Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3776
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 20:46:00 -
[271] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Jenn aSide wrote: lol, the people you are talking about aren't just good at pvp evasion, they're good at discussion evasion as well.
It's how we know we're winning the argument when they have to fall back on "you just want me to play your way" and "ccp will lose subs and the game will die". Even after it's explained to them that no one cares if they pvp or not.....
I still waiting for the massive carebear unsubs from the NPC AI change. I guess there is a lag time for such events lol.
You are good at facts evasion instead. Show me where CCP has nerfed PvP evasion or where they state the next expansion(s) they are going to nerf PvP evasion. ' Show me where I said any such thing. where do you get this stuff? Lemme guess, English isn't your 1st language.
I supposed you'd make the logical jump from: "the people you are talking about aren't just good at pvp evasion, they're good at discussion evasion as well.", that is :words:
to demonstrating that they are actually wrong (with CCP actually implementing PvP evasion nerfs), which needs :facts: Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
1286
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 20:51:00 -
[272] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Jenn aSide wrote: lol, the people you are talking about aren't just good at pvp evasion, they're good at discussion evasion as well.
It's how we know we're winning the argument when they have to fall back on "you just want me to play your way" and "ccp will lose subs and the game will die". Even after it's explained to them that no one cares if they pvp or not.....
I still waiting for the massive carebear unsubs from the NPC AI change. I guess there is a lag time for such events lol.
You are good at facts evasion instead. Show me where CCP has nerfed PvP evasion or where they state the next expansion(s) they are going to nerf PvP evasion. ' Show me where I said any such thing. where do you get this stuff? Lemme guess, English isn't your 1st language. I supposed you'd make the logical jump from: "the people you are talking about aren't just good at pvp evasion, they're good at discussion evasion as well.", that is :words: to demonstrating that they are actually wrong (with CCP actually implementing PvP evasion nerfs), which needs :facts:
In other words, you jump to completely nonsensical conclusions.
|
Stonecrusher Mortlock
University of Caille Gallente Federation
97
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 21:04:00 -
[273] - Quote
We need to do away with the fact null alliances use NPC corps to freely move there stuff avoiding the one way people could hurt them, attacking there supply lines Aka war dec and shoot the haulers moving things.
But they just use NPC corps to avoid that. |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
958
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 21:06:00 -
[274] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:If suiciding and other measures were impossible I would agree, but that situation does not exist. Please cite these "other measures" one can use to non-consensually blow up ships in high-sec, since we've already ruled out wardecs. If you're not already part of a bloc, this is the best guy for CSM8. |
EI Digin
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
454
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 21:19:00 -
[275] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:No, the reason why there are very few big and effective high sec players group is because high sec is the place for those whose conditions don't allow to play any useful part in a group.
The guy who gets 1 hour a day to play is going to pick hi sec not to waste that hour with the nitty gritty things that playing in a social structure involve. He's probably going to do 1 mission or mine some ore and log off.
If he could do all what's needed to be of any use to an organized group, he would probably not be in hi sec but in null or a WH. A miner who plays one hour a day is still useful to any corp because he helps to supply minerals to the corp's home station. Or maybe the miner can fly a T1 cruiser and gets involved in a fight to help defend his corp's honour. It doesn't matter how often you log in, how old your character is, or how insignificant your contribution is. Your presence helps out your corporation. Groups like mine have proven this to be true.
Player groups are not monolithic in this game, as much as solo players would like to believe they are. They consist of multiple players all looking to achieve different goals. However, players usually have a shared goal that they are all trying to achieve together as a group, mostly being safe in the space that they live in. If you live in already safe places like highsec there is very little effort required in reaching your common goal, so you are mostly free to do what you like. |
Ginger Barbarella
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1132
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 21:32:00 -
[276] - Quote
Thorn Galen wrote:Reuben Johnson wrote:(wrote some stuff ), where's Red Frog and Push on this issue. It's you're boats they want.
