Makes no sense either from an English language standpoint either. Even though it is multiple players.
You’re using the word wrong. It doesn’t matter if you describe one, or two players. That’s not how the word “multiplayer” is being used within the context of the discussion.
Multiplayer is used to describe the setting that the player is in. And yes, if players are interacting with other players, then even if you single out a single player, we still use the word multiplayer to describe the setting him or her is in because there isn’t just a single player and this isn’t a single player game.
‘Those players are in a multiplayer encounter’ describes the environment, not the players. The question was
So describing the user with ‘multi-player’ will never be a correct usage of the word - which we have all agreed on, yet for some reason you still posted this nonsense:
Thus the confusion from others as you contradict yourself.
Its like you ignored half the sentence I typed to fit your narrative.
Here, let me break it down for you.
I broke it up so that its easier for you to understand.
If I were to ask you “What do you call a Calf that is thrown into a pack of hungry wolves”, and you answer “Dinner time”, you would be right, even though “Dinner time” is describing the situation as a whole, and is not a description of the Calf.
What youre doing is dishonestly highlighting “What do you call a Calf” as if the rest of the sentence doesnt exist.
Yeah, maybe if you read what you called as “nonsense” you would have a better understanding as to why you are wrong.
Oh, whats that? I set up a scenario where we are talking about a user who is interacting with other players? And not just a single player that is doing nothing and is completely independant of everything else?
If the context of the discussion was simply about a single player, then you would be correct. But the discussion we were having, and the scenario that I brought up, was as follows:
The scenario was a player, with 20 other players logged in simultaneously. I originally made that argument to contrast with Natalies argument of how she considered it cheating for someone to log in 20 characters at the same time, showing how, if you cant differentiate between a player with 20 accounts or 20 players with 1 account each, its stupid to call it cheating in a game that doesnt consider it cheating for players to have as many accounts as they wish.
Maybe you should follow the discussion and the context instead of just looking at the most recent reply and deciding someone was wrong.
No, you and the person you replied to are both misusing the language. You call ‘a calf being thrown’ dinner time, not ‘a calf that is thrown’ dinner time - a calf is ‘dinner’, the scenario is ‘dinner time’. Word choice actually is relevant. Perpetuating @Natalie_Patrovita 's improper use doesn’t make your continued improper usage right, especially in the specific context of someone calling out Natalie for applying an environmental descriptor to a user and then you weirdly hopping to her defense.
No, and an easy demonstration here is combining the two. You could say “A calf that is being thrown” and it would mean the same thing.
If you want to specifically address the calf, and not the general situation, you would probably have to replace the word “A” with “The” to be more specific.
The difference would be, “What do you call X”, and “What do you call the specific X that is in this situation, as”. And while the first statement doesnt necessarily preclude the second, they are not the same thing and there is a difference between them.
And the way we figure out if we are speaking about the statement as a whole, or a specific word/actor/noun/whatever you choose to concentrate on, is for the person who made the statement, to clarify what he was talking about.
I was arguing against her for a different reason, then someone said something else that was wrong, so i replied. I am an equal opportunity debater.
And this is where it goes back to understanding the context of the discussion we were having.
I used to whine and ■■■■■ about ganking in high sec too when i started, but learned its making this game unique in its kind. I understand its not really funny to get blown up daily when just starting a game but it makes you learn how this game works. My concerns are more about the carebears nowadays who try to change this game into some solo mining tycoon crap game. I even started to respect some of the ideals in the CODE, because its about playing the game and not multibox mining allday gathering isk like a greedy scrooge.
And i know now i will get the full bucket of ■■■■ thrown at me by the carebears who want a safe EVE, even in wormholes, where i am around a lot now adays ( and actually loose less ships then in high sec or low sec ).
This is how the game is, you mine you play victim, you fight or gank etc. you become the hunter, just be both!!! and enjoy all aspects of this great game or go do something else instead of bitching and whining.
No, mining can be fun and rewarding. You are right, careless mining is dangerous, but organized mining regarding logistical and security aspects for many players is satisfying.
I’ve been perfectly able to use my very first Covetor in highsec for years. Never met any gankers but once, afk in a Venture in a System right between Dodixie and Jita - cheap lesson, I was young (new) and foolish.
Chose your spot wisely and keep your eyes open.
While I’m flattered that you posted my character as an example despite me not playing the game
Your thesis contains multiple factual errors which were addressed in the thread so can you please show me where the Catalyst touched you?
Also harden the ■■■■ up
You are right but this thread will be flooded by gankbears trolling and grasping at straws quicker than you think.
Issue is always : if there is a broken mechanic that people exploit. The exploiters are quick to act in order to preserve their risk averse playstyles.
