open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Why we need a SIGNIFICANT nerf on lvl4s in hisec.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 ... : last (43)

Author Topic

SSgt Sniper
Gallente
SSgt Sniper Temporary corp
Posted - 2008.08.24 18:05:00 - [391]
 

Edited by: SSgt Sniper on 24/08/2008 18:05:46
Originally by: Maximillian Bayonette

If you're done making up stories, maybe we can go on with the discussion?

I call shenannigins on this one.

1. Interceptors can camp gates anywhere in Caldari or Gallente Lowsec. I know, I've seen me do it. The gate guns cannot track you for crap and you will be fine as long as you are REALLY careful.


2. You cannot know whether he lies or does not lie about getting nailed on some gate at some time in the middle of nowhere. (Ad-hominem, anyone?)

3. Your definition of a stupid person seems rather flawed. It seems to include anyone who doesn't agree with you. Which I shouldn't be surprised, the modern age seems to have removed the ability to respectfully disagree from the planet. I could be wrong, but I've watched you call several people stupid in this thread for no reason I can discern except that you don't like thier point of view, so I don't think so.

4. I don't think anything currently needs nerfing. (including nanoships, with the exception of the Ishtar. Being able to go fast and still deal your optimum dps is a bit ******ed. Other than that, I'd leave them alone, if they go stupid fast they spent a lot of money to be able to go stupid fast, and they should be able to go stupid fast all they want. But I digress.) Level 4 mission runners in highsec may not be your cup of tea, but this is not a good reason to nerf them. I haven't seen one shred of anything 'irrefutable' posted by either side tbh. And yes, I can make more money mining, it is a lot more work to make it work, but I can do it. I spent a lot of money to be able to do so, as the pwnmobile CNR's with crystal sets spent a lot of money to do thier thing, as the 21k per sec machs spent a lot of money to do thier thing, as x spent a lot to be able to do y, blah, so on, and so forth, etc.

Average joe never makes the money, does the efficiency, or has the speed of those that make up the top of the heap in thier preffered timesink. However, the top of the timesink crop is the numbers you always see used in these forums. That's crap, it always has been crap, and if I could figure out a way to cure that particular blight upon logic, I would. Sadly, I've yet to perfect the mind control internet device that will permit me to do so.

You accused the guy you quoted of a lot of logical fallacies, yet yours are all over this thread. That's okay though, you're human, so am I. I'm sure I've got one or two around here myself. But you should attempt to disagree respectfully instead of succumbing to 'Johnathan Gabriel' syndrome.

Doonoo Boonoo
Posted - 2008.08.24 18:20:00 - [392]
 

Edited by: Doonoo Boonoo on 24/08/2008 18:26:22
Edited by: Doonoo Boonoo on 24/08/2008 18:23:29
Originally by: Tippia
The issue at hand is L5s, and their group requirements. Max offers an explanation for why L5s aren't being run that much: they require groups, and mission runners don't seem to like that. You counter by saying that ISK is what makes people run missions whether they have to group up or not is irrelevant. No mention?

No. I counterd Max's statement that said mission runners are adverse to interaction with others when he used it to explain why mission runners where not running lvl 5 missions in lowsec. The primary motivation behind running all missions is the reward. Max already pointed out that lvl 5s have poor rewards. I agree with him.
Originally by: Tippia

In essence, either you're talking about something completely different, or you're offering an alternative explanation to his group requirement hypothesis. I was wondering which the case was: do you offer an anternative explanation (in which case you're implicitly arguing that more ISK would solve the problem)

lvl 5 missions in lowsec cannot be run solo and the rewards are crap. Obviously I am in favour of boosting them. Again, Max called for a boost to lowsec in the post I replied to.
So again I am agreeing with him.
Originally by: Tippia

or are you in fact not arguing against his point at all (in which case you're just throwing in some irrelevant misdirection)? It could simply be that your truncated quote made you miss out on the point he made, and that you therefore argued against a point that was never made.

I truncated the quote because that was the only part of his post I disagreed with.
Originally by: Tippia

..and you offered an alternative perception: that the ISK is what matters. Since you didn't dispute that L5s aren't being run that much, or that they require groups to run, you're saying that the reason behind this is that the pay isn't good enough.
Quote:
Newsflash: People already group together to run lvl 5 missions in lowsec. As for 'Do I think higher rewards will bring more people into lowsec', I already told you- I don't know.
If you don't know, why did you assert ISK as the motivating factor for running L5s (or any missions, for that matter)? If it is such a factor, then, surely, you would also think that more ISK would offer more motivation?)