They're a bunch of pretty intelligent folks who find they have no need to resort to these GD Forums for issues which are not real. I have used Red Frog Freight on more than one occasion and as far as I am concerned, they have their act together, are totally reliable and I highly recommend them.
This. +1 "Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." -á --- Sorlac |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3776
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 21:55:00 -
[277] - Quote
EI Digin wrote: Player groups are not monolithic in this game, as much as solo players would like to believe they are. They consist of multiple players all looking to achieve different goals. However, players usually have a shared goal that they are all trying to achieve together as a group, mostly being safe in the space that they live in. If you live in already safe places like highsec there is very little effort required in reaching your common goal, so you are mostly free to do what you like.
Your corporation (and to a degree, GS) are an exception not the rule. Most are still well stuck at being either a worthless "casuals industrials compound" ready to crack at the first sneeze OR quite involvement required, "if you are online you are on voice comms" or /kick. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
EI Digin
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
454
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 23:55:00 -
[278] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Your corporation (and to a degree, GS) are an exception not the rule. Most are still well stuck at being either a worthless "casuals industrials compound" ready to crack at the first sneeze OR quite involvement required, "if you are online you are on voice comms" or /kick.
Highsec-only corps are especially fragile if they are wardecced as most competent people will leave because they can choose not to be shot at by being in their own one man corp or an NPC corp. You can't make a good highsec corporation if the game style rewards players if they leave the second things get tough. It would certainly help corporations form and stick together and potentially form alliances if they had a sense of purpose, to kill those who try to kill them or face real consequences.
And of course some player groups would form (or already exist) that don't require 100% commitment, because true leaders take hints on how to run a successful corporation by those who have already succeeded. Tryhard corporations tend to get run into the ground or make enemies with more powerful more player-friendly corporations. You won't see any changes in highsec corp leadership styles as long as there is no point to being in a corporation if you want to live in highsec. |
Kaethe Kollwitz
22
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 00:00:00 -
[279] - Quote
I think this is where i come in. ITS NOT AN ALLIANCE. ITS NOT A CORP. ITS AN IDEA. CLICK FOR BRAIN FOOD-á |
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks
2596
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 00:08:00 -
[280] - Quote
My standard argument against NPC corps as they currently exist:
Eve is about consequences. The Butterfly Effect trailer. The Retribution expansion. This recent quote by GM Karidor:
GM Karidor wrote:If you have a bone to pick with someone, declare a war and take the risk that your target may actually taste blood and fight back (or finds allies for that part).
War is an essential part of Eve's set of consequences...Except every player presently has the ability to opt out of war entirely. And yet those same players are free to continue engaging in all those highsec activities that affect the rest of us by way of resource availability and market prices. In its current state, the NPC corp system is effectively a license to impact the gameplay of combat-oriented players without them being able to respond in kind. It's antithetical to Eve. Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement. |
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3062
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 00:13:00 -
[281] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Highsec-only corps are especially fragile if they are wardecced as most competent people will leave because they can choose not to be shot at by being in their own one man corp or an NPC corp. You can't make a good highsec corporation if the game style rewards players if they leave the second things get tough. It would certainly help corporations form and stick together and potentially form alliances if they had a sense of purpose, to kill those who try to kill them or face real consequences.
People with that kind of motivation to succeed would not be content puttering around in hisec. They will start PvPing, head out to lowsec, and build a following as large as their leadership capability will afford.
Most hisec corporations are associations of convenience. When things get inconvenient, the individuals will go their own direction. Perhaps they will gt back together when the inconvenience is gone, who knows?
Nullsec alliances are self-selecting: you are out there because that is where you want to be, your play is about empire building (or at least being a serf to the empire builder you worship), and you are generally happiest when marching to the beat of someone else's drum.
