|
PerrineClostermann posted:Wait, link to CCP calling Grath an idiot? I think this is it: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4426759#post4426759
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 01:25 |
|
|
Hey, I know I'm just a newbie and maybe I'm missing something, but who the gently caress are Li3, and why would they allow people who have been in dreddit only 2 weeks ago to join them and shoot us?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
Unimpressed posted:Hey, I know I'm just a newbie and maybe I'm missing something, but who the gently caress are Li3, and why would they allow people who have been in dreddit only 2 weeks ago to join them and shoot us? Both the long and short answer to this question is 'because they are loving dumb.'
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
[00:52:35] Arathor Dietrichan > if you really think a nano and a plate don't work well together then you're probably retarded If hoopz is any indication of what the rest of the CFC alliances are like, how the gently caress do you guys manage to stand them? Its just astounding how terrible he is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
I want a Chremoas. I'll never fly a Chremoas. But I want one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
darth cookie posted:I can't believe he is a troll. He genuinely believes in the Goon Conspiracy and how the 'nullsec cartels,' and Goons in particular will be the death of the game. In a way, he's our greatest achievement. He is the product of years of Goon hisec hazing and propaganda. I wish we were anything like the legendary boogeyman he imagines us to be. Reading his insane ramblings, content in the knowledge that CCP regularly purges his posts as nonsense, warms the cockles of my heart. Dinsdale has been grr-gooning and generally ranting about how RMT cartels are running the game back to at least 2010, if you check his eve-search history. It's become somewhat more focused and individuals (myself in particular) have become a particular focus, but it's always been there. If he's a troll, then he gets a cookie for keeping it up so consistently and so long. Unfortunately he's not only legitimate but, I suspect, genuinely mentally ill.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
Elmnt80 posted:[00:52:35] Arathor Dietrichan > if you really think a nano and a plate don't work well together then you're probably retarded I don't know who either person referenced in this post is, but I can still answer this. It's because the people in charge value winning over not dealing with retards.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
Elmnt80 posted:[00:52:35] Arathor Dietrichan > if you really think a nano and a plate don't work well together then you're probably retarded It's genuinely surprising that you guys haven't figured out when I'm joking and when I'm being serious yet (never). 
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
mynnna posted:Dinsdale has been grr-gooning and generally ranting about how RMT cartels are running the game back to at least 2010, if you check his eve-search history. It's become somewhat more focused and individuals (myself in particular) have become a particular focus, but it's always been there. If he's a troll, then he gets a cookie for keeping it up so consistently and so long. He also comments on every single Eve-related blog on the internet. He's wrong about everything he posts but you have to admire his determination.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
Noctis Horrendae posted:It's genuinely surprising that you guys haven't figured out when I'm joking and when I'm being serious yet (never). I want feel bad that you have so little self-esteem that you'll smilingly accept naked derision as the cost of being a nominal member of a community, but then I read your posts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
Noctis Horrendae posted:It's genuinely surprising that you guys haven't figured out when I'm joking and when I'm being serious yet (never). I'm genuinely surprised you haven't changed your avatar+text yet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
Elmnt80 posted:[00:52:35] Arathor Dietrichan > if you really think a nano and a plate don't work well together then you're probably retarded Actually, he's not completely wrong -- nanofiber internal structures lower hull HP, not armor. If you don't have the fitting to fill your remaining lowslots with additional armor tank modules, nanos are a decent choice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
ICE UP SON posted:I'm genuinely surprised you haven't changed your avatar+text yet. Why change it? I wear it as a badge of pride. Glory of Arioch posted:Actually, he's not completely wrong -- nanofiber internal structures lower hull HP, not armor. If you don't have the fitting to fill your remaining lowslots with additional armor tank modules, nanos are a decent choice. Voyager I posted:I want feel bad that you have so little self-esteem that you'll smilingly accept naked derision as the cost of being a nominal member of a community, but then I read your posts. Noctis Horrendae fucked around with this message at 02:22 on Apr 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
