Is that euphemism?
Of course you won’t.
Of course. Would be an entire waste of time. You have your opinion and so far I have not heard anything constructive from you hat convinces me that we are better of WITH tethering outlaws in HighSec than WITHOUT. And thats all I care for. From my point of view, tethering outlaws makes no logical sense at all (lore), hurting the gameplay by removing options for interaction.
Change my mind and stop whining as if someone would want to take away your toy after you have hit several others too hard with it. :shrug:
Using that same logic, you should be in favor of moving all high-sec PvE to low-sec (and beyond), since this would satisfy your conditions perfectly:
Lore:
- All of the good natural resources should have been mined out ages ago, and the empires definitely wouldn’t let some loony eggers steal what’s left to turn into warships that would get vaporized a week later
- The massive pirate gangs that are the common targets of most high-sec missions shouldn’t be able to operate in high-sec (just like capsuleer pirates shouldn’t be able to) because of navy and police presence
- Civilians would be against vast industrial waste stemming from, and morally opposed to, the production of private military armadas near their homes
Gameplay:
- This would certainly help player interaction, as there are currently countless players doing nothing but grinding high-sec PvE and never interacting with anyone, and forcing them all into low-sec would certainly boost player interaction
Yet somehow I doubt you’ll get behind this particular initiative.
That’s not my job. It’s your idea, so you have to defend it. Throwing out random theories and ideas and putting the onus on others to disprove them would amount to an endless filibuster, and nothing would ever get done. That’s why the system doesn’t actually work that way.
Surely someone who goes around calling people “dumb” on internet forums understands this?
Nothing in this topic is about resources, PvE or anything else. You try to light a smoke candle again. It might be perfectly fine in your book that the empire police tolerates tethering of wanted outlaws they would otherwise instantly engage, in my book thats a debatable status.
Also I have explained multiple times now why I believe it would be a better solution to have tethering disabled for outlaws. If you disagree, fine, then you could just disagree and get over it or bring good arguments against it. That is how a discussion works. But instead you constantly try to raise new issues, make assumptions about some hidden agenda you might have sensed in other peoples minds and basically tell them to “shut up and leave”, accusing them of using “Alts” to push for their goals or whatnot.
If you want to have a honest discussion, focus on the topic and stop the personal attacks and clueless assumption on what other people might want or not want. If I would like to have ganking removed alltogether, I would just say so. Why not? What bad things should happen if I do? Nothing. I have ganked with my corp during our active times, even in highsec, I also have done alot of PvE, so I know both sides. Which leads me to the point that I see the whining of the gankers about any possible changes to the status quo as similar funny as the carebears tears about the big bad gankers. Deal with it.
1 Like
Yes, @Destiny_Corrupted raises new issues. Those are the arguments you ask for. That is literally how you discuss…
Player A - I think we have a problem
Player B - Do we?
Player A - But we can fix the problem by kicking Player C in the balls
Player B - I’m not sure how Player C will feel about that.
Player A - STOP RAISING NEW ISSUES
1 Like
If someone argues to spend 100 million to help the people of Somewhatistan in a topic about Somewhatistan and all the problems there and you begin claim that no action should be taken because the people of Strawmanistan are also poor and nobody here obviously thinks about them, then that is not a discussion. It’s derailing a discussion for the purpose of keeping the current status while looking like having any argument. That kind of stuff ist just not constructive.
Deal with what, exactly?
It’s not like these changes are imminent, and I’m having an existential crisis over my play style being removed (this already happened around 2016 and can’t happen again). Right now, the game is chugging along just fine, and your call for outlaw tethering to be removed, which you refuse to defend through any other argument aside from “no, you prove why it shouldn’t be done!” isn’t even a point of consideration for the developers.
So what exactly do I have to deal with?
I brought up an argument for how your justifications for balance can extend to many other critical aspects of the game, and you refuse to address that too. That makes my job easier, since when an opponent refuses to engage, I win by default.
Though I am looking forward to another of your retorts, doubtlessly sandwiched in between more claims of impartiality and claims about beng an experienced ganker. Probably something along the lines of “HTFU gankbear” or something.
At this point it looks like you’re just collecting likes from Dracvlad to build up some AG street cred. He’s terribly desperate for a friend right now, and will use this opportunity to try to circle-jerk each other until you both are absolutely raw.