Isk is the motivating factor in all missions. Yes, it is safe to assume that more Isk rewards to lvl 5 missions in lowsec would bring more players but I would be guessing as to exactly how many extra people it would bring. At no point have I said that adding more rewards to lvl 5 missions in lowsec wouldn't draw more people to run them. I don't know where you got that idea.

Quote:
Max thinking that all mission runners are afraid of interaction is like saying all pirates are griefers.

Originally by: Tippia

And saying that all mission runners are motivated by ISK is not?



Because Anybody who ever ran a mission is a mission runner and is motivated by the Isk/rewards. What I say is true. The other 2 statements are not.

Lyra Blazing
Posted - 2008.08.24 18:35:00 - [393]
 

Quote:

Back on topic ... solo? Yeah, solo gets you murderized. Considering this is an MMO, I would hope players would have some reason to LEAVE the State War Academy to join a corp. If they only reason we can think of is using the same reasoning that once was (can't make no money in hisec, might as well move to losec), then that's fair enough.


So its true you want to get ppl to play the way you think its right. I am not at all interested to play in a corp. To much politics there. And dont tell me its a mmo. I dont have to do all jobs in rl as a group. So a mmo should have a place for solo players as well. I want to choose the degree of interaction with other players. Thats btw the reason i play eve. Lots of ppl do. You kill that and lots of ppl going to leave.

So leave me my game and i will let you have yours. Its not my problem that you dont seem to be able to find a corp with social contacts that fit you.

Necrosmith
Gallente
Chunder Corp
Posted - 2008.08.24 18:42:00 - [394]
 

China called.

They want their wall back.

Ruze
Amarr
Next Stage Initiative
Posted - 2008.08.24 18:44:00 - [395]
 

Originally by: Lyra Blazing
Quote:

Back on topic ... solo? Yeah, solo gets you murderized. Considering this is an MMO, I would hope players would have some reason to LEAVE the State War Academy to join a corp. If they only reason we can think of is using the same reasoning that once was (can't make no money in hisec, might as well move to losec), then that's fair enough.


So its true you want to get ppl to play the way you think its right. I am not at all interested to play in a corp. To much politics there. And dont tell me its a mmo. I dont have to do all jobs in rl as a group. So a mmo should have a place for solo players as well. I want to choose the degree of interaction with other players. Thats btw the reason i play eve. Lots of ppl do. You kill that and lots of ppl going to leave.

So leave me my game and i will let you have yours. Its not my problem that you dont seem to be able to find a corp with social contacts that fit you.


No, me finding a corp isn't your problem. I made my own, live in it as I wish, yadda yadda.

But don't give me that 'you mind your business' bullsh*t. This IS an MMO, and one of the better one's on the block. Every move you make affects someone else. You may underplay the level it affects others, and I may overplay it, but it's still there.

I got my own opinions about all kinds of things. Seems you do, too. And as a paying player, I have just as much right as any other (owning three accounts, I might actually have MORE right by that logic, but that's silly reasoning).

The mission systems seems imbalanced to me. Particularly, the level of profit a solo player can reach in comparison to a group of players.

So, yes, I will continue to discuss a part of the game I feel is deficient. And, yes, you can't stop me.

Play your game how you will. But don't assume you can do so without affecting others.

oilio
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2008.08.24 18:55:00 - [396]
 

Originally by: billkroll

Raising the amout of time it takes to get new ships would ultimatly push the non-hardcore players towards other games giving me more space in my space sim. I say let them go!


Very shortsighted.

If they go, then CCP loses revenue. Potentially, quite a lot of revenue.

Take a look on the mmorpg charts http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart2.html

Notice that in every case, once the graph for a given game starts to go downwards, the game never recovers?

The more "casual" players - however much you despise them - are a very important component to Eve online. If you lose them, the game is in trouble.

Kwedaras
Amarr
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.08.24 19:31:00 - [397]
 

Originally by: SSgt Sniper
Edited by: SSgt Sniper on 24/08/2008 18:05:46
Originally by: Maximillian Bayonette

If you're done making up stories, maybe we can go on with the discussion?

