They could if they took them from their neighbors.
And who says they canāt afford the losses? What losses? Supers? You donāt need supers to fight.
Sorry you canāt accept that you made an erroneous claim. Maybe you should have been more precise in your statements. People do fight over resources, and are currently fighting over resources.
Thank you for admitting you were muddying the waters. Unconscious slip?
You were just whinging that supers would sit in hangars unused.
Man, you really need to work on your precision and clarity when you type stuff out. Itās hard to be charitable and not assume bad faith on your part. First you said āwar landscape without supersā something something, and āsitting in hangarsā, and now youāre saying theyāll just be used but in low risk situations. But isnāt that currently the situation anyway, since you attribute the āconstant lamentationā from the community to that?
The people not fighting with those assets, obviously. You have to weight the risks before committing assets, and the risks are lower in lowsec.
That was the statement. Do I say theyāre not fighting over the resources that do exist? Can you please demonstrate to me where theyāre fighting over resources that donāt?
No, I was arguing that the two are distinct, and need to be evaluated distinctly. Youāre the one trying to compare apples and oranges.
No, I said they wouldnāt be risked in any significant way. That doesnāt mean āunusedā, unless you think PLās decade-long habit pre-jump fatigue of dropping supers on any fight involving a decent number of faction battleships constituted real risk.
Did I, though? Letās go look.
Supercapital warfare is a very different thing than ādo people use supers?ā Itās ādo people use supers against supers?ā Do supercapitals engage one another?
But then, itās hard not to assume bad faith when you intentionally misrepresent my statements.
18 dead dreads is a far cry from āmassive numbersā, especially when the other sideās lost 50 capitals of varying types. One side lost 18 of 47 capitals. The other lost lost 50 of 67. Do you think the No Forks Given guys feel like they took āmassiveā losses during that fight?
Are you comparing NullSec to LowSec? Please explain this:
Ooof, talk about a double standard! If you scroll up youāll clearly see that the only one comparing different regions of space was you. Go on - you just scroll on up and read all your posts where you compare LowSec and NullSec and the posts where Iā¦ donāt.
Okay. Well I donāt see the problem? Let people fight in regular dreads (not sure about your fixation on supers TBH) or subcaps. If people arenāt willing to risk supers, the people who are will have an advantage. Or neither side will, and the war will be fought with subcaps? I honestly donāt see how this is a problem or how this has anything to do with the fact that - people fight over resources. Even if theyāre in Atrons, if theyāre fighting over resources then theyāreā¦ fighting over resources.
So? I never said anything about āmassive numbersā.
So?
EDIT: Anyway Iām heading off. "yeah but"ing gets pretty boring after a while.
Iām comparing the process of deciding whether or not to risk certain assets. That process is the same. The factors involved in making the decision are different, and so the results of the process differ.
Not a double standard at all.
Except thatās not how it plays out. Youāll have people dropping supers on subcap fights, where the supers face no appreciable risk. That leads to consistent lopsided engagements, and then to stagnation. Weāve seen it before, time and again.
Yeah, thatās you, apparently questioning the assessment of āI donāt see a massive number of dead caps on the other side of it, eitherā.
But, again, youāre clearly not arguing in good faith here, so I donāt know why Iād expect you to acknowledge your own statements.
I feel like this got way the heck off topic just reading this. but there is always assets at risk when you go to null no matter if its a war or not. but the real thing is that with all the changes coming i think that if we are getting big changes like they said in the csm live on twitch. They said that all ore fields in hs ls and null are gonna be gone at some point and it be all anomalyās. i think the best way to put this into the game is make hs and ls the same as null for that. i think the bigger the anoms should be based on % of the system because that way you have to earn it.
@Arrendis I do not know why you bother; there are certain people on these fora with whom attempting to engage in meaningful debate is like playing chess with a pigeon. They do not understand anything, knock all the pieces over, defecate all over the board and then, when one finally gives up bothering with them, strut back and forth as if they have wonā¦
your reading it from the wrong angleā¦ the point is āif anyone has something that is +1 then the other one hasā. just look at USAās oil wars.
m2 extraction is done and finished.
ye, no thanksā¦ also local chats are unstable af.
If you get killed by not seeing localā¦ ccp says "erp. herpy derp, chat server not broken, this no game bug. (ā ā ā ā you). "
lolā¦ plex to isk ratio has hit a new low, it has dropped by half in value, since 2 years back.
you can come here with your weird logic and say āIām rightā all you want, truth is, only ccp can correct the statement you made.
But I highly doubt thatās whatās going on.
becouse its 5 pages long qoute answering, that are 5 months old :)))
Wouao CCP again failed to go balls deep with actually fixing the game.Once more making baby steps by only removing the belts omg.What about removing the insurance from the game when u loose your ship we want to mean something ccp said(lol).No nerfs on the salvage planetary production and npc loot drops.No nerfs to 00 endless anomalies spamming .How about introducing fuels for sub capitals if u want to fly the 100 ships u got in your huge stock pile u need to have fuel and a ship uses an certain amount every hour of flying .CCP stopped reading reedit ā¦ keep this up and u will be left with no players .All that players want is a healthy economy people are leaving eve because of that when u people will understand the importance of a healthy eco system ?
No. Arrendis describes it quite succinctly. And even if somebody does have something and you donātā¦what resources are you going to use to go take that stuff? And even if you did have say some guns and ammo lying around, you expended valuable resources to try and take something and even if you succeed you can end up worse off.
āwe are going to make ihubs worthless next, break some other mechanics, create artificial limitations which are easily solvable with plex, and ā ā ā ā you honest players, weāre not gonna forget to buff botters in some way here as wellā.ā
Guess were just waiting on the ihub changes hey?
Have you ever heard that the road to hell is paved with good intentions?
But CCP is too arrogant and too smug to admit they have really screwed up. Yeah, yeah. Maybe the revenues are looking okayishā¦but if I canāt interact with others in gameā¦why play? Eventually these numbers will kill you, you numpties.
Scarcity is a failure. Get rid of Rattati or whatever that doofusā name is. He is as bad a Greyscale, maybe worse.
