Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lord Zim
774
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 11:08:00 -
[421] - Quote
It wouldn't be a problem if the replacement (which quite a few of the proponents FOR removing local hasn't come up with) didn't mean that the gankers get a disproportionate buff whereas the effort of the hunted also go in the roof disproportionally. vOv |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
390
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 18:48:00 -
[422] - Quote
Signal11th wrote:Anyway how many times do you use local to do the thing is was designed for e.g chat? Local is used as a pure free intel tool and nothing else? people mentioned titans being nerfed because they were doing things they were not designed to do, so what's The difference with the intel channel? Sorry local?
Rarely, but it does get used. Either way, it's a moot point as I don't have the slightest problem with local being a free intel channel, as it works both ways and keeps the tedium level of both living and hunting in null to manageable levels.
Besides, the reason I call it a troll is that 99% of the advocates just keep saying "remove local", oftentimes with no replacement for it at all, or some nebulous words about some kind of scanner to replace it (again, with no details about how it'd actually work). That's why it gets a vitriolic reaction from anyone who actually LIVES in null - you don't need to look any farther than the drone regions to find out what happens when CCP takes something major away and doesn't add an adequate replacement. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
449
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 23:29:00 -
[423] - Quote
Snow Axe wrote:Besides, the reason I call it a troll is that 99% of the advocates just keep saying "remove local", oftentimes with no replacement for it at all, or some nebulous words about some kind of scanner to replace it (again, with no details about how it'd actually work). That's why it gets a vitriolic reaction from anyone who actually LIVES in null - you don't need to look any farther than the drone regions to find out what happens when CCP takes something major away and doesn't add an adequate replacement. These are frequently accompanied by 'it works just fine in wormholes so nullsec should have it too!" without any consideration of the other unique aspects of wormspace and how they affect people's ability to operate there. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Lord Helghast
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
98
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 04:54:00 -
[424] - Quote
are we ever getting more ihub mods that we were promised,
what about ability to install station guns, or lock down gates or something to make owning a system worth it somehow |
Marlona Sky
Massive PVPness Psychotic Tendencies.
1081
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 06:29:00 -
[425] - Quote
Lord Helghast wrote:are we ever getting more ihub mods that we were promised,
what about ability to install station guns, or lock down gates or something to make owning a system worth it somehow
Station guns?? Locking down gates?? You know for a null resident who rages at players in high sec for playing solo and being risk free, you sure sound like you don't want to interact with other players in null much.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1117
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 07:33:00 -
[426] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Lord Helghast wrote:are we ever getting more ihub mods that we were promised,
what about ability to install station guns, or lock down gates or something to make owning a system worth it somehow Station guns?? Locking down gates?? You know for a null resident who rages at players in high sec for playing solo and being risk free, you sure sound like you don't want to interact with other players in null much. Locking down gates works in wormholes, and if it works in whs, it'll work in 0.0. That's what the 'nerf local' lobby likes to say, after all. What sort of dumb additional space-work proposal are you championing now, btw? |
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
64
|
Posted - 2012.06.09 19:28:00 -
[427] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Lord Helghast wrote:are we ever getting more ihub mods that we were promised,
what about ability to install station guns, or lock down gates or something to make owning a system worth it somehow Station guns?? Locking down gates?? You know for a null resident who rages at players in high sec for playing solo and being risk free, you sure sound like you don't want to interact with other players in null much.
But see, the difference between nullsec risk management and highsec risk management is the difference of having players provide their own security, versus players demanding that the game actually protect them without those players having to lift a finger.
In other words, Nullsec is safe because of the efforts of the people living there, whereas highsec is safe because of NPC space police. Now, in a player-driven game like EVE, which do you think is more deserving of actually having that safety? |
Grumpy Owly
612
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 03:20:00 -
[428] - Quote
Obvious question, why does null sec continue get its own topic focus yet other regions do not? I had thought the CSM came under the opinion that this area bias wasn't relevant as per the various PR stunts on EVE Radio and the CSM 7 campaigning?
Whilst I recognise null might have its own relevant topics the continual neglect or demonstration of not showing focus to other areas also at the same time even by continual omission simply shows a presumptious and neglectfull stance on topic discussion by the CSM and simply continues to promote to others the focus the CSM appears to have. (Even if for some this isnt a suprise).
So will this leopard ever change its spots, or is it culturally just following tradition as opposed to player concerns on topics. Either way it continues to highlight problems in the CSM focus despite the lip service. Bounty Hunting for CSM7 |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
467
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 06:26:00 -
[429] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:Obvious question, why does null sec continue get its own topic focus yet other regions do not? I had thought the CSM came under the opinion that this area bias wasn't relevant as per the various PR stunts on EVE Radio and the CSM 7 campaigning?