I call shenannigins on this one.

1. Interceptors can camp gates anywhere in Caldari or Gallente Lowsec. I know, I've seen me do it. The gate guns cannot track you for crap and you will be fine as long as you are REALLY careful.




Very HappyVery HappyVery HappyVery HappyVery Happy
goddammit stop posting. How can we discuss with you when you are clueless?

Karentaki
Gallente
Oberon Incorporated
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2008.08.24 19:37:00 - [398]
 

Originally by: Necrosmith
China called.

They want their wall back.


/thread Laughing

That was the first truely awesome post in this thread Laughing

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.08.24 19:44:00 - [399]
 

Originally by: oilio
Originally by: billkroll

Raising the amout of time it takes to get new ships would ultimatly push the non-hardcore players towards other games giving me more space in my space sim. I say let them go!


Very shortsighted.

If they go, then CCP loses revenue. Potentially, quite a lot of revenue.

Take a look on the mmorpg charts http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart2.html

Notice that in every case, once the graph for a given game starts to go downwards, the game never recovers?

The more "casual" players - however much you despise them - are a very important component to Eve online. If you lose them, the game is in trouble.


While we're consulting that chart, look at what happens when you split a PvP game into PvE and PvP realms.

oilio
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2008.08.24 19:48:00 - [400]
 

Originally by: Malcanis

While we're consulting that chart, look at what happens when you split a PvP game into PvE and PvP realms.


For sure, but no-one is talking aobut splitting Eve into PvP and PvE realms.

We're talking about either changing high sec, or leaving it the SAME.

DMAN666vic
Posted - 2008.08.24 19:49:00 - [401]
 

I don't think level 4 mission running was particularly lucrative given the amount of time you put into them. I found them to be more enjoyable and you get to make a bit of money too.
I would be all for 4.5 level mission running in low sec with better bounties and rewards.


Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
Chubby Chuppers Chubba Chups
Posted - 2008.08.24 19:57:00 - [402]
 

Originally by: oilio
Originally by: Malcanis

While we're consulting that chart, look at what happens when you split a PvP game into PvE and PvP realms.


For sure, but no-one is talking aobut splitting Eve into PvP and PvE realms.

We're talking about either changing high sec, or leaving it the SAME.



Strange that, Bears have called for succesive changes to high sec over time.

War dec nerf CHECK
Suicide gank nerf CHECK
More wardec nerf HIGH PRIOIRITY FROM CCP

All make high sec far to riskless compared to the isk you can churn in semi afking lv 4 missions.

Lv 4 missions need to be nerfed and nerfed hard. All the whiners gogin on about leaving with their 50 accounts wont leave. They never do. And CCP can rest easy knowing they have acted fairly and with an eye for balance for once

Cut the rewards drasticaly, no longer shall the bears print isk whilst half watching TV (you know you do it dont lie)

SKUNK

Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
Emptiness.
Posted - 2008.08.24 19:59:00 - [403]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
THere aer only 3-4 Level 4 missison thatallow you to reach > 20 mil epr hour (taht with a marauder salvagign while you do it). And you don 't usually will get them more than once per day unless you are really a mission *****.
…you only need to get them once per day in order to milk them 23/7. As for requiring a marauder to reach those levels… I can get 15mil/h from those high-end missions in a battlecruiser, and that's before LP (which is maybe another 10mil/h).

Just because you don't know how to run missions effectively doesn't mean that they aren't very well-paying (especially considering the complete lack of effort required to run them).

Oh and…
Quote:
Mining is simplest way to way outperform missiosn running while in 0,0.
…congratulations. You just proved his point.


No you are wrong, I know how to run missiosn very well. Enough to have bought quite a few Faction BS from LP for me. But even so I make far far far less isk than in 0.0. High sec level 4 might make more isk than Low sec common activities when taken into accoutn risk. But not even close to 0.0. Put in your mind 0.0 is INCREDIBLY SAFE!

Mission runngin does give you spikes of 40 mil or more isk pqr hour. But the average is way lower than that (if you usign only 1 character that is what you can do if you don't have an EXCELENT connection), its a fact. I stoped running missiosn because i droped my standign to other empires so much tht would make me impossible to travel in empire, so I ran my share of missions quite enough. And why?... because if you have low sp then yes they are the best way to make isk without much risk (just risk of gettin uber bored). But after you get diversified a bit your SP you can make far far more isk other ways. Even in empire!

