks victims, and you try and argue ‘no they are not’, and I ask you to prove your point by showing how there are equal nefrs being applied to the ‘favored’ styles, as compared to the 'non-favored- styles, it becomes ‘incomprehensible’ to you, and I’m not making any sense and I’m ‘suddenly changing the argument’ simply because you can’t support -your- points?

[Avatar_Sky-on]

Daichi,
so your defense, when asked to prove your claim that someone was using Ad Hom, and pointed out that you are the one using Ad Hom, and your inability to use an -entire- statement of a quote to argue against is supposed to show the strength of your logic?
quoting -part- of my statement where I quote your Ad Hom, to -prove- my point you are making an Ad Hom argument, to make a statement that “I have a bee in my bonnet” isn’t very logical or honest, so what does that say about you?

[tutucox_Khamsi]

[Evei_Shard]

@Anabella_Rella

and does little to address the built up stockpiles of the super rich.

The re-balancing is aimed at affecting those stockpiles through positive incentive (prices are up, make more isk), but CCP seems to only be looking at the vast stockpiles of materials that exist in general, and perhaps not looking at how much of those stock piles are on active or even recently active accounts.

The only way they are going to solve the hoarding problem is to either make NPC stations vulnerable to attack by players or an NPC entity, or through the introduction of an entropy system where if your items have been stored for x amount of time, they begin to rust/degrade/fall-apart, etc.

[Daichi_Yamato]

@Avatar_Sky-on

so… Haulers don’t have to suddenly go into more dangerous areas to haul out minerals that are no longer in HS?? So which are you trying to stand by, you being wrong, or you prevaricating?

The nerfs to mining aren’t a nerf to hauling.

Haulers were already going through lowsec. And people were already mining in lowsec. Though career haulers may be getting more jobs because of it. A nice buff for them if they are.

And what about PI? What about missions?

They haven’t been nerfed have they? So by your definition they must be gankers?

@Avatar_Sky-on

I responded with a counter to your point
you can’t counter the point, so jump on an entirely different topic/tack…

I’m trying to keep the discussion remotely on topic.

I.e. Not about ganking nerfs.

@Avatar_Sky-on

so, when I point out that things are skewed in favor of gankers, or making folks victims, and you try and argue ‘no they are not’, and I ask you to prove your point by showing how there are equal nefrs being applied to the ‘favored’ styles, as compared to the 'non-favored- styles, it becomes ‘incomprehensible’ to you,

But things aren’t skewed in favor of gankers.

A nerf to mining isn’t a buff to gankers. Gankers fly ships too, and many of them are miners themselves. And vice versa miners kill people too.

A ganker today is a victim tomorrow.

CCP are nerfing mining for everyone. That affects everyone. Gankers and null blobs included. Not just ‘victims’.

This is how you’re incoherent. You’re attitude that eve players fall into gankers OR victims is clearly nonsense. Clearly you’re just butthurt about ganking.

[tutucox_Khamsi]

@Daichi_Yamato

And people were already mining in lowsec.

yeah they totally are
never saw so many miners in the fw area
miners everywhere

[Daichi_Yamato]

@Evei_Shard

but CCP seems to only be looking at the vast stockpiles of materials that exist in general, and perhaps not looking at how much of those stock piles are on active or even recently active accounts.

Why do you think that?

@tutucox_Khamsi

yeah they totally are
never saw so many miners in the fw area
miners everywhere

Someone has to get the Iso and Nocx

[tutucox_Khamsi]

@Daichi_Yamato

Someone has to get the Iso and Nocx

yes and with them come a bunch of strange people
changed low a lil
non low folks …
they are fine i guess

[March_rabbit]

@Daichi_Yamato

Hi-sec has 200-300 mil in a belt. But who fights over hi-sec belts?

Low sec mining however is different. A small anomaly had 2.5mil m3 of crokite (in two rocks!). That’s over 1bil easily. Maybe 2bil isk. Not counting the gneiss and orchre that was also present.

Is this some kind of average value which can be found easily? Or this is initial value of fully spawned and not touched by NPC miners belt?

If it is former then this makes the story completely different. In this case I agree that this can increase conflict.

[Daichi_Yamato]

@March_rabbit

Is this some kind of average value which can be found easily? Or this is initial value of fully spawned and not touched by NPC miners belt?

This is my estimation of an untouched hisec belt.

I can consistently find this, but i have a good timezone for mining and NPC miners don’t seem quite as rapacious as some people suggest.

The low sec anom was a small anom after CCP did the ‘redistribution’ patch. Low sec got a massive increase in crokite in it’s anoms. No way of telling how long that anom was there before i got there and it’s the first anom I saw since the change.