Whilst I recognise null might have its own relevant topics the continual neglect or demonstration of not showing focus to other areas also at the same time even by continual omission simply shows a presumptious and neglectfull stance on topic discussion by the CSM and simply continues to promote to others the focus the CSM appears to have. (Even if for some this isnt a suprise).
So will this leopard ever change its spots, or is it culturally just following tradition as opposed to player concerns on topics. Either way it continues to highlight problems in the CSM focus despite the lip service. Highseccers should be crossing their fingers and praying that CCP never starts looking seriously at what changes need to be made to their particular corner of space. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Grumpy Owly
612
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 07:02:00 -
[430] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:Obvious question, why does null sec continue get its own topic focus yet other regions do not? I had thought the CSM came under the opinion that this area bias wasn't relevant as per the various PR stunts on EVE Radio and the CSM 7 campaigning?
Whilst I recognise null might have its own relevant topics the continual neglect or demonstration of not showing focus to other areas also at the same time even by continual omission simply shows a presumptious and neglectfull stance on topic discussion by the CSM and simply continues to promote to others the focus the CSM appears to have. (Even if for some this isnt a suprise).
So will this leopard ever change its spots, or is it culturally just following tradition as opposed to player concerns on topics. Either way it continues to highlight problems in the CSM focus despite the lip service. Highseccers should be crossing their fingers and praying that CCP never starts looking seriously at what changes need to be made to their particular corner of space.
So says an extremely biased null seccer. One who is still likley crying about all the failures and mistakes made by their own organisation and leaders idiocy who are well known to take meta interests to a absurd level. Why would I be suprised by this kind of overly biased and known predjudical opinion?
Regardless I will wait for an answer from a CSM member about the exclusion of topics at least then it will hold some validity and relevance. Bounty Hunting for CSM7 |
|
Bossy Lady
Aliastra Gallente Federation
57
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 07:05:00 -
[431] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:Obvious question, why does null sec continue get its own topic focus yet other regions do not? I had thought the CSM came under the opinion that this area bias wasn't relevant as per the various PR stunts on EVE Radio and the CSM 7 campaigning?
Whilst I recognise null might have its own relevant topics the continual neglect or demonstration of not showing focus to other areas also at the same time even by continual omission simply shows a presumptious and neglectfull stance on topic discussion by the CSM and simply continues to promote to others the focus the CSM appears to have. (Even if for some this isnt a suprise).
So will this leopard ever change its spots, or is it culturally just following tradition as opposed to player concerns on topics. Either way it continues to highlight problems in the CSM focus despite the lip service. Highseccers should be crossing their fingers and praying that CCP never starts looking seriously at what changes need to be made to their particular corner of space.
No, they should be praying that CCP start this process 9AM this mornng. The sooner we ditch the outdated and obviously wrong idea that hi-sec is a starter area, the sooner we can start making it better for everyone (except utterly risk averse people I guess, but who cares about them?)
Posting on this character because apparently some people get upset when they're asked difficult questions. M. |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
413
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 07:10:00 -
[432] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:Regardless I will wait for an answer from a CSM member about the exclusion of topics at least then it will hold some validity and relevance.
I'm sure they'll get right on addressing your accusation poorly disguised as a question. |
Grumpy Owly
612
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 07:24:00 -
[433] - Quote
Snow Axe wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:Regardless I will wait for an answer from a CSM member about the exclusion of topics at least then it will hold some validity and relevance. I'm sure they'll get right on addressing your accusation poorly disguised as a question.
I think the CSM has more credibility and a bit more sanity and awareness about it now that it is less influenced by extremists with absurd views. I actually think they will be able to see it as trying to improve communications more than seeing it as an accusation. As such I think they might be a bit more mature than other certain EVE cultures about being able to accomodate more interests than a narrow mindset.
I'm sure they will be able of seeing this as a fair criticism as to why certain areas have continued to receive a focus due to them having an historical bias previously in the CSM topic content. I doubt they would be so scared of introducing more topic content for discussion pertaining to other regions as a result, especially after describing how much of a diverse interest set they have regarding EVE and also since they have previously promoted this awareness to the EVE player base. Bounty Hunting for CSM7 |
Lord Zim
782
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 08:17:00 -
[434] - Quote
If only the world was a perfect place so everything could be implemented instantly, instead of having to be prioritized.
If only. |
Grumpy Owly
612
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 08:49:00 -
[435] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:If only the world was a perfect place so everything could be implemented instantly, instead of having to be prioritized.