smg77 posted:He also comments on every single Eve-related blog on the internet. He's wrong about everything he posts but you have to admire his determination. Not every. Only if he can find a way to grr about goons that's related, no matter how much of a stretch.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
Glory of Arioch posted:Actually, he's not completely wrong -- nanofiber internal structures lower hull HP, not armor. If you don't have the fitting to fill your remaining lowslots with additional armor tank modules, nanos are a decent choice. There are a single-digit number of fittings in Eve (all frigates, none of them Gallente) where this may possibly be acceptable. In all others, even an ANP is better than a nanofiber.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
Noctis Horrendae posted:Why change it? I wear it as a badge of pride. Voyager I posted:I want feel bad that you have so little self-esteem that you'll smilingly accept naked derision as the cost of being a nominal member of a community, but then I read your posts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
Fix Lag posted:To live in a wormhole, you need to be able to fly a bunch of different ships well using one or two characters. It's a pretty big barrier to the average newbie and there's no shortcut. Old post from 2 pages back, but: Not that I am nearly always comatose in front of my computer (I am), but just PM me on gf.com, it actually goes to my phone and annoys me to answer in a more timely fashion. That being said, the auth queue is completely hosed atm, several (un-vacationed) people have attempted to join holesquad and don't show up in the queue. Please annoy your favorite GSF director or submit a jira ticket or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
Did we really lose all of our highsec POCOs to Gevlon?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:27
|
|
|
Brownhat posted:Did we really lose all of our highsec POCOs to Gevlon? Probably not. On the off chance we did, who really cares?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:28
|
|
|
Brownhat posted:Did we really lose all of our highsec POCOs to Gevlon? No. Miniluv didn't want to defend them anymore and so we gave them to RvB. Despite swearing up and down for over a month that RvB were goon slaves, that RvB was a project we'd formed to defend our poo poo, etc. he promptly claimed that this was victory and moved on, blithely ignoring (and suppressing any attempts to point out) the fact that according to his own propaganda, we still own them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
JohnSherman posted:Probably not. On the off chance we did, who really cares? Holesquad still has pocos that we transfered to GSF in J11946 that occasionally get RF'd and subsequently ignored.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:31
|
|
|
Brownhat posted:Did we really lose all of our highsec POCOs to Gevlon? Where do you guys keep seeing these bullshit statements?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:33
|
|
|
deadtear posted:Where do you guys keep seeing these bullshit statements? Gevlon repeats it in his blog every chance he gets in the hopes of it becoming genuinely true.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:34
|
|
|
mynnna posted:Gevlon repeats it in his blog every chance he gets in the hopes of it becoming genuinely true. I like how he edited his post five minutes after he posted it, replacing most of his victory speech with more skewed numbers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Mining Barges and Exhumers are getting changed again. ...so what you're saying is that it might be kinda viable to do a spidertanking (preferably hull, because real men hulltank) fleet with Skiffs and Orcas? Man, I've always wanted to try that EDIT: At least hulltanking on the Orcas, leaving the Skiffs to shield tank with their solid amount of mids
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:54
|
|
)
|
Unimpressed posted:I think this is it: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4426759#post4426759 quote:Grath if you think this change nerfs the speed at which supercarriers reinforce sov structures, you're doing it wrong. Pfft. Thanks! e: Oh dear god some of the posts and whining in that thread is ridiculous. Is this what the official forums are always like? PerrineClostermann fucked around with this message at 02:59 on Apr 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
mikey posted:In addition to what others have said, it's basically a covert-cloaking super-Tristan. Most people use it for killing explorers because it probes sites well enough, has enough mids to tackle stabbed covops, and doesn't require any slot sacrifices to do damage (drones). Yeah, exactly. I mean don't get me wrong. Big McHuge in Groon got me addicted to hunting down helpless explorers with an Astero. It's my favorite ship. It just doesn't win best-in-category for anything besides that, but man does it win. Nobody in those sites expects hostile company to show up. Throw an agility mod on there, bring a spare "repair" fitting and rigs in your cargo bay, set up a depot somewhere, and you're going to be a mild annoyance to a lot of people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 03:05
