open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked [CSM Candidate] Goumindong
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8

Author Topic

Seth Ruin
Minmatar
Ominous Corp
Circle-Of-Two
Posted - 2008.04.30 01:31:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy
Why do you feel that you can speak on the behalf of goonswarm when in fact no one in goonswarm can stand you and 50% of our forums have you on ignore because of your horrible posts?
How can you claim to be a valid candidate when you couldn't even get 20 people to support your CSM candidancy out of a forum of thousands of people?


Sounds kind-of out of line. As far as representing GoonSwarm or not, as far as I know this CSM thing isn't about representing a corp or an alliance, but the playerbase as a whole, and I believe Goumindong is doing relatively well at that.

Waterfowl Democracy
The Ministry of Indigenous Affairs
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.04.30 02:07:00 - [62]
 

Originally by: Seth Ruin
Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy
Why do you feel that you can speak on the behalf of goonswarm when in fact no one in goonswarm can stand you and 50% of our forums have you on ignore because of your horrible posts?
How can you claim to be a valid candidate when you couldn't even get 20 people to support your CSM candidancy out of a forum of thousands of people?


Sounds kind-of out of line. As far as representing GoonSwarm or not, as far as I know this CSM thing isn't about representing a corp or an alliance, but the playerbase as a whole, and I believe Goumindong is doing relatively well at that.


I'm sorry, I thought this was a thread for questions to a CSM candidate which is what I did.
And my point was that Goumindong comes up with such horrible ideas and posts them constantly that people just ignore what he is saying nowadays. And my mention of support for his candidancy references the internal voting we had to determine which candidate goonswarm as a whole would support for the CSM.

Goumindong would be a horrible representitive as he doesn't have the first idea about game balance or how to make an argument.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.04.30 03:26:00 - [63]
 

Originally by: Makhan
Goumindong, what subforum of SA do you find yourself browsing the most?


I do not have an SA account.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.04.30 03:36:00 - [64]
 

Originally by: Labienus
According to the Goonswarm killboard you have barely ever flown a t2 ship in a pvp situation. An Absolution 4 times, and never used a HAC. How can you say that the risk reward is broken on them if you have never flown/lost these t2 ships? Could your opinion in anyway be biased because you do not want to use these ships that outperform the usual t1 versions?


Besides flying with and against these ships? Besides flying ships with similar characteristics [though not all similar] and then amalgamating from there? Besides testing their capabilities in non-live situations? Besides intimate knowledge of the game mechanics governing tracking, explosion velocity, speed, inertia, et all?


Nothing besides those things. I did not have to fly Typhoons and Domis to know that they were utterly broken right after the Rev 1 patch, and the same holds true for nano-ships. If there is a doubt, look a killboard like BoB and Tri and see where their losses crom from and the number of nano-ships that are killed by non-nano ships. Then figure out how many of those were from stupidity[like my last two nano-kills, which had the pilots had half a brain or were paying attention would never have happened]

Note, there is very little wrong with the Absolution in terms of risk/reward. It is not able to be made into a ship that is able to disengage like its smaller cousins. I would be flying that particular ship more, but getting my BS out of QY6 was of more strategic importance and the contract system screwed me over in terms of other means of retrieval[which is to say you can't contract damaged crystals in a gun]

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.04.30 03:39:00 - [65]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 30/04/2008 03:40:04
Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy
Why do you feel that you can speak on the behalf of goonswarm when in fact no one in goonswarm can stand you and 50% of our forums have you on ignore because of your horrible posts?
How can you claim to be a valid candidate when you couldn't even get 20 people to support your CSM candidancy out of a forum of thousands of people?

I will not be speaking on behalf of goonswarm and do not claim to, nor do any of our official reps. I will dispel rumors towards Goonswarm when asked for me however.

Next time i will try to dumb myself down for you and post a bunch of image macros with cute animals on them, maybe that will increase my levels of support.