If only.
Except from a point of omission or neglect to see the big picture due to ignorance or predjudice to issues then this "prioritisation" the Goons like to use as they supposed effectual political rambling aid is just another exclamation to the full level of ignorance they like to think they have full control over CSM or CCP with.
It doesn't escape the EVE community the obvious tactics they like to think they can employ. Shame they don't have an offical voice on the CSM this year though to make this most "effective" for those selfish interests though really eh?
It will be interesting to see who if any on the CSM will pander to the old schoolboy way of continuing to think about these issues in a similar manner however especially after all the rhetoric employed on the subject to placate the EVE playbase about bias. Bounty Hunting for CSM7 |
Lord Zim
782
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 09:38:00 -
[436] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:Except from a point of omission or neglect to see the big picture due to ignorance or predjudice to issues then this "prioritisation" the Goons like to use as they supposed effectual political rambling aid is just another exclamation to the full level of ignorance they like to think they have full control over CSM or CCP with. This isn't a politician's forum, there's no need to bust out the dictionary to try to appear smart.
Grumpy Owly wrote:It doesn't escape the EVE community the obvious tactics they like to think they can employ. Shame they don't have an offical voice on the CSM this year though to make this most "effective" for those selfish interests though really eh? I thought you had Issler. vOv
Grumpy Owly wrote:It will be interesting to see who if any on the CSM will pander to the old schoolboy way of continuing to think about these issues in a similar manner however especially after all the rhetoric employed on the subject to placate the EVE playbase about bias. Hisec is being tweaked. They just got a new crimewatch system, for one. I'm sure the new crimewatch is much better suited to being expanded with new functionality such as bounty hunting than the old aggression system or whatever it was they called it. |
Grumpy Owly
612
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 10:07:00 -
[437] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:I thought you had Issler. vOv
Except again you missunderstand, my point was about official Goon CSM representation or the obvious lack of it, not about any CSM member representing mining. Besides there are other candidates representing other regional interests also.
Quote:Grumpy Owly wrote:It will be interesting to see who if any on the CSM will pander to the old schoolboy way of continuing to think about these issues in a similar manner however especially after all the rhetoric employed on the subject to placate the EVE playbase about bias. Hisec is being tweaked. They just got a new crimewatch system, for one. I'm sure the new crimewatch is much better suited to being expanded with new functionality such as bounty hunting than the old aggression system or whatever it was they called it.
Hope so, long over due. Shame your organisation doesnt seem to echo your desire to see EVE improved with an effective BH system.
But the point was not intended to be limited to just crimewatch related issues as you seem to have missintepreted, but all other non-null regional interests, which also includes worm holes and low sec environments aswell as high sec interests. Bounty Hunting for CSM7 |
Lord Zim
782
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 11:27:00 -
[438] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:Lord Zim wrote:I thought you had Issler. vOv Except again you missunderstand, my point was about official Goon CSM representation or the obvious lack of it, not about any CSM member representing mining. Besides there are other candidates representing other regional interests also. I've no idea what relevance this should have on anything.
Grumpy Owly wrote:Hope so, long over due. Shame your organisation doesnt seem to echo your desire to see EVE improved with an effective BH system. Have we said we're against a bountyhunter system?
Grumpy Owly wrote:But the point was not intended to be limited to just crimewatch related issues as you seem to have missintepreted, but all other non-null regional interests, which also includes worm holes and low sec environments aswell as high sec interests. What would a bounty hunter do in lowsec/nullsec which he isn't able to do now? |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2431
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:15:00 -
[439] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:Regardless I will wait for an answer from a CSM member about the exclusion of topics at least then it will hold some validity and relevance.
I think once the summit minutes are out you'll find that your fears of "null sec bias" on the current council (or even more so, on CCP's part) are misplaced.
Despite having a dedicated session, null sec issues hardly dominated the recent summit discussions. Also, plenty of other sessions overlapped and contained content highly relevant to low and null sec (content, the war dec system & crimewatch, mining and industry, faciton warfare, the economy, new player experience).
In other words, you can't really evaluate how much one area of space was discussed or where it is in the coming pipeline just by whether it had a dedicated session at the summit. Many incursion enthusiasts, for example, felt slighted because of the lack of a session named "incursions" despite the fact that they appeared in multiple other sessions as a topic of discussion.
High sec is currently receiving a lot of development love front and center, low sec issues are less concrete at the moment, other than the recent work on Faction Warfare, but null sec issues are pretty sharply defined and compartmentalized, due to most of them being left over from Dominion. Thus, it's easier to hold a focused talk on null sec issues and fixes, even if they aren't imminently being worked on by CCP.