Edit : Not that I care because I barely fly anything worthwhile ganking and if I do I make sure EHP checks out (math lets you know if you are worth a gank) So my opinion is 100% neutral.
Gankbears = Carebears.
Blowing up stupid LVL4 NPCs that dont fight back
Blowing up stupid Haulers that dont fight back.
Actualy scratch that. LVL4 missions have a higher risk but far less reward than ganking.
Speaks volumes really.
It seems we need to ISK limit in cargo-holds.
Or maybe, just maybe, people may consider switching to a Blockade Runner just for Uedama (seems like ANY example of gank is from this system) and actually use that covert ops cloak you fit in such ships.
If this was reality then the insurance company would be trying to retrieve their payout (character or the corp) and it seem like there is fairly good documentation for a court to approve this…
The police could gather the belongings from the ganked ship and move them to a nearby station
The police could attack people looting under their noses.
They don’t do this in real life. If you rob me, then throw my wallet in the corner of the street, the police don’t come and pick up my wallet unless I report the crime, and even then, they won’t bother sending anyone to the scene of the crime to begin with.
Instead, the police will probably just ask you “well, if he threw the wallet on the ground, why didn’t you just pick it up, or have a friend pick it up for you?”
Police don’t do this in the real world either.
If a policeman was standing 5 feet from me, and I pick up a wallet left on the side of the road, do you think he will care? If I pick up a 50 dollar bill from the side of the road, do you think he would arrest me for stealing? Of course not. He wouldn’t even look twice.
Concord doesnt kill you. They destroy your ship, but leave your pod. Killing, even Podding in EVE online is not the same as killing in real life, because real life doesnt have immortal capsuleers who respawn at a station nearby.
Its more akin to a lesser crime in real life. And yes. If someone robs you at gunpoint, and then takes your wallet, but drops it on the ground and gets chased or arrested by the police, they are not going to tape a crime scene around you, and anyone will be able to walk by and pick it up.
Ignoring the whole “in real life” thing (because making such points will always be on shaky ground in a science-fiction game)…
The main purposes of the current system is thus: It encourages people to make conscious choices and team up with others.
For gankers, they have to…
– sit idly in abject boredom (for who knows how long) waiting for a potential target to show up
– gauge whether it is worth losing security status (causes headaches later)
– gauge whether it is worth losing a ship (lost ISK/materials, non-recoverable)
– gauge whether it is worth not being able to fly any other ship for up to 15 minutes (more downtime)
– gauge whether it is worth being a legal target for everyone in the game for 15 minutes (potential for some logistical issues if shot)
– gauge whether all of the above is worth all for a potential payoff that has a 50/50 odds of dropping as loot (see: 50/50 chance to run a loss in both time and money)
– gauge whether a friend will be fast enough to grab the loot and get away before someone takes a shot at them (see: chance to run a loss in both time and money)
That last point is kind of important, because someone who ganks cannot also scoop loot. So teamwork is absolutely mandatory (in some form or another).
And the person who scoops loot can be shot at by everyone in the game (but not police) once they load up their cargo bay.
For haulers/miners/mission runners, they have to…
– gauge whether it is worth loading up a ship with a certain amount of value
– gauge whether said value will make a ship more or less attractive to potential hostiles
– gauge whether their ship’s tank will make the ship less attractive to potential hostiles
– whether all of the above will dent their efficiency and by how much
Teamwork works for haulers/minder/mission runners as well.
A teammate can use a stasis web to make it warp faster., provide remote rep support to increase a ship’s staying power, do cleanup/salvage/ferrying operations, etc.
The whole thing is SUPPOSED to be a “rat race” where players are constantly trying to develop ways to attack and defend, loot and secure, produce and destroy, supply and starve.
Once you find something that works for you, another player will find a way to get around it. And the cycle continues.
Ganking is merely the most obvious and (arguably) jarring example of this.
Be slippery (and generally more trouble than you are worth)
Have friends (scouting, webbing, etc)
Take routes that see less traffic
Use the right ships and fittings for the right job
– Example 1: Fast frigates are good for low-volume, high-value items.
– Example 2: Active-tanks (repair modules) ideal for steady, controlled DPS situations… like missions. Buffer tanks (armor plates & shield extender) are good for quick, burst-DPS scenarios… like ganking.
Generally speaking: Don’t use auto-pilot unless you know when to use it.
Hmmm, I wish I knew how many catalysts it took to take out a certain ship, then I could comment on your argument or not. Unfortunately, the fitting simulation gives the alpha of those fits on my skills so they’re obviously wrong. Also I just noticed these forums are really hard to navigate long threads that have more than 30 posts. Ironically, the old forums EVE Online Forums had pages making it easier to follow conversations, although following them is a bit silly since most of that info is out of date.
