If you think my post’s aren’t being flagged I can only conclude that you don’t have eyes.
I’ve simply concluded that based on the sheer volume of insults lobbed about by the ganking crowd that insults must now be allowed on the forum, so I’m just joining in the fun.
You get this is a lie, right? I deleted a couple that got flagged and a bunch got deleted by mods (or possibly automod I dunno how it works) and Gix decided to start claiming that I’m running around deleting everything.
Sure, some old posts, particularly back then when a mod was selectively pruning my posts seemingly based on personal preference of views rather than based on any rule breaches.
TBH though, I don’t particularly care if some asshats want to sit around pretending I’m deleting posts, just thought it was worth pointing out in case he legitimately wasn’t aware that it’s a tactic being used by Gix to claim I deleted a post and then make up some content he claims I posted.
Where exactly is the line? Certain posters here seem to be able to launch literally hundreds of insults without so much as a warning so it genuinely seems to me that there’s no longer limits.
Considering a few years back I got a 7 day suspension for calling someone an idiot, it seems that the level of moderation has significantly decreased, which may explain why a small handful of people are now able to engage in targetter harassment to force people out.
I’m pretty sure when Aurora came on board it was made clear that cleaning up the forums was a priority but the exact opposite seems to have happened since then. The vast majority of people with sensible, rational views have gone elsewhere.
And yet you support a massively overpowered mechanics that deprives people of content and that is in itself so lacking in challenge that you got bored after doing it for a day and quit.
Oh look, Wes is posting, this’ll be amusing no doubt.
@Gix_Firebrand It can’t be worth it to keep talking to this guy is it? He’s gotten so much worse in the last week or so, and I’m just seeing it through the filter of your guys responses. You are out there starting straight at it like looking directly at the sun of stupidity, I honestly don’t know how you hang in there.
Sure, becuase much like gankers do with the endless taunting of gank targets they gradually wear me down to the point that I no longer give a flying ■■■■ about their feelings. You get this is their goal, right? The hook’s right there I might as well bite into it and go for the ride. Worst that happens is I get suspended and the ISDs prove categorically they are biased.
Yep, I absolutely am. Because you and your little mates constantly launch tirades of personal attacks and seem to get a completely free pass, then I respond in kind a couple of times and an ISD jumps in with a warning.
So, returning to the topic of the OP, my criticism of the approach is mainly 3-fold:
Arguments about specific economics are fundamentally flawed. Any arguments based on “cost/benefit” are ultimately at the whims of the market. The numbers ran today are not the numbers tomorrow, due to complex factors around supply and demand. The specific goods that gankers have to buy to execute their goals will change if there’s futzing-around with the material makeup (and therefore cost) of those specific goods. Likewise, people’s tolerance for hauling using the “ISK/EHP rule” metric will adjust accordingly up to re-risk being ganked again anyway. Looking at it as an economic problem does not make effective and market-condition-resistant long-term sense.
Arguing around specific CONCORD mechanics (time & pulling) do not make sense. Tweaking these values will not fundamentally change the game. Either more or less catalysts/thrashers/tornadoes (or whatever tactic of choice) will be needed, and these arguments wind up being one degree away from simply being an economic argument. And see previous paragraph why those are not strong arguments.
Arguments stemming from morality and “freedom” do not make sense. I cannot simply just go and drop a Keepstar in any nullsec region despite wishing for that kind of “freedom”. Morality does not make sense because it is a video game – and people have fun conducting immoral violent acts in all sorts of video games – think of the Goomba & Koopa genocides subject to Mario of the past 20+ years.
Really, it should be about arguments around engaging gameplay. The OP lightly touches on some aspects of those, but is saddled with what I find are the above weak arguments.
As ganking increases, the supply of ore will decline, and the price will increase. With more ganking, alert active miners will earn more, if they survive. Consequently, ganking is actually good for miners, as it removes AFK bot competition.