Hisec alliances are more likely to be like driftwood rafts: these people happen to be doing kinda the same thing at sort of the same time, so they do it together because it is nice to have people around who share their interests. Good hisec corporations aren't about good leadership, they are about social networking and sharing goals. Hisec is different to nullsec, and that is a basic understanding that you do not have since you are so deeply buried in nullsec life.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Tesal
184
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 01:55:00 -
[282] - Quote
The list of things that some people want to do to hi-sec carebears keeps getting longer and longer. Extermination isn't seen as a problem by them. |
EI Digin
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
454
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 02:00:00 -
[283] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote: Hisec alliances are more likely to be like driftwood rafts: these people happen to be doing kinda the same thing at sort of the same time, so they do it together because it is nice to have people around who share their interests. Good hisec corporations aren't about good leadership, they are about social networking and sharing goals. Hisec is different to nullsec, and that is a basic understanding that you do not have since you are so deeply buried in nullsec life.
Nearly all highsec corporations that aren't alt corps have very niche purposes, like a couple guys getting together to manufacture goods, or to haul freight like RFF. That should not be the case. Players should be able to join a community where they can enjoy the game together, not necessarily as individuals in highsec. It is very difficult to do so and results in a lot of dead corps and complaints of "griefing" because the game promotes people to leave their social groups and abandon their friends or their special project when things get inconvenient. Not saying that backstabbing shouldn't be possible, but you shouldn't push people into making it the default reaction if you are threatened, or to completely avoid making friends like it is now. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Air The Unthinkables
2919
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 02:29:00 -
[284] - Quote
Tesal wrote:The list of things that some people want to do to hi-sec carebears keeps getting longer and longer. Mine can be summed in two. |
Tallian Saotome
Papercut Syndicate Nuclear Arms Exchange
920
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 03:01:00 -
[285] - Quote
Tesal wrote:The list of things that some people want to do to hi-sec carebears keeps getting longer and longer. Extermination isn't seen as a problem by them. If people wanted to exterminate hi-sec carebears, said extermination would happen. Outnumbered or not, the organization more competitive people bring to the table would make it unstoppable.
Fact is, very few want the carebears gone, we just want them to stop trying to ruin the game by adding more and more 'save me!' buttons to what should be a hard, vicious, and intensely competitive game.
Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom. |
Red Frog Rufen
Red Frog Freight Red-Frog
192
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 04:10:00 -
[286] - Quote
I still don't get why some people want to impose playstyle on other so much.
Ruin the game? how about the carebear impose their style to you? would you like that?
Imagine if they could, by some action, render a solar system completely covered by concord, even in deep null-sec.
how would you react?
|
Tallian Saotome
Papercut Syndicate Nuclear Arms Exchange
920
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 04:18:00 -
[287] - Quote
Red Frog Rufen wrote:I still don't get why some people want to impose playstyle on other so much.
Ruin the game? how about the carebear impose their style to you? would you like that?
Imagine if they could, by some action, render a solar system completely covered by concord, even in deep null-sec.
how would you react?
They HAVE been imposing their play style on PVPers, if you haven't been paying attention to the game for last few years.
This is backlash to that, since PVPers have learned that if they do not fight, then they will impose their will on the game.
Carebears brought this dislike on themselves, they were not hated on this way before they started whining loud enough that CCP started listening.
Oh, and Hisec is not carebear territory, any more than nullsec is pvper territory. They should both have a blend of both.
Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom. |
Dersen Lowery
Laurentson INC StructureDamage
412
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 04:41:00 -
[288] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Players should be able to join a community where they can enjoy the game together, not necessarily as individuals in highsec.
Players in the most long-lived and successful alliances generally have such communities outside of EVE, e.g.: Reddit, to pick a name out of the air. The alliances are then simple projections of those communities onto EVE. The social bonds are already forged, and that's the hardest problem.
The players that The Mittani referred to as the 'EVE-born,' those who forge social connections purely within the game, start out at a significant disadvantage, receive very little help from the NPE and basically have to find out the hard way whether they're being recruited by potential allies, or gankers, or scammers. If I had to pick an area where EVE is really falling short of the mark, this would be it.