|
|
|
Margaret Thatcher posted:EVE's core gameplay is terrible...... Then you're doing it wrong.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
Hypation posted:Then you're doing it wrong. No, he's right. The actual mechanics by which the game is played are godawful. The game is mostly fun because it is an open-world sandbox with interactions and consequences that don't exist in another medium. Even the PvP, which is the closest the game comes to legitimately fun, is controlled in ways that are cumbersome and needlessly unintuitive and often involves hours of tedium for the rush of a fight (though I will say in its defense that it is quite deep, especially factoring in the cost:benefits analyses derived from ships being lost permanently). Outside PvP, it is a mess of godawful interfaces and some of the most shamelessly lovely PvE content that has ever been inflicted upon the world. Mining is one of the most fundamental activities in the game and is essentially a player doing their best to emulate a bot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:No, he's right. The actual mechanics by which the game is played are godawful. The game is mostly fun because it is an open-world sandbox with interactions and consequences that don't exist in another medium. Even the PvP, which is the closest the game comes to legitimately fun, is controlled in ways that are cumbersome and needlessly unintuitive and often involves hours of tedium for the rush of a fight (though I will say in its defense that it is quite deep, especially factoring in the cost:benefits analyses derived from ships being lost permanently). Outside PvP, it is a mess of godawful interfaces and some of the most shamelessly lovely PvE content that has ever been inflicted upon the world. Mining is one of the most fundamental activities in the game and is essentially a player doing their best to emulate a bot. This sounds like a major case of bittervet syndrome. Half of the fun in PvP is the hunt. PvE is - while not top notch - not much different to other MMOs. Kill quests, loot quests, your standard MMO rubbish. It takes actual strategy, which is a major redeeming factor IMHO. Mining, I'll give you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 03:49
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:No, he's right. The actual mechanics by which the game is played are godawful. The game is mostly fun because it is an open-world sandbox with interactions and consequences that don't exist in another medium. Even the PvP, which is the closest the game comes to legitimately fun, is controlled in ways that are cumbersome and needlessly unintuitive and often involves hours of tedium for the rush of a fight (though I will say in its defense that it is quite deep, especially factoring in the cost:benefits analyses derived from ships being lost permanently). While the control system is definitely a bit clunky, the rest of the game needs to be roughly the way it is. You can't have a loss-based PvP game with constant action, or the action you get becomes meaningless. You can even kind of do that in Eve already: buy a PLEX and throw a stack of 500 fitted T1 frigates in an NPC station, and go to town. There's little or no downtime beyond flying around looking for someone to engage, which won't take long in FW space. On the flip side, the thrill and rush of fighting are greatly lessened when you have effectively nothing to lose other than the three seconds it took you to fit the ship. The most fun I ever had in this game was flying 3-5bn isk ships that would instantly die if I double-clicked in the wrong place at the wrong time, and it's sad that they decided to throw the baby out with the bathwater with respect to speed fitting. Voyager I posted:Outside PvP, it is a mess of godawful interfaces and some of the most shamelessly lovely PvE content that has ever been inflicted upon the world. Mining is one of the most fundamental activities in the game and is essentially a player doing their best to emulate a bot. Yeah, Eve has easily the worst PvE of any MMO I've ever heard of. There's no excuse either, as creating a dynamic mission generation system for a space-based game should really not be that difficult. Mining in Eve should never have been about piloting the mining ship, and instead about deploying variably-expensive mining structures and babysitting them in a combat ship. The game could still move in that direction with the addition of the new deployable system, but that probably won't happen any time soon. When it comes to actual combat mechanics, the game is actually pretty deep. Even the most specialized ship can be fit and used in a dozen different ways, and some have hundreds of viable fittings. The only real problem with Eve PvP is how many medium- to large-fleet situations boil down to anchor->target->F1 rather than individual piloting, but none of that applies to small gang combat (however difficult that is to find these days).