Someone having a different opinion and not shutting up as you would like. There are people in this game not sharing your stance and thats fine. The OP is one of them and I just showed some understanding for his point of view. Nothing more, nothing less.
I feel absolutely no obligation to convince you in any way. Just go on an believe what you want.
I never said (or even think) any changes to this gameplay are imminent, I just understand why more and more people call for adjustments. I also don’t “call” for anything. At least I do not remember having created a topic demanding anything from the developers or whatever. I have just stated my opinion that what the OP mentioned in his post is from my point of view totally understandable and explained my personal reasons for it. Disagee, go on, all day long.
Ah yes, and of course I have mentioned the noticable whining of the pro-ganking fraction if even the slightest aspect of their gameplay is put up to discussion, it’s even more funny than the whining of the carebears who obviously don’t know better. I seriously haven’t expected to hear so much mimimi over tethering, seriously, if I would be a ganker I wouldn’t even care, because it barely changes anything in the outcome, if I do my job flawlessly, I will still bring any target down. And it would feel much more deserved when I had tricked the Antigankers on the way to it, wouldn’t it? Well maybe not for those who just want simple undock-warp-f1-kills.
That’s quite an elaborate reality you’re constructing inside of your head, but we see that here a lot, so have at it.
Ganking has an extremely rich history of being repeatedly nerfed over the last 13 years or so. No other activity in the game as experienced as many additional restrictions as ganking has, aside maybe from high-sec wars.
How many ganking buffs were there? I can only think of one—tags—and that’s it.
So pray tell, why shouldn’t gankers get defensive over their play style, considering how it’s already been nearly driven into the ground over the past decade?
Sounds like you need to go out and actually do some professional ganking to get a feel for how the activity is like today.
Your entire posting over the past couple of hours is nothing but one big no-true-Scotsman.
Oh jesus, cry harder. Please… Ganking is still incredibly easy, incredibly cheap and incredibly lucrative. Even a goddamn lowsec gatecamp (which is usually looked down upon) is more demanding. If they nerfed it over and over again, it wasn’t where the developers want it to be, right?
You act as if ganking was a valuable technique you had to learn and fine-tune over years, developing actual skill and experience and that people should respect that and not nerf it to the ground needlessly. But it’s not. It is as cheap and simple as it always was. It’s so easy that people can actually do it multiboxing dozens of alts, because it just demands nothing other than a few basic moves any trained monkey could learn.
What I can respect is the roleplay aspect of it, so props to Aiko and her crew, these ppl are actually funny and when on the forums they mock and poke instead of crying. Also the amount of dedication they show to their profession is respectable and I believe they wouldn’t let tethering or not tethering stop them in any way.
So? Why should anything be buffed that is considered working too good already? Also the resistance nerf should be quite nice when trying to bring down all these blingy marauders and HACs running abyssals (just an example)? Didn’t we had a shortrange-ammo buff as well, thinking about Coercers that do a quite nice job now with Conflags… Also let me think, didn’t cost destroyers a lot more a while ago? Pffff…
Ha Ha hahahah. Sorry, can’t hold it. Ganking is flourishing all over HighSec in the last months, be if from ganking Freighters over Abyssalrunners, Eventrunners, Marauders doing missions, Exhumers, Orcas. Gankers have even begun blowing up T2-fitted battleships or empty haulers that whould have never be a target some years ago. Just out of boredom and because its that easy and cheap.
Really, it’s ridiculous how you can seriously complain about thee nerfs of ganking - or people asking for future adjustments - when it is still done this successful every and every and every day. With ease. And highly profitable.
Oh man, I’m genuinely having a hard time arguing with someone so impartial. Public school never prepared me for this!
No, it really isn’t, but since you have no experience with it, you wouldn’t understand.
Assuming that the developers don’t nerf things due to pressure from players, or upper management demands to change the game in a way to cater to bigger/more lucrative market demographics.
Objectively false. In the past it was possible to gank a freighter with just one Tornado, and not 30 of them. Also, gankers received full CONCORD insurance, and broke even on their costs before the loot was even taken into consideration. Additionally, most ships, and especially mining and industrial ships, had considerably less resilience in the past.
None of these things are ganking buffs, as all of these changes go much beyond affecting gankers, or the targets of gankers.
By virtue of targets being too abundant and careless, yes.