The only think level 4 need is removal of the T1 loot that produces too much minerals. Apart from that the rest is fine. Msot of the LP store is simply unused because of the lack of enough tags.

Ogul
Caldari
ZiTek Deepspace Explorations
United Front Alliance
Posted - 2008.08.24 20:12:00 - [404]
 

Originally by: Le Skunk

Strange that, Bears have called for succesive changes to high sec over time.

War dec nerf CHECK


Your own fault, you just didn't know when to stop.

Ogul
Caldari
ZiTek Deepspace Explorations
United Front Alliance
Posted - 2008.08.24 20:16:00 - [405]
 

Originally by: Maximillian Bayonette

Perhaps if you stopped trying to be clever for a second and actually became clever you might find the proof you require.



So you still have nothing tangible to say and go for an ad hominem attack instead?

Very well played, Sir.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.08.24 20:22:00 - [406]
 

Originally by: Le Skunk
Originally by: oilio
Originally by: Malcanis

While we're consulting that chart, look at what happens when you split a PvP game into PvE and PvP realms.


For sure, but no-one is talking aobut splitting Eve into PvP and PvE realms.

We're talking about either changing high sec, or leaving it the SAME.



Strange that, Bears have called for succesive changes to high sec over time.

War dec nerf CHECK
Suicide gank nerf CHECK
More wardec nerf HIGH PRIOIRITY FROM CCP

All make high sec far to riskless compared to the isk you can churn in semi afking lv 4 missions.

Lv 4 missions need to be nerfed and nerfed hard. All the whiners gogin on about leaving with their 50 accounts wont leave. They never do. And CCP can rest easy knowing they have acted fairly and with an eye for balance for once

Cut the rewards drasticaly, no longer shall the bears print isk whilst half watching TV (you know you do it dont lie)

SKUNK



Well, not TV... actually I watch charity documentaries about unfortunate young ladies compelled to do undignified and sinful things to afford the clothes they lack.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.08.24 20:22:00 - [407]
 

BRING BACK ALLIANCE 'P'

oilio
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2008.08.24 20:38:00 - [408]
 

Originally by: Le Skunk

War dec nerf CHECK
Suicide gank nerf CHECK
More wardec nerf HIGH PRIOIRITY FROM CCP



Suicide gank needed some balancing. You keep mentioning risk/reward, but the risk to suicide gankers was almost zero.

Whether the nerf goes too far as a matter for a different debate (but I think it does - either increase CONCORD response time, or remove insurance, but not both).

The wardec nerf issue is still an unknown. CCP have said they are going to look at it. If they nerf it too hard, then I agree that high sec might become too safe.

I'm all for making high sec a bit less safe, but what we're debating here is moving L4s to low sec. I still believe that if they do that, or if they SIGNIFICANTLY reduce income from high sec L4s, it will be harmful to the game for the simple reason that Eve will lose a lot of the more casual players.

I wish CCP would release stats of how many people are High Sec L4 mission runners. This information would help to determine the impact of the changes you guys are proposing. Without those figures, it comes down to opinion, but my opinion remains that nerfing high sec income will overall have a negative impact on the game.

Mika Meroko
Minmatar
Crayon Posting Inc
Posted - 2008.08.24 20:42:00 - [409]
 

Edited by: Mika Meroko on 24/08/2008 20:45:09

wow, this thread is still alive..


gonna make a comment about pvp to pvp and pve comment...


actually, for ultima online....(memories... of being.. consoler...argh!) the "loss" is actually, errrm, matches the launch of other online games..

yes.. competition... if you count in the number AND the type of the competition...

you would see people actually prefer pve more...(beyond me... no murdering people, stealing, griefing...)


but yeah, to be real for a sec: pve games do better than pvp games...

period...

the UO:R's loss of subs is to competitors who are new, pve based and grind grind grind mindless lvl grinding...


so... yeah, people are weird...

but hey, people do what people do... as long as they pay... I say CCP keep them...



edit: as for the nerfs:..

Sucide ganking: one sentance, when people say risk vs reward... it only applies to others huh?...