The reason that I am ignored on GF.com is pretty much entirely due to bandwagoning.

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

Goumindong would be a horrible representitive as he doesn't have the first idea about game balance or how to make an argument.


Do you have evidence of this or are you going to spew more ad hominem?

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.04.30 03:44:00 - [66]
 

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

That's nice, but it completely sidestepped the question. The statement was publicly made to CCP in the form of an ISD anouncement. It was made to sound as if it represented the alliance's objectives as a whole. If it did not, and was only the words of a single member, then your authorized reps should have been doing some damage control. Since they did not, I have to assume that the motives for jihadswarm were as publicly stated.

GoonSwarm is an alliance. An alliance can remove corps that don't adhere to policies. A corp can remove players that disobey orders. Failure to keep control of members is a matter of choice, not ability.


Then you fundamentally do not understand how Goonswarm operates. And this misunderstanding is what drives a lot of the funny that we see in the game. Vile Rat could have said anything and this would have been O.K. with the leadership and the people. Because as an alliance we don't care what you think, and if what you think is wrong and funny, more the better.

Quote:
Making other players quit is by no means a way to "win" EVE. I'd have to say that with some rare exceptions, everyone loses each time a player quits, because then there is one less person contributing to a game that is built on player interaction.


It is in the strictest of terms, otherwise there is no "game over" for the other player as there is in any other competitive game. This is very good for the game, but as an alliance it has much deeper meanings with regards to how you can win even temporarily.

The short answer is "You will win when you log on" and so the most important aspect of fighting another alliance and tacking their space is making sure that you will log on, and they will not.

Sinrath
Caldari
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.04.30 04:43:00 - [67]
 

Edited by: Sinrath on 30/04/2008 04:45:29
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Labienus
According to the Goonswarm killboard you have barely ever flown a t2 ship in a pvp situation. An Absolution 4 times, and never used a HAC. How can you say that the risk reward is broken on them if you have never flown/lost these t2 ships? Could your opinion in anyway be biased because you do not want to use these ships that outperform the usual t1 versions?


Besides flying with and against these ships? Besides flying ships with similar characteristics [though not all similar] and then amalgamating from there? Besides testing their capabilities in non-live situations? Besides intimate knowledge of the game mechanics governing tracking, explosion velocity, speed, inertia, et all?


Nothing besides those things. I did not have to fly Typhoons and Domis to know that they were utterly broken right after the Rev 1 patch, and the same holds true for nano-ships. If there is a doubt, look a killboard like BoB and Tri and see where their losses crom from and the number of nano-ships that are killed by non-nano ships. Then figure out how many of those were from stupidity[like my last two nano-kills, which had the pilots had half a brain or were paying attention would never have happened]

Note, there is very little wrong with the Absolution in terms of risk/reward. It is not able to be made into a ship that is able to disengage like its smaller cousins. I would be flying that particular ship more, but getting my BS out of QY6 was of more strategic importance and the contract system screwed me over in terms of other means of retrieval[which is to say you can't contract damaged crystals in a gun]


You sir, are one deluded man. I wanted to come up with something retortive, but your statement says all.

Clearly the Typhoon & Domi is overpowered Rolling Eyes

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.04.30 04:57:00 - [68]
 

Originally by: Sinrath

You sir, are one deluded man. I wanted to come up with something retortive, but your statement says all.

Clearly the Typhoon & Domi is overpowered Rolling Eyes


Were Overpowered. Were. Back right after Rev 1 when the istab boost came in. Back when Phoons and Domis were going 3-5kms in tight orbits with stacks of heavy nos and tonnes of DPS?

Yea, they were terribly and utterly broken and they got nerfed[quite a bit actually]

LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
Posted - 2008.04.30 05:32:00 - [69]
 

Edited by: LaVista Vista on 30/04/2008 05:34:01
Originally by: Goumindong
and tonnes of DPS?