The people who know exactly which alliance, and often which corp, they're going to join before they've even download the client get a comparatively charmed and effortless introduction to the game and far more guidance from established players to help them acclimate to the game's treacherous depths. I'm not sure that we (because I'm one of these people) understand exactly how harsh the game is to 'EVE-born' players. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Red Frog Rufen
Red Frog Freight Red-Frog
192
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 04:55:00 -
[289] - Quote
Tallian Saotome wrote: They HAVE been imposing their play style on PVPers, if you haven't been paying attention to the game for last few years.
This is backlash to that, since PVPers have learned that if they do not fight, then they will impose their will on the game.
Carebears brought this dislike on themselves, they were not hated on this way before they started whining loud enough that CCP started listening.
Oh, and Hisec is not carebear territory, any more than nullsec is pvper territory. They should both have a blend of both.
I don't see how carebear have been imposing on anything except on a few logic changes (ie: no insurance on ganking)
Faction warfare brought back some life to low-sec system. WH brought real pure PVP (no local, no stations!)
the real problem isn't carebear in high-sec. it's station safety in low/null.
Truth is, it's so lame to hunt in low/null (so easy to dockup) that those that want to prey on easy target choose to try to bring their PVP on those that doesn't want it, but dare to get out in space.
and how does that sound to you? |
Derek Wiildstar
Rifterlings
11
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 05:18:00 -
[290] - Quote
High sec war decs are lame due to station games. The entire system should be removed from high sec.
I'd like to see the FW system extended to other areas and add various pirate and corp faction at odds with each other. I don't see why FW of all types shouldn't continue in high sec.
Here's a suggested for null sec taken from WH space: Add a bunch of pockets of systems of lower value than the current null type systems and then rate the gates for a certain amount of mass. Nothing bigger than X sized ship can get in. Anything bigger must be built in system. Limit the amount of jumps in a given period as well. This will allow people to setup small and medium sized pocket kingdoms without be steamrolled by the bigger alliance. You'll end up with a bunch of small groups in null all shooting at each other and in general creating fun warfare based content. |
|
EI Digin
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
454
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 05:49:00 -
[291] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:The people who know exactly which alliance, and often which corp, they're going to join before they've even download the client get a comparatively charmed and effortless introduction to the game and far more guidance from established players to help them acclimate to the game's treacherous depths. I'm not sure that we (because I'm one of these people) understand exactly how harsh the game is to 'EVE-born' players.
The game is harsh to 'EVE-born' players and we are in fact very lucky to have been a part of organizations that have allowed us to learn how to play the game without much risk involved. But I look at the community that the new player is exposed to first and it is very fragmented, highly unorganized, and generally hostile towards new players. There are very few organizations (basically Eve University and RVB) that are structured, trustable, and willing to help. If there were more open communities out there that would accept new players, you would see them stick around for longer. A tutorial only goes so far, the best way to learn is to have an angry nerd scream at you on comms and a community that welcomes your dumb questions.
Red Frog Rufen wrote:I don't see how carebear have been imposing on anything except on a few logic changes (ie: no insurance on ganking
"Carebears" are imposing their will on players through wardec mechanic evasion either by hiding in a NPC corp or by recycling 1 man corps. If I pay 50-500 mil to declare war on you, you should be a target to me for a week. If you are not, you are imposing your will on me. If you skirt this by being in an unwardeccable corp, you are imposing your will on me by not allowing me to declare war on you. The only people who should be able to avoid wardecs are brand new players. |
Aren Madigan
EVE University Ivy League
37
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 06:03:00 -
[292] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:"Carebears" are imposing their will on players through wardec mechanic evasion either by hiding in a NPC corp or by recycling 1 man corps. If I pay 50-500 mil to declare war on you, you should be a target to me for a week. If you are not, you are imposing your will on me. If you skirt this by being in an unwardeccable corp, you are imposing your will on me by not allowing me to declare war on you. The only people who should be able to avoid wardecs are brand new players.
To be fair, by that logic, either way someone's will is getting imposed... honestly the guy mentioning expanding on a FW style system might be on to something... something to give wardecs more purpose