War-dec: I think CCP is trying to errrm, oh god.. make Wardec means something XD... instead of just pay to whack ya-mole....


High sec is never safe.... those who say is safe is kidding themselves...

it just depends on how profitable it is to kill you.. or how badly someone wants you dead... that is all....



Ruze
Amarr
Next Stage Initiative
Posted - 2008.08.24 21:43:00 - [410]
 

Instead of moving mission agents or outright lowering rewards or that kind of thing, how about this:

In the near future, we *may* see changes which further increase the security of hisec and which will go a long way in further separating a large portion of the playerbase from crime.

To turn these changes, CONCORD, in working with each of the Empires, receives a 10% tax from all hisec activities, on top of standard taxation. These taxes will help CONCORD not only rebuild from it's recent losses, but will also help them avoid the level of security that so many have come to rely on.

This 10% tax is active in all things, including bounty payouts (player and NPC), market sells of all items (sells being made in hisec stations), market purchases of all items (purchases being made from hisec stations), all agent payouts (kill, courier, production and mining missions), and all rentals (corp office, factory slot and research slots). Even reprocessing fees.

This tax does not extend into losec operations, as CONCORD has had to pull many resources from these troubled districts, and is actually able to provide LESS security than before (please note the initial dev blog on pirating being easier in losec).



Ta-da! You now have a system that universally hits those who are industrialists AND mission runners, those who are in player corps and NPC corps, market runners and full blown traders ... everybody.

Hisec becomes safer, by all means. I'm actually for that sometimes. But somebody has to pay for this extra security, no?

Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
Chubby Chuppers Chubba Chups
Posted - 2008.08.24 23:37:00 - [411]
 

Originally by: Ogul
Originally by: Le Skunk

Strange that, Bears have called for succesive changes to high sec over time.

War dec nerf CHECK


Your own fault, you just didn't know when to stop.


At by that marker, it will be the bear fault for over exploiting level four missions which will lead to them being nerfed.


SKUNK

Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
Chubby Chuppers Chubba Chups
Posted - 2008.08.24 23:38:00 - [412]
 

Originally by: oilio
Originally by: Le Skunk

War dec nerf CHECK
Suicide gank nerf CHECK
More wardec nerf HIGH PRIOIRITY FROM CCP



Suicide gank needed some balancing.


As does level 4 missions... incoming nerf bat ?

SKUNK

Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
Chubby Chuppers Chubba Chups
Posted - 2008.08.24 23:46:00 - [413]
 

QUESTION

What risk, does a NPC corp character running lv4s have in high sec.

ANSWER

Risk of being suidice ganked = ONLY risk


ArrowWhy do you think there are hundreds of isk farmers running multiple accounts in all the major mission hubs....

Because the only way they ever die is if suicide ganked... and guess what the bears have pressurised CCP into nerfing... suicide ganking.

ITs risk free, gains masive rewards and has no place in this game if ccp truley do care about balance.

And no mission runner will leave. They all know they are overpowered - And will have grudgin respect for ccp for keeping thing balanced.

NERF LV 4s

SKUNK

oilio
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2008.08.24 23:49:00 - [414]
 

Originally by: Le Skunk
Originally by: oilio


Suicide gank needed some balancing.


As does level 4 missions... incoming nerf bat ?

SKUNK


Actually...

Originally by: oilio

Suicide gank needed some balancing. You keep mentioning risk/reward, but the risk to suicide gankers was almost zero.

Whether the nerf goes too far as a matter for a different debate (but I think it does - either increase CONCORD response time, or remove insurance, but not both).



If you're gonna quote, don't deliberately modify the context - makes you look like a troll.

Fully insured (and essentially risk-free) suicide ganking had a distinctly negative impact on the game.

L4 missions in high sec do not have the same negative impact. I know you argue that they do, but it's not the same as having 800 million worth of ship taken out by people who won't have to pay a pennny for doing it - hence the suicide gank nerf.

That's not the same thing as your "I want L4s nerfed" issue. You would like it to be, but it isn't.

There is no indication that the nerf-bat is gonna swing at High Sec L4s. This is mainly because High Sec L4s don't really cause any harm. They are essentially victim-less (yeah, I know what's coming now, but I can't be bothered debating that again).

Wardec nerfing is a different story. That could be a real mess if CCP aren't very careful with any nerfs they are considering, but no-one knows what is gonna happen with that.