How much DPS? I don't exactly recall the nano-phoon and -domi being DPS boats, when they were "overpowered".
In fact, if someone brought a rapier/huginn with them, they were completely useless.

They were flying bricks, if you managed to web them.

Leave alone the fact that you needed to fit them with rigs, likely snakes and faction MWD's if they should be worth anything. Or pure skill-requirements in order to do DPS. Phoon is one of the most skill intensive ships in the game at present, if you wanna fly it right. That has ALWAYS been true, the nano-time it had was no different. I mean, even now, if you want to do respectable DPS, you need a lot of skills. Imagine how little DPS it would do with of the damage being reallocated to NOS.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.04.30 05:44:00 - [70]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 30/04/2008 05:48:25
Edited by: Goumindong on 30/04/2008 05:47:00
They were doing 500-600 DPS in a full 3-5km/s oribt with 4 heavy NOS running. Pretty broken.

ed: Also they were not much more expensive than any other battleship at the time[everyone needed rigs to be competitive], not that isk is a reason to make things overpowered. But their ability to disengage and to move at such speed was clearly broken.

I don't really want to get into an argument onto whether or not the battleships that could go faster than interceptor with better than cruiser agility were overpowered or not, if you want to get into it, you should go check out the threads where Ryysa[who was flying 5km/s + Phoons and Nightmares at the time] pretty much wailed on everyone supporting the other side.

Quote:
Imagine how little DPS it would do with of the damage being reallocated to NOS.


AC's make up and made up less than 1/3rd of the DPS that a Typhoon puts out.

Vladameir Harkenin
Posted - 2008.04.30 07:29:00 - [71]
 

Originally by: LaVista Vista
Edited by: LaVista Vista on 30/04/2008 05:34:01
Originally by: Goumindong
and tonnes of DPS?


How much DPS? I don't exactly recall the nano-phoon and -domi being DPS boats, when they were "overpowered".
In fact, if someone brought a rapier/huginn with them, they were completely useless.

They were flying bricks, if you managed to web them.

Leave alone the fact that you needed to fit them with rigs, likely snakes and faction MWD's if they should be worth anything. Or pure skill-requirements in order to do DPS. Phoon is one of the most skill intensive ships in the game at present, if you wanna fly it right. That has ALWAYS been true, the nano-time it had was no different. I mean, even now, if you want to do respectable DPS, you need a lot of skills. Imagine how little DPS it would do with of the damage being reallocated to NOS.


Coming from a pilot who used to fly one, no you didn't need snakes. Also from what I remember there was a rig that was deleted that added to the mwd bonus ability. The problem is that nos and neuts are damage (considering they weren't nerfed at this time), domi did around 400-500 damage with drones while nosing his enemy to feed its own cap hungry mwd. a huggin or rapier will not stop this ship alone it is a flying brick yes, but that is a benefit as webs won't effect it as much as smaller ships. it will cause him to flee and find an easier target. You did not need alot of isk to build one either, a decent amount, but considering the payout in terms of survivability, definetly cheaper then the old dble repped nosdomi. (keep in mind not a comparison of price, but a comparison of survivablity) A good pilot who keeps his eye on local will never loose it.

Did it need to be nerfed, coming from a pilot who just happened to have all the skills needed to fit this style of domi and flew it regularly, yes. Also please don't include implants as a price for the ship, if the ship dies they still are imbedded into your skull so you didn't loose them....yet. Only thing you lost was a ship worth about 200-500 mil depending if you used a faction mwd. Not a huge loss, especially if you keep an eye on local the ship will more then paid for itself by tenfold.

Truthfully it doesn't really matter, the point is they WERE overpowered and as such they were put in there place.

LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
Posted - 2008.04.30 07:46:00 - [72]
 

Originally by: Vladameir Harkenin

Coming from a pilot who used to fly one, no you didn't need snakes. Also from what I remember there was a rig that was deleted that added to the mwd bonus ability. The problem is that nos and neuts are damage (considering they weren't nerfed at this time), domi did around 400-500 damage with drones while nosing his enemy to feed its own cap hungry mwd. a huggin or rapier will not stop this ship alone it is a flying brick yes, but that is a benefit as webs won't effect it as much as smaller ships. it will cause him to flee and find an easier target. You did not need alot of isk to build one either, a decent amount, but considering the payout in terms of survivability, definetly cheaper then the old dble repped nosdomi. (keep in mind not a comparison of price, but a comparison of survivablity) A good pilot who keeps his eye on local will never loose it.

Did it need to be nerfed, coming from a pilot who just happened to have all the skills needed to fit this style of domi and flew it regularly, yes. Also please don't include implants as a price for the ship, if the ship dies they still are imbedded into your skull so you didn't loose them....yet. Only thing you lost was a ship worth about 200-500 mil depending if you used a faction mwd. Not a huge loss, especially if you keep an eye on local the ship will more then paid for itself by tenfold.

Truthfully it doesn't really matter, the point is they WERE overpowered and as such they were put in there place.

Well, I'm not saying that they weren't overpowered. Having flown with Rysa, and seen his nightmare, it was just sick.

But they could still be countered. It just comes down to player skills. EVERYTHING DOES. The nano-bs stuff was just easier for people to learn to use properly.

But the istab change that came with Rev 1 was broken. I still fail to understand why they made that change in the first place.

And yes, there was a rig which gave a MWD bonus. It was eventually removed and replace with auxillary thrusters, for those who had them.

I flew the nano-phoon once or twice. I didn't like it that much. Sure, you can do some decent DPS(By no means awesome DPS, my deimos can do the same, though it doesn't reach the same speed, it's a lot more agile.

But the nano-phoon did about the same DPS as 1-1 T1 cruisers. So seriously, id didn't do tonnes of DPS. My rokh does tonnes of dps, but it doesn't go fast.

So the point is that the nano-phoon/domi did too manyt hings at once. If you wanna fit your lows with nano, fine, you will just suck at everything else. And that wasn't the case with them pre-nerf.

Vladameir Harkenin
Posted - 2008.04.30 08:23:00 - [73]
 



Well, I'm not saying that they weren't overpowered. Having flown with Rysa, and seen his nightmare, it was just sick.

But they could still be countered. It just comes down to player skills. EVERYTHING DOES. The nano-bs stuff was just easier for people to learn to use properly.

But the istab change that came with Rev 1 was broken. I still fail to understand why they made that change in the first place.

And yes, there was a rig which gave a MWD bonus. It was eventually removed and replace with auxillary thrusters, for those who had them.

I flew the nano-phoon once or twice. I didn't like it that much. Sure, you can do some decent DPS(By no means awesome DPS, my deimos can do the same, though it doesn't reach the same speed, it's a lot more agile.

But the nano-phoon did about the same DPS as 1-1 T1 cruisers. So seriously, id didn't do tonnes of DPS. My rokh does tonnes of dps, but it doesn't go fast.

So the point is that the nano-phoon/domi did too manyt hings at once. If you wanna fit your lows with nano, fine, you will just suck at everything else. And that wasn't the case with them pre-nerf.


I concur for the most part but the problem is this. Nos/Neuts are damage and very powerful (especially considering that nos wasn't nerfed yet), virtually anything under bs size that got close to these ships was vanquished. The only counter was a hugin/rapier with friends or bring lots of people. Considering this the nanophoon did do alot more damage then a cruiser, quickly erroding your enemys cap is the same as if the enemy had to turn on reps to repair incoming damage. Nos/neuts are damage, just a different form. But back on topic.

Sorry for posting this in this forum, just thought that it needed to be clarified as it was a topic at the time.

LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
Posted - 2008.04.30 08:31:00 - [74]
 

Originally by: Vladameir Harkenin
Considering this the nanophoon did do alot more damage then a cruiser, quickly erroding your enemys cap is the same as if the enemy had to turn on reps to repair incoming damage. Nos/neuts are damage, just a different form. But back on topic.