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
PerrineClostermann posted:Wait, link to CCP calling Grath an idiot? Not really, its someone from PL calling another person from PL an idiot. Except now one of them works for CCP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
So I haven't played since 2009 and I want to come check out the game again but I am cheap. Can someone toss me a "Recall" invite? Account name is the same as my SA name.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 04:11
|
|
|
quote:Grath Telkin: Stop adjusting the things for how you think the game will be played and adjust it based on how its actually being played. Grath is absolutely right. Whether his point is more important than what CCP is trying to do is the real debate. CCP seems to be trying to balance a lot of different meta's right now, in theory forcing coalitions to follow the CFC model. The problem is a lot of the elements, and people, that could successfully run that model are already in the CFC, so at best all that would come about would be a much smaller bizarro-CFC, which would simply be blobbed to death. Death2AllSupers and all that jazz, but IMO, their unbalanced nature is the only thing keeping nullsec from going completely to poo poo atm. Maybe that's what needs to happen though for CCP to actually change nullsec sov mechanics, I dunno.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 04:18
|
|
|
How do you guys feel about the loki compared to the other t3's? Also the whole "lose a subsystem skill level when you lose a t3" does that only apply to lvl 5 skills or can it apply at any level of the skill?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 04:18
|
|
|
Thrasophius posted:How do you guys feel about the loki compared to the other t3's? Also the whole "lose a subsystem skill level when you lose a t3" does that only apply to lvl 5 skills or can it apply at any level of the skill? I haven't lost any skills from losing a t3 yet (from back when you could eject to avoid the SP loss), but I'm pretty sure it's always one of the highest level skills, and it's more than likely going to be Offensive or Defensive since they take the longest to train. Not that the 4ish days is that bad compared to how long it takes other skills take to train rank 5
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 04:23
|
|
|
dragonstalking posted:Grath is absolutely right. Whether his point is more important than what CCP is trying to do is the real debate. You have no idea what you're talking about. Grath is screeching about random bullshit and has no basis in reality. His current thing is how multiboxing is ruining the game, because he thinks that more than doubling fighter bomber ehp is going to make them die more to stealth bombers dropping bombs on them, somehow. FruitNYogurtParfait fucked around with this message at 04:32 on Apr 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 04:28
|
|
|
deadtear posted:You have no idea what you're talking about. Grath is screeching about random bullshit and has no basis in reality. His current thing is how multiboxing is ruining the game, because he thinks that more than doubling fighter bomber ehp is going to make them die more to stealth bombers dropping bombs on them, somehow. He mentions ISBoxer for sure, but his main complaint is with sov grinding/mechanics in general, something he has mentioned in greater detail many, many times. Further, none of his complaints really matter for PL anyways since, as he states, they have the isk, SP, and diplomacy to get around nearly anything. However anyone who isn't CFC/PL is getting a light shafting with this change. For the record, I'm not saying this change will be game-breaking or anything, it just seems disappointingly inadequate compared to changes CCP could make instead.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 04:37
|
|
|
^^^^^^ The only thing grath ever says can be boiled down to "This makes my alliance's supercap fleet not as important, it is bad and should be gone." Or "This makes my alliance's supercap fleet more important, it is good and should be supported." He's pretty binary about it. deadtear posted:You have no idea what you're talking about. Grath is screeching about random bullshit and has no basis in reality. His current thing is how multiboxing is ruining the game, because he thinks that more than doubling fighter bomber ehp is going to make them die more to stealth bombers dropping bombs on them, somehow. I think it's more that by making fighter bombers stronger, people will bomb them more. I think. CainFortea fucked around with this message at 04:41 on Apr 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 04:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 01:25 |
|
|
dragonstalking posted:He mentions ISBoxer for sure, but his main complaint is with sov grinding/mechanics in general, something he has mentioned in greater detail many, many times. Further, none of his complaints really matter for PL anyways since, as he states, they have the isk, SP, and diplomacy to get around nearly anything. However anyone who isn't CFC/PL is getting a light shafting with this change. No his main complaint is isboxer because he can't get traction on whatever other poo poo he was spewing. CainFortea posted:I think it's more that by making fighter bombers stronger, people will bomb them more. I think. It's the easiest way to neuter supers right now, you can't bomb them more than the 100% of the time they already are.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 04:39
|
|