Tuesday, January 5, 2016

How a Carebear's Nerf Proposal Is Born

Over the years, we've seen quite a few carebears and carebear apologists ask CCP to nerf highsec aggression--One More Nerf™. We know these misguided individuals are ultimately motivated by the desire for 100% safety, but who are they? Where do they come from? Today, we'll witness the origin of just one of these theme parkers.


The carebear's name was Galrak Malinkorn. You might be wondering why a 2008 character was mining with a Retriever in a 0.9 system. Judging by his employment history, it seems he'd left EVE and returned about a year ago. You might then wonder why a one-year player was mining with a Retriever in a 0.9 system. Bot-aspirancy would be my guess.


After losing his Retriever to Agents Keraina Talie-Kuo and Krominal, they finished off his Capsule. Following their round of PvP, Galrak was sent a form EVEmail instructing him to read the Code and pay 10 million isk.


Galrak sent Krominal a response that strongly implied he was not going to buy a permit.


Galrak reserved his worst sentiments for Keraina Talie-Kuo, who had been credited with the destruction of Galrak's rather unremarkable pod. Having sent two permabannable EVEmails, Galrak went silent. But he never stopped thinking about that 83 million isk pod.


Five days later, Galrak reported to the official EVE forums to offer the fruits of his meditations. Considering the loss of his pod in highsec to be a defect in the game, he posted a thread in the "Issues, Workarounds & Localization" subforum. The substance of Galrak's proposal was as follows:
I suggest that in the case of Illegal podding in HI-SEC SPACE either on miners, or from gate camps, that ...

1. The podded entity is "resurrected" back at the LAST station it UNDOCKED from, with its complete compliment of implants if any.
2. The ship with all its modules and rigs if any, replaced there too.

ie for the victim player it is as if the incident never happened.
In other words, Galrak's suggestion was to automatically reimburse players who get podded. To compensate for this change and balance things out for the ganker, Galrak added:
As for the perpetrator, as CONCORD will destroy the ship but at the moment doesn't pod the capsuleer, I suggest

1. as punishment for such an action, the game CAN pod the perpetrator and resurrect them back at their "HOME" station with a NEW bare clone, and a rookie ship. (like it does with the victim now)
2. That NO kill rights are issued for the incident to the victim, and no criminal flag is issued to the perpetrator, ie no need for revenge.
3. There is no ship debris at the point of the incident of either the perpetrator or the victim.
Thus, if a ganker manages to succeed in podding someone in highsec, the victim gets all their stuff back, and the ganker loses his own pod. Fair enough?
hopefully this action will bring back established players who may have lost a lot through illegal ganking and got fed up and left, and also, wont deter new players from staying on after their trial period.
this way the victim isn't at a loss for this incident, and the perpetrator just gets a slap on the wrist off CONCORD.

For the so called perpetrators, well they have 0.4, 0.3, 0.2, 0.1, 0.0, and Worm Hole space to carry on with that aspect of the game.
Galrak blamed gankers for the decline in EVE subscriptions. I doubt it. Interacting with people like Galrak Malinkorn, on the other hand, probably isn't EVE's biggest draw.


Galrak's "bug report" in the Issues, Workarounds & Localization subforum didn't go over well. Galrak realized that he'd posted his idea in the wrong place. So he created an exact copy of his post and put it in the "Player Features and Ideas Discussion" subforum, where One More Nerf™ proposals belong.


But even there, Galrak's idea met with mockery in reply after reply of players disagreeing with him. Time for Galrak to absorb the constructive criticism.


Galrak laughed it off. On public record now, he spared his fellow players any talk of cancer or gas chambers.


The carebear's good humor didn't hold up for very long.


After a bit more feedback, Galrak decided he'd had enough. Galrak's great effort to change EVE's game mechanics was at an end. But as long as there are carebears losing Retrievers in highsec, there will be more proposals like this one.

40 comments:

  1. Nice double tap Agent Keraina!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Geez, that guy's poison pen is some of the worst vitriol I have ever seen in a video game. I'd hate to see his Christmas cards.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. These were the ones he sent to CODE this year. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CV4-93YWcAE7Xx9.jpg

      Delete
    2. I know I know, anonymity and all that. But I just can't imagine writing any of this stuff ever, not even ironically. What kind of people do carebears have to be to not only write, but also honestly wish such things to happen? Sad, really.

      Delete
    3. @Anon10:02

      We understand the kind of person that the carebear is. Many Agents also used to be Carebears, before we realized our mistakes, gave up on our life of bot-aspirancy, voluntarily became baptized by CONCORD, and began our new lives enforcing the Code.

      The Carebear is a pitiable creature, to be sure. It is the Mercy of James 315 that is continually extended to the carebear for the low, low, price of 10 million isk, that can redeem them. (That, and/or going to lowsec and shooting people instead of rocks.)

      The Combination of Combat and The Code is the Cure that Can overCome in this Case.

      Delete
    4. Fit your cat: http://www.minerbumping.com/p/blog-page.html

      Delete
  3. But antiganking was supposed to protect him

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, guess what! They failed... again!

      Delete
    2. loyal, if you could answer that gmail question I would be eternally grateful!

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. Lol Wolf/Loyal Please. "antiganking was supposed to protect him". That is a funny obscure statement. You humor me Wolf thanks for your Troll!

      Delete
    5. @Kickass Trivianne 5:36

      It is, indeed a funny statement, but I am afraid I must inform you that it is no troll. Anti-Gankers do, in fact, indeed fail daily at the so-called "protection" they intend to offer their "parters." In fact they are so utterly incapable of success that they have not once succeeded in stopping a New Order gank!

      Praise James!

      Delete
    6. Fit your cat: http://www.minerbumping.com/p/blog-page.html

      Delete
  4. That carebear mimics other, seemingly peaceful, passive aggressive awful people who seem peaceful at first, but at the first sign of trouble, abandon their supposedly peaceful principles for all out grudgewar on all who oppose them, like the tyrants they are.

    These "children," to use a term, are the most in need of Discipline of The New Order and Its Agents.

    Take the relatively niche subject of Acceptance Parenting, (which views all child discipline as abusive and amoral,) a view that is reasonably similar to the Philosophy of the Common Miner, as an example, and see how hostile and awful the Miner Philosophy truly is:

    http://revolutionaryparent.com/sick-of-hearing/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fit it! Fit it! Fit it!

      Delete
    2. Fit your cat: http://www.minerbumping.com/p/blog-page.html

      Delete
    3. If only he knew of somewhere that had a proper fit for a ganking vessel.

      Delete
  5. So if CCP implements the "ressurection" mechanic this guy came up with, we know who to blame. The end of highsec podding is near. Gee, thanks Gamis branch!

    ReplyDelete
  6. So if CCP implements the "ressurection" mechanic this guy came up with, we know who to blame. The end of highsec podding is near. Gee, thanks Gamis branch!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Then there was Nicky Two-Times. We called him that because he said everything two times.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Here is an honest question, no trolling I promise.

    What is the software that the player behind the Kusion cousins is using to manage all those cats at the same time? That is pretty cool. I know it's not against the rules and all that. I'm honestly interested.

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's no software involved; watch his stream and you'll see he just has 12 clients tiled on top of each other on a single monitor, he clicks through each one to issue commands.

      Delete
    2. You sir, Mr. Crazy Taco, just made my day,(possibly my year). Can't wait to test it out! :)

      Found this and lo, you are absolutely right: https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Multiple_clients

      Just when you thought you were done being a noob, you learn something totally new.

      Thanks again!

      Delete
    3. Fuk me, AG will never believe it. Thats skillz boy

      Delete
    4. I know it is. Mad skillz. And I only need 1/3 of what he has.

      Delete
  9. It's important to note that the accounts have to be paid. Multiboxing trial accounts IS a TOS violation.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This made me actually lol:

    "Galrak sent Krominal a response that strongly implied he was not going to buy a permit." - that's gold man!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. yeah this made me laugh as well, love him or hate him James315 knows comedy.

      Delete
  11. It is not unreasonable that an individual who pays hard earned $ for a monthly subscription should expect a reasonable amount of safety.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. and an omnipotent police force that can insta-kill a criminal isn't reasonable protection?

      Delete
    2. The real question is: Why can't Antiganking prevent the ganks?

      Oh because they're too busy whining for someone ELSE to do it for them!

      Anti-gankers failing DAILY!!!!

      Delete
    3. Fit your cat: http://www.minerbumping.com/p/blog-page.html

      Delete
  12. "and an omnipotent police force that can insta-kill a criminal isn't reasonable protection?"

    No, not in Eve. Not if their pod is left intact. Letting CONCORD target and destroy the pods of criminals is a viable solution to the problem.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Anon7:28

      Incorrect.

      With the removal of clone costs, and the fact that New Order Pods are regularly flashy red (and thus freely able to be podded by capsuleers interested in their own "self defense",) How much "financial damage" do you think you would be able to do to the New Order, given that we regularly run without implants?

      You would be quickly back, saying that "CONCORD destroying the pods of criminals is not enough, is not a viable solution to the problem. What we really need is for CONCORD to introduce a 15-minute waiting period in which they cannot undock after they commit an illegal act. That would be a viable solution to the problem."

      The real answer here is that there is no problem, and everything that is going on is working as intended. You have all the tools you need to be your own police force. It is simply your own careless, slovenly laziness that keeps you from realizing your potential to be your own Protector.

      The Code is also working as intended to punish you for your entitled, childish, and lazy beliefs. Praise James.

      Delete
    2. Fit your cat: http://www.minerbumping.com/p/blog-page.html

      Delete
  13. Find great deals on eBay for All Nerf Guns in Outdoor Dart Guns and Soft Darts. Shop with confidence. their explanation

    ReplyDelete

Note: If you are unable to post a comment, try enabling the "allow third-party cookies" option on your browser.