How much DPS did the phoon do? My thorax does between 400 and 500, gank/plate fitted. That is pretty much how the phoon works too.

Waterfowl Democracy
The Ministry of Indigenous Affairs
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.04.30 08:53:00 - [75]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Do you have evidence of this or are you going to spew more ad hominem?


Funny you should mention that.

http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=597162
Your horrible concept of different sized webs whereby an interceptor would be slowed 4% by a battleship at up to 40km.

http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=670196
Your plan to make assault ships into mini commandships and allow gang bonuses to only be distributed from squad command.

http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=633776
This list of amarr changes where you mess with the ships in weird manners for no apparent reason including giving the geddon 4 turret slots (of 7 highs) and a 100% bonus to damage and then 5% damage per level AS WELL.

I could go on and post your entire "A GENERAL TREATISE ON EVE ONLINE" but really it's just a lot of words that don't say anything worthwhile at all and just show that you are capable of writing 35000 characters that say nothing of merit.






Vladameir Harkenin
Posted - 2008.04.30 10:00:00 - [76]
 



How much DPS did the phoon do? My thorax does between 400 and 500, gank/plate fitted. That is pretty much how the phoon works too.


Off base calculations. this is of course using eft (an older version, unfortunatly not the one pre nerf but close to it, torps didn't get a boost yet) so damage will not be accurate due to figureing out dps on eft is imo redundant. Also I will call this my Frakaphoon, as I have no idea how it works and am going off how I would throw it together if I were to nano one back in these days. Also not sure if my nos/neut dps I calculate is correct so if someone would like to correct me, please do.

Dps using 2 arbalest torps with 5x heavy ogre II's comes out to 410 dps, no not as much as your thorax, but like I said nos/neuts is dps. Not knowing this ship and how it was fitted on this part makes it difficult so I will guess on a fitting for nos/neut in which it works and is fairly cap stable. 4x heavy dim nos 1x heavy unstable = 1080 cap drained every 24/s, or for easy comparison on a repper 540 cap every 12/s, a large and med repper take 560 energy every 12 secs (I say roughly due to skill...which really doesn't help that much).

Now turning cap dps into dps, this is tricky. For this I added armor rep repaired of a large and med, then divided by 12 (representing 12 seconds). comes out to 93. not perfect nos/neut dps due to this combo not completely sinking with med/large rep (560 doesn't equal 540) and seems like a pathetic number, but there is a huge portion that is missed from this. This is pure dps as cap doesn't have resistence.

So you have 410dps unresisted damage(eft is not a good source for gaining dps imo) and 90ish worth of pure dps.

Now looking at the thorax. 400-500 dps is unresisted so they are about the same unresisted dps but 90ish worth of pure dps is a nice amount when compared to unresisted dps. for this I use a basic omni tank with base resist around 50 (rax doesn't do em so we'll use other resist for such comparison). raw dps of said thorax will be around 200-250. raw dps of said frankenstein phoon I threw together, around 295 dps roughly. Yes simular but I'd rather fly this phoon then the die mosts little brother. Chance of surviving and killing the target in the phoon 100% as long as you watch local, chance to survive and kill in thorax going against what this phoon can take on odds may very, but obviously not a good idea to pick a fight with a blasterthron, which the phoon could do and win easily.

100% is derived from no one entering local. This can kill anything bs and smaller, recons will probably be the only thing that would give you a problem.

Is my frakaphoon better then a rax, for solo yes, gang no.

Vladameir Harkenin
Posted - 2008.04.30 10:26:00 - [77]
 

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy
Originally by: Goumindong
Do you have evidence of this or are you going to spew more ad hominem?