Rest assured Empire space was by no means slighted! Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
469
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 19:39:00 -
[440] - Quote
Bossy Lady wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:Highseccers should be crossing their fingers and praying that CCP never starts looking seriously at what changes need to be made to their particular corner of space. No, they should be praying that CCP start this process 9AM this mornng. The sooner we ditch the outdated and obviously wrong idea that hi-sec is a starter area, the sooner we can start making it better for everyone (except utterly risk averse people I guess, but who cares about them?) All Eve players interested in a healthy, longlived Eve universe should be hoping for highsec to be fundamentally reformed as soon as possible.
However highseccers, or at least the handful of loudmouths who purport to represent them, have to date shown little sign of putting the wellbeing of Eve above their own desire to secure for themselves all the rewards and none of the risks. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
|
Marlona Sky
Massive PVPness Psychotic Tendencies.
1115
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 00:37:00 -
[441] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Bossy Lady wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:Highseccers should be crossing their fingers and praying that CCP never starts looking seriously at what changes need to be made to their particular corner of space. No, they should be praying that CCP start this process 9AM this mornng. The sooner we ditch the outdated and obviously wrong idea that hi-sec is a starter area, the sooner we can start making it better for everyone (except utterly risk averse people I guess, but who cares about them?) All Eve players interested in a healthy, longlived Eve universe should be hoping for highsec to be fundamentally reformed as soon as possible. However highseccers, or at least the handful of loudmouths who purport to represent them, have to date shown little sign of putting the wellbeing of Eve above their own desire to secure for themselves all the rewards and none of the risks.
You do realize one could easily replace highseccers with nullseccers and the shoe would fit just as well?
As far as the people proclaiming I have screamed local should be removed without doing a complete directional scanner revamp is of course lying their ass off.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Lord Zim
787
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 05:09:00 -
[442] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:As far as the people proclaiming I have screamed local should be removed without doing a complete directional scanner revamp is of course lying their ass off. Every "suggestion" I've seen which begins with "remove local", even if it says "revamp the directional scanner" has been unequivocally a buff to gankers/cloaked ships, with little to no subsequent real change for those who actually try to live somewhere. But I'm sure your suggestions are ~different~. |
evereplicant
State Protectorate Caldari State
154
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 06:03:00 -
[443] - Quote
my list and ive been in nullsec for a lot of years
- Tech moons or any high income moons such as prom and dyspro. Remove them either completely or randomise them every month!. Alliances should be made to work for these massive isk makers! I dont want to hear about maintaining pos, and the effort. Its easy, even easier now with blocks of fuel. You stick up a pos its mods and fuel it, then jsut continue to fuel it. Thats not much effort. Constant risk free pvp because alliances make billions from doing nothing and pay for anything and everything is beyond a joke! Stop it now!
- Stop alliances owning region after region and not even living in it! and then creaming it from renters! To allow more people to own space alliances can only have sov in 1 region and only hold 51% of the stations in that region
- Limit alliance numbers to 2000! Its not right people like goons and test can control the whole of eve! No No No!
- Limit the number of blues! Eve has become a complete napfest now! Having this set to a limit allows people to think about who really there friends are and who they choose not to be
The above two will allow smaller alliances to compete and own space! and create more pew pew.
- Remove warp bubbles - Seriously WTF - Stop lazy ass gameplay. We have dictors and hictors for that! You want to camp a gate then get the right ship and be prepared to fight for it! Drag bubbles again WTF. Lets camp 100Km off a gate!
- Remove jump bridges! Seriously WTF - You want to move through space get a gang to escort you! Wheres the Risk? |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1138
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 06:05:00 -
[444] - Quote
evereplicant wrote:my list and ive been in nullsec for a lot of years
- Tech moons or any high income moons such as prom and dyspro. Remove them either completely or randomise them every month!. Alliances should be made to work for these massive isk makers! I dont want to hear about maintaining pos, and the effort. Its easy, even easier now with blocks of fuel. You stick up a pos its mods and fuel it, then jsut continue to fuel it. Thats not much effort. Constant risk free pvp because alliances make billions from doing nothing and pay for anything and everything is beyond a joke! Stop it now!
- Stop alliances owning region after region and not even living in it! and then creaming it from renters! To allow more people to own space alliances can only have sov in 1 region and only hold 51% of the stations in that region
- Limit alliance numbers to 2000! Its not right people like goons and test can control the whole of eve! No No No!
- Limit the number of blues! Eve has become a complete napfest now! Having this set to a limit allows people to think about who really there friends are and who they choose not to be
The above two will allow smaller alliances to compete and own space! and create more pew pew.