Anyway, L4s in High Sec is not the same as risk-free suicide ganking. One has victims (and no consequence for the offender) and the other doesn't.

Ruze
Amarr
Next Stage Initiative
Posted - 2008.08.24 23:49:00 - [415]
 

Originally by: Le Skunk
QUESTION

What risk, does a NPC corp character running lv4s have in high sec.

ANSWER

Risk of being suidice ganked = ONLY risk


ArrowWhy do you think there are hundreds of isk farmers running multiple accounts in all the major mission hubs....

Because the only way they ever die is if suicide ganked... and guess what the bears have pressurised CCP into nerfing... suicide ganking.

ITs risk free, gains masive rewards and has no place in this game if ccp truley do care about balance.

And no mission runner will leave. They all know they are overpowered - And will have grudgin respect for ccp for keeping thing balanced.

NERF LV 4s

SKUNK



Don't nerf level 4's.

Tax hisec dwellers. Tax them heavily. Give them all the security that you can manage, and tax them for it.

Give a real advantage to those of us who choose not to live in hisec.

oilio
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2008.08.24 23:52:00 - [416]
 

Originally by: Ruze

Don't nerf level 4's.

Tax hisec dwellers. Tax them heavily. Give them all the security that you can manage, and tax them for it.

Give a real advantage to those of us who choose not to live in hisec.


A high sec tax seems fair enough. Living in high sec means protection by CONCORD. From a "realism" point-of-view, a tax would seem entirely proper.

Dave Davies
Posted - 2008.08.25 00:00:00 - [417]
 

Originally by: Ruze


Don't nerf level 4's.

Tax hisec dwellers. Tax them heavily. Give them all the security that you can manage, and tax them for it.

Give a real advantage to those of us who choose not to live in hisec.


You know? I like that. Really fits in with the whole capitalist dystopia thing this game sometimes exhibits. It would also add another layer of economic depth if done properly, and it would make lowsec more valuable by default regardless of what the market's been doing.

Ruze
Amarr
Next Stage Initiative
Posted - 2008.08.25 00:08:00 - [418]
 

I can't believe that I, as an upstanding American, proposed that taxes could be the solution to ... well, anything!




But from a 'realism' standpoint, having major taxes to things in hisec seems damn reasonable to me. This doesn't mean to shift the current profit margins made from hisec activities to cover the cost of the taxes, but to add the taxes wholesale on everything. Be you renting an office, selling a product, or getting bounties from a rat kill. Boom, money in CONCORD's pocket.

And it would be unaffected by current trade skills, which reduce the taxes levied by Empires on market activities.

Dave Davies
Posted - 2008.08.25 00:17:00 - [419]
 

Yeah, but the devil's in the details as always. How would you implement a concord tax?

For mission rewards and bounties it would be pretty easy, you just skim some off the top. What about ore, though? I guess you could scale refine taxes by system sec so that it would be impossible to get "perfect" refining in 0.5 and above.

Sales tax? That gets trickier, because it's already more profitable to sell in low sec in a lot of cases. I've advocated variable sales taxes before though to break up trade hubs.


And Ruze, there's nothing inherently wrong with taxation. It can be an effective way to manage an economy if used prudently.

Empyre
Chaotic Balance
Posted - 2008.08.25 02:01:00 - [420]
 

I used to genuinely care about this topic.. the first 300 times it was rehashed. It boggled my mind how logic could pervade some people when trying to honestly debate this. But then it dawned on me, why the hell should I care?

The L4 mission nerf cry has been ringing out forever now, and over the years they've only seen touching up. That alone spoke to me and said CCP seems to believe they are well enough balanced. If it was as big of a deal as some of these over-dramatic, sensationalist and frothing at the mouth posters were making it out to be, something would have changed long ago.

So now I get genuine amusement out of reading the nerf cries. Aside from the trolls who try so hard to be noticed and only get ignored (another sad story), I picture these people actually believing that if they type something long enough, despite the fact CCP runs the darn game and could prove/disprove their "ideas" in a work-day, that somehow CCP will think, "You know, that guy typed the same shaky argument several times. Let's forget what the data says and make the change."

Denial is a helluva drug. I've heard if you keep telling yourself something, you also start to believe it as well.


Pages: first : previous : ... 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 ... : last (43)

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