Funny you should mention that.

http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=597162
Your horrible concept of different sized webs whereby an interceptor would be slowed 4% by a battleship at up to 40km.

http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=670196
Your plan to make assault ships into mini commandships and allow gang bonuses to only be distributed from squad command.

http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=633776
This list of amarr changes where you mess with the ships in weird manners for no apparent reason including giving the geddon 4 turret slots (of 7 highs) and a 100% bonus to damage and then 5% damage per level AS WELL.

I could go on and post your entire "A GENERAL TREATISE ON EVE ONLINE" but really it's just a lot of words that don't say anything worthwhile at all and just show that you are capable of writing 35000 characters that say nothing of merit.








1. my inty (crow) goes 6393m/s I doubt loosing 4% (255.72m/s) is going to get me killed. I don't aggree with it because it is a nerf to blaster boats moving from target to target and simply nowing how much damage a blaster boat does when it gets into range will do obviously get them primaried for webification. IMO asside from gate camping/station camping this would be the end of blasterboats as a raven or a gankgeddon would be more viable to fly in bs, zealot would obsolete diemos in hacs if this was implented. Thats just my view though. Not to say that it would happen, but I still speculate on it.

2. aggreed

3. aggreed, amarr are fine, save for the apoc that needs that opt range bonus reduced.

Terianna Eri
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2008.04.30 10:45:00 - [78]
 

I'm mostly just curious about this:

a) What do you think about the 10% less cap use / level bonus on Amarr ships? Balanced? Waste of bonus and should be replaced with something different? Raise to 15% or 20% or decrease to 5? etc.

b) Do you think the Omen is balanced with other cruisers of its teir / other T1 combat cruisers?

c) you mentioned that you think there should be a role for everything. Do afterburners have a significant enough role, especially with regards to PVP?

thanks

(p.s. I actually liked your reworking of webs)

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.04.30 14:40:00 - [79]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 30/04/2008 14:42:29
Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy
Originally by: Goumindong
Do you have evidence of this or are you going to spew more ad hominem?


Funny you should mention that.





I am sorry, are you going to make an argument as to why that is or are you just going to post some of the things that I have posted out of context?

Also no, i would not make gang bonuses only distribute via the squad command position and no, not make all AFs gang bonus producing ships. But you would have had to read those threads to understand what was going on.

And, had you you read the introduction to the thread you quoted

Quote:

This thread is not going to look at what exactly is wrong with Amarr. It will provide no changes that may or may not "fix" amarr. It will not look into any ships that also need changing that arent Amarr. The purpose of this thread is to provide a study on ship design around the Sansha/Marauder template that has recently made its way onto Sisi and will be entering the game soon as a way to diversify ship types and roles.


Which was also before any of the Amarr changes bar the Khanid ones.

There is nothing wrong with signature radius webs. If you would like to provide a reason why, i would love to hear it. Hell, that thread is still open, you can post in it.

Waterfowl Democracy
The Ministry of Indigenous Affairs
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.04.30 15:41:00 - [80]
 

Edited by: Waterfowl Democracy on 30/04/2008 15:41:37
Originally by: Goumindong

I am sorry, are you going to make an argument as to why that is or are you just going to post some of the things that I have posted out of context?

Also no, i would not make gang bonuses only distribute via the squad command position and no, not make all AFs gang bonus producing ships. But you would have had to read those threads to understand what was going on.



I didn't know it was possible to take an entire thread out of context. But basically here's my point, you don't know the first thing about this game or game balance. And despite this you seem to think that anything that comes into your head is a golden idea worthy of immediate implementation. You're the worst kind of idiot, the one who thinks he knows things.

And the reason I'm posting here is so that everyone else knows exactly how awful you are.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.04.30 15:42:00 - [81]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 30/04/2008 16:01:23
Originally by: Terianna Eri
I'm mostly just curious about this:

a) What do you think about the 10% less cap use / level bonus on Amarr ships? Balanced? Waste of bonus and should be replaced with something different? Raise to 15% or 20% or decrease to 5? etc.

b) Do you think the Omen is balanced with other cruisers of its teir / other T1 combat cruisers?

c) you mentioned that you think there should be a role for everything. Do afterburners have a significant enough role, especially with regards to PVP?

thanks

(p.s. I actually liked your reworking of webs)


The 10% cap bonus is easily justified on the Battleships where the range advantage really means something[because the range advantage is high, and ships are slow]. Cruiser sized and below it is not very valuable but you can engineer around that[as can be seen in the case of the Harbingers "mysterious" extra 1000 armor points]

Currently the Omen is about balanced, and possibly the best DPS cruiser due to the nano-craze. Despite its low peak DPS and terrible EHP its the only cruiser with the ability to really hit fast cruiser sized ships since its the only one that doesn't need a range bonus to be effective against them. This makes it better by default when nothing else is hitting that far. It would not be overpowered with a bit more powergrid

No, I don't believe they do. Which is one of the reasons i proposed changing webs, though ABs may need a flat boost as well. ABs should be useful in avoiding damage and they currently aren't. This ought to be fixed.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.04.30 15:45:00 - [82]
 

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy
Edited by: Waterfowl Democracy on 30/04/2008 15:41:37
Originally by: Goumindong

I am sorry, are you going to make an argument as to why that is or are you just going to post some of the things that I have posted out of context?

Also no, i would not make gang bonuses only distribute via the squad command position and no, not make all AFs gang bonus producing ships. But you would have had to read those threads to understand what was going on.



I didn't know it was possible to take an entire thread out of context. But basically here's my point, you don't know the first thing about this game or game balance. And despite this you seem to think that anything that comes into your head is a golden idea worthy of immediate implementation. You're the worst kind of idiot, the one who thinks he knows things.

And the reason I'm posting here is so that everyone else knows exactly how awful you are.


So you aren't going to make any argument?

You didn't take an entire thread out of context, you took snippets, made it look like the entire thread, and lied about them.

I do not think that anything that comes into my head is a golden idea, but i do think the ones I post have merit.

Your posting here isn't really hurting me as far as I can tell. You've no argument and are just attacking me. I think most of the people who play this game are smart enough to not fall for such cheap tricks.

Talkuth Rel
Minmatar
Republic Military School
Posted - 2008.04.30 16:01:00 - [83]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Talkuth Rel

That's nice, but it completely sidestepped the question. The statement was publicly made to CCP in the form of an ISD anouncement. It was made to sound as if it represented the alliance's objectives as a whole. If it did not, and was only the words of a single member, then your authorized reps should have been doing some damage control. Since they did not, I have to assume that the motives for jihadswarm were as publicly stated.

GoonSwarm is an alliance. An alliance can remove corps that don't adhere to policies. A corp can remove players that disobey orders. Failure to keep control of members is a matter of choice, not ability.


Then you fundamentally do not understand how Goonswarm operates. And this misunderstanding is what drives a lot of the funny that we see in the game. Vile Rat could have said anything and this would have been O.K. with the leadership and the people. Because as an alliance we don't care what you think, and if what you think is wrong and funny, more the better.
So your point is that the statements were approved of by the Goons because they were false and a joke. I'm sorry, but if your alliance openly allows and encourages false public statements about their motives, then you have to accept and live with whatever perceptions are brought about as a result of those statements. Once again, if your alliance chooses not to control what information it's members put out, then it is responsible for that information, just as much as if it had directly instructed the statement. From this, the Goons have no one to blame but themselves for their public image. If they allow anything to be said and encourage lies, they should not be shocked or surprised to find that they are then judged by those lies. The Goons also have no right to later return and pick and choose which statements are true and which are false. The time to stop the lies and put an end to rumor is when they first come to light, not months or years later, as by then the damage has been done. When you've neglected your housekeeping, you can't just sweep everything under the carpet once it become inconvenient. If you've allowed the record to become what it is, without protest, then you have given approval and acceptance of the record as fact.

Also, why should anyone trust a representative from an organization that encourages and advocates lies? Why should anyone vote for a representative who does not care what others think? This is where the central philosophy of the Goons disqualifies them as viable representatives, as the ideals directly contradict the duties of the position.
Originally by: Goumindong


Quote:
Making other players quit is by no means a way to "win" EVE. I'd have to say that with some rare exceptions, everyone loses each time a player quits, because then there is one less person contributing to a game that is built on player interaction.


It is in the strictest of terms, otherwise there is no "game over" for the other player as there is in any other competitive game. This is very good for the game, but as an alliance it has much deeper meanings with regards to how you can win even temporarily.

The short answer is "You will win when you log on" and so the most important aspect of fighting another alliance and tacking their space is making sure that you will log on, and they will not.


In other words, your answer is that the Goons do in fact believe it a good thing when their opponents quit the game. Thank you for confirming my point. Frankly, I find this view in direct contradiction with what is best for the future of the game. I find it disturbing that those who hold such a view want to be on a council designed to improve the game, when their goals for endgame dictate its destruction.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.04.30 16:09:00 - [84]
 

Originally by: Talkuth Rel
The second part

You are mistaking understanding of how the game is played and won with a wish to hurt others.

Quote:
The first part


Only if you believe that we act as a monolithic entity and have no wish to play a fun game. Both of these things are not true, we are not monolithic and do like to have fun. If anything Waterfowl should have convinced you that we are indeed not monolithic.

Reverend Wreckedum
Gerbil Liberation Super Force
Posted - 2008.04.30 16:43:00 - [85]
 

A Goonswarm member running for CSM that has almost no PVP experience, let alone experience flying t2 ships.

My vote will be going elsewhere.

Waterfowl Democracy
The Ministry of Indigenous Affairs
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.04.30 16:52:00 - [86]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
So you aren't going to make any argument?

You didn't take an entire thread out of context, you took snippets, made it look like the entire thread, and lied about them.

I do not think that anything that comes into my head is a golden idea, but i do think the ones I post have merit.

Your posting here isn't really hurting me as far as I can tell. You've no argument and are just attacking me. I think most of the people who play this game are smart enough to not fall for such cheap tricks.


My argument is that you don't have a clue how to balance a game and my supporting evidence is everything you've ever posted. All I'm hoping is that people are smart enough to decide that someone who writes their GENERAL TREATISE OF EVE ONLINE and then includes such gems as an explanation of game theory which is never referenced because it's completely worthless.

And as to whether I lied, anyone can go to the links I posted and see for themselves exactly what I paraphrased. If you feel that those posts don't show you as a complete idiot then clearly you wouldn't need to defend them. The fact that you cannot seem to not respond to my posts indicates to me (and to the reader) that you are defensive about your past record on 'balance'.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.04.30 17:16:00 - [87]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 30/04/2008 17:39:23
Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy
If you feel that those posts don't show you as a complete idiot then clearly you wouldn't need to defend them.


No, i simply give everyone their fair shake, even you.

ed: But i will correct misunderstandings of them.

Traeon
Posted - 2008.04.30 18:05:00 - [88]
 

Goumindong doesn't get enough credit for his ideas (probably because they're not always easy to understand). The webifier idea in particular is very good.

People doubting is motives are also probably not aware that he's been posting since way before the CSM thing was announced.

Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
Posted - 2008.04.30 18:24:00 - [89]
 

I have no trouble believeing Goumindong's motives. It surprised me more, after reading rather a lot of his posts on SHC, that he was a member of GoonSwarm.

Traeon
Posted - 2008.04.30 18:49:00 - [90]
 

Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro
I have no trouble believeing Goumindong's motives. It surprised me more, after reading rather a lot of his posts on SHC, that he was a member of GoonSwarm.


Nah I'm not refering to you, but rather to that guy who thinks Goum is running for CSM to ruin EVE because he's a goon Laughing


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only