- Remove warp bubbles - Seriously WTF - Stop lazy ass gameplay. We have dictors and hictors for that! You want to camp a gate then get the right ship and be prepared to fight for it! Drag bubbles again WTF. Lets camp 100Km off a gate!
ban npc corps from csm forums |
evereplicant
State Protectorate Caldari State
154
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 06:06:00 -
[445] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:evereplicant wrote:my list and ive been in nullsec for a lot of years
- Tech moons or any high income moons such as prom and dyspro. Remove them either completely or randomise them every month!. Alliances should be made to work for these massive isk makers! I dont want to hear about maintaining pos, and the effort. Its easy, even easier now with blocks of fuel. You stick up a pos its mods and fuel it, then jsut continue to fuel it. Thats not much effort. Constant risk free pvp because alliances make billions from doing nothing and pay for anything and everything is beyond a joke! Stop it now!
- Stop alliances owning region after region and not even living in it! and then creaming it from renters! To allow more people to own space alliances can only have sov in 1 region and only hold 51% of the stations in that region
- Limit alliance numbers to 2000! Its not right people like goons and test can control the whole of eve! No No No!
- Limit the number of blues! Eve has become a complete napfest now! Having this set to a limit allows people to think about who really there friends are and who they choose not to be
The above two will allow smaller alliances to compete and own space! and create more pew pew.
- Remove warp bubbles - Seriously WTF - Stop lazy ass gameplay. We have dictors and hictors for that! You want to camp a gate then get the right ship and be prepared to fight for it! Drag bubbles again WTF. Lets camp 100Km off a gate!
ban npc corps from csm forums
You guys still relevant? oh i forgot you been demoted to being a -A- pet now... :)
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1138
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 06:12:00 -
[446] - Quote
An NPC corp poster goes for the "relevance" attack. Does it have any sense of self-awareness or irony? |
Lord Zim
787
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 06:50:00 -
[447] - Quote
evereplicant wrote:You guys still relevant? oh i forgot you been demoted to being a -A- pet now... :) Ban NPC corps from CSM forums. |
Mocam
EVE University Ivy League
142
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 07:47:00 -
[448] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Adjustments to 0.0 are irrelevant as long as highsec continues to provide everything anybody could possibly want in an environment of near-total safety.
Will CSM7 be prepared to discuss that elephant in the room with CCP?
Why do you care at all what they do in other space? Every last resource they can obtain is available to you, in broader abundance, with far more safety while operating in your SOV space.
More safety, better income, less effort? Why wouldn't they just be flooding down to nullsec?!?!
Maybe the reason many don't go there is simply who is controlling it and what they would have to agree to while earning that enhanced income. Independent minded, civil people can't always stomach the ideologies underpinning your elected CSM representative's statements. It may be found "distasteful" to support such either directly, by joining, or indirectly by renting.
As such; I really don't see your point on that supposed issue. Not while you have a secure base of operations to launch pogroms of persecution against other forms of play in this game due to boredom.
What's needed in nullsec are actual threats and that won't come from outside null. Your security needs to be removed. After that, perhaps you can whine about the secure income in other portions of this game *IF* you have the time and energy to invest in such concerns while actually fighting. |
Lord Zim
787
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 08:02:00 -
[449] - Quote
Mocam wrote:Every last resource they can obtain is available to you, in broader abundance, with far more safety while operating in your SOV space.
More safety, better income, less effort? Why wouldn't they just be flooding down to nullsec?!?! The answer to this question is simple: it isn't safer. That's why they're not flooding down to nullsec. |
Shepard Wong Ogeko
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
35
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 23:39:00 -
[450] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Mocam wrote:Every last resource they can obtain is available to you, in broader abundance, with far more safety while operating in your SOV space.
More safety, better income, less effort? Why wouldn't they just be flooding down to nullsec?!?! The answer to this question is simple: it isn't safer. That's why they're not flooding down to nullsec.
Yah, if the "nullsec is safer" argument had any merit, nullsec would have a much larger population.
But typical Eve players are horribly risk adverse. You can see it with ideas like; removing local (so they can hide),\ limit force projection (so enemy fleets can't reach them) spread around strategic resources (so they don't have to go fight for them) fort/capitol systems (to buff their defense or nerf others' offense) remove structure notifications (so they can shoot structures without interruption)
A lot of people will move to nullsec, once they can hide out in a systems with defense buffs, wait for the moon cycles to bring the tech to them, and shoot their neighbor's structures without them knowing. And people complain that nullsec is too safe now. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |