By definition of value, it cannot be wrong. It MUST be worth it. Maybe not to everyone, but SOMEONE.
God damn! Can another accountant please help me explain this. @Teckos_Pech
‘Real value’ is entirely subjective to the individual and their unique circumstances. The price of something you see on the market is not it’s real value. It is only a suggested value until it’s actually bought.
Yes!!!
No!!! Lol.
I’m trying to tell you how humans perceive value and how value can be (or more accurately, can only be) measured by human behaviour. I mean REAL VALUE. And this ties in so well to what is ‘balance’ in a game such as eve.
But my explanations must suck.
The fact that so much fracking goes on means it strongly suggests it has value to a lot of people (more than it’s alternatives anyways). And that strongly suggests there is no issue.
If ore thieves were so damaging to fracking income, it would not have more value than the alternatives and most people would stop fracking.
This is how REAL VALUE is estimated. And it takes into account absolutely everything, including time zones, population density, group size…everything. Because real value is different to each unique individual and can only be finally known for sure at the point of transaction.
Wrong, I’m talking about direct sell. so the price I talk about ARE money you directly get.
Then you are wrong.
Yeah, when you switch the meaning of the words when you are proven wrong, I think it’s not only your explanation that suck.
You claim that there is no issue because people keep doing it.
That’s just simply wrong. Just because people survive something does not mean that thing is not deadly.
No. Your “most” is completely comes out of nowhere.
what is “this” ? I could not find a correct evaluation protocol.
So now you are claiming that the value that fits your view is the correct one, and any one that does not is thus incorrect.
That’s hypocrisy. If we discuss a notion of value, then we need to settle on a value that makes sense and does not change according to the temperature. Otherwise you are just trolling.
This whole ■■■■■■■■ does not change the truth : ninja harvester take no risk and you just argue for the sake of arguing.
What’s more it’s a complete absurd affirmation made up for the sake of shifting the topic from “ninja harvester don’t have enough risk” to “moon mining is worth more than the other mining activities in HS”, which is not only a lie but also completely off-topic as it does not address the topic.
I’m not trying to shift the topic. Trying to explain that ninja-salvaging is not ao damaging to fracking that people are still doing it. It’s obviously still worth more to the frackers than the alternatives.
no. The data you have is, there ARE people who still do it.
Then what ?It does not mean there are not people who stopped specifically for that reason.
What’s more the data is there ARE people who consider that it is an issue.
So your DATA are that actually it IS an issue.
Now you just don’t want to accept it and rather ignore the part where it shows there is one. Which is as clever as closing your eyes and claim there is no wall when running.
If we are going to argue that CCP need to change the game mechanics, there should be a clear reason that such a change needs to be made, otherwise, why bother? We can go back and forth here, but let’s look at actual player behavior in the game; by and large, most people are choosing to build a moon drill in high sec, and low sec is under utilized. Those station owners know that they can push ninja miners out if they build in low-sec, but they still choose to build in high sec, knowing that others can mine their ore with minimal consequence.
Based on player actions, it seems there’s still too much incentive to build in high sec, and not enough incentive to build in low sec, and this proposed change to the game mechanics would provide even less incentive to build the drill in low sec.
Some people may have stopped doing it, but if other people take their place it would still suggest there is no issue.
The goal is to find the correct balance between people doing and people not doing it. And more than that, the right people doing it and the wrong people not doing it.
Now assuming ccp intended fracking to be a group activity, then groups doing it and solo players not doing it would be fine! No issue.
But if we reached a point where not even groups were doing it, that would definitely suggest there was an issue. Or if we had a situation where solo players were widely doing it, that may suggest that it’s too easy/worthwhile. Assuming ccp intend for it to be a group activity.
No. Just no.
The simple fact that people complain suggest on the other hand that there is an issue, which you don’t want to see because “personal opinion”.
And you are none to claim what the correct balance is. And even so you would have NO DATA to validate such a balance. And what’s more your “right people” is a valuation post-experience and thus as literally zero validity, because your only valuation is what fits your opinion. “I like it so it is okay”. Sorry that’s complete BS.
Again, you are shifting the issue from “is the ninja harvesting balanced” to “is there too many moons harvested” which not only you have no right to judge , but also have no argument for . And of course is completely off-topic.
Pretty bang on actually. The issue is knowing what is the correct amount of building to be happening in hi-sec vs low-sec.
It suggests there may be an issue. But because a player perceives there to be an issue doesn’t mean there is one. It doesn’t mean everyone else agrees.
Look at this:
He perceives an issue and may complain about it. But it doesn’t necessarily mean there is one. It doesn’t mean we all agree.
And neither are you.
I have the same right to judge it as you do to judge that ninja-mining is unbalanced. Same as anyone does.
Actually OP said they should be changed because of ninja harvesters in HS.
In no way was there a concern about what people are doing in low sec. I agree that this should not make LS worse than it is, but then your claim that it would impact LS is still to be proven. Especially in the case of people who just don’t want to go to LS.
You believe that people will leave HS and go LS just because they can kill people there ? They rather leave the game. If you think you can improve LS by making HS worse, you are very wrong.
No it’s not.
Again, “correct” is just your opinion, and not related to the topic.
Indeed and as I wrote just after it means that you focusing only on the part “it suggests there is no issue” have a vested interest in ignoring the issue.
And you are free to put that opinion of yours where I think of That is, in a dedicated topic . So as to not pollute other people by going in an off-topic rampage.
And no, the mechanism of ninja-harvesting IS unbalanced in favor of the ninja harvesters. By any meaningful definition you use.
I do have a vested interest. But doesn’t the op also have a vested interest?
Ccp will have an idea of what amounts of fracking should be happening and who should be doing it. And we can speculate as to what that may be and summise about the current situation: ‘this seems fine’ or ‘somethings broken’.