A decade ago, we’d have to sit on a gate for a day before spotting a single hauler with 300 million ISK of stuff in it. Spotting a freighter that wasn’t web-warping with an alt was a rarity. Players actually acted with due diligence, instead of assuming their safety, and feeling entitled to it.
These days, there literally aren’t enough gankers to kill all of the auto-piloting paper-tank haulers transporting billions of stuff through the pipe, or blinged-out missioner marauders sitting AFK at gates.
This isn’t a “ganking” problem; it’s a “game has been invaded by casuals and bot aspirants” problem. Stop giving the gankers so many targets, and ganking will decrease.
Ah the, “No! You just don’t understand” argument. Okay… well then you must be right! Go on and explain all the hardships in detail, or is this all top-secret business? I am always willing to learn, maybe you can point out what exactly I am missing here. Do not hesitate to go into all and every detail, please!
You have stated very nice reasons to nerf ganking. Wise decisions, CCP! I see absolutely nothing to complain here.
Also it’s not about the isk-cost of ganking, its cheap and simple in execution. It was back then, it is right now.
So what? These changes surely helped gankers. So they are effectively a buff, be it intentional or not.
yeah, everything was better in the old days, I know that saying.
I didn’t say there is a “ganking problem” at all. What I say is that ganking has a really really great time these days and there is absolutely no reason to complain. And by the way there wouldn’t be one if tethering would not work any more as the OP (understandably) asked for, just to stay on topic a bit.
As long as we’re clear that that’s a statement of opinion, and not anything rooted in personal experience or empirical observation, I’m perfectly cool with that.
In a world of alts, you really gonna push this? Do you not know how EVE works or
You mean as they engage in supported gameplay? Brother you didn’t know the diff between an MTU and a mobile depot. I don’t think you can lecture people on the state of the game 
Yea cause you weren’t there ROFL.
AGing is only non-lucrative cause people suck at corp management.
There is a way to AG that would impact ganking severely. But AG won’t do it
Yep. I don’t know why they hide behind sophistry.
No one uses those 2 systems cept for SICO who jump in indies
She’s not? She’s calmly destroying your points. You also know she isn’t even a ganker right?
Yes, anyone should be able to be ganked anywhere. Welcome to EVE
Once you undock, you consent.
In other words you can’t think of a buff so you just wanna nerf. Got it
She isn’t even a ganker ROFL. You realize ganking is only “easy” because the targets are dumb right?
LOL ok pops.
They do tho? How do you explain some people going their whole EVE lives without getting ganked? Its cause we yennoe, learn to EVE
And what’s to stop AG from doing it too? ROFL. The answer? Their lazy bruv
Yennoe, you use the word whining a lot but I don’t think you know what it means?
Oh man I wish
Wut, you started the personal attacks bruv ROFL. Man. You like lighting that gas up huh?
Sure you have bruv, sure you have.
Not really. Its merely she is shredding your narrative and you’re throwing a tantrum to deflect from that
So why don’t you do it then?
Not really. Gate camping is an accepted game play Sounds like someone is salty they can’t read F10 well
So why doesn’t everyone do it?
So why doesn’t everyone do it?
Not everyone wants to blow up stuff, ya know? Some want to create something, which EvE offers great opportunities for. They don’t really care for blowing up other sandcastles, they just want to build theirs and enjoy it.
Not everyone wants to blow up stuff, ya know? Some want to create something, which EvE offers great opportunities for. They don’t really care for blowing up other sandcastles, they just want to build theirs and enjoy it.
Not everyone wants to blow up stuff, ya know? Some want to create something, which EvE offers great opportunities for. They don’t really care for blowing up other sandcastles, they just want to build theirs and enjoy it.
We can play this game for a while. But only because it’s fun, unlike the other nonsense you have written.
In other words you don’t got an answer. Got it
After all if it was so easy and profitable, wouldn’t everyone do it? But they aren’t. Huh. I wonder why?
And of course you duck everything else ROFL.
1 Like
Not everyone wants to blow up stuff, ya know? Some want to create something, which EvE offers great opportunities for. They don’t really care for blowing up other sandcastles, they just want to build theirs and enjoy it.
Your “everything else” translates to “nothing”, really. Not wasting my time arguing with the next troll.
But I mean if its so easy and profitable, why would anyone bother with something else?
What’s funny is you know you dug yourself a hole and are desperately trying to deflect from it ROFL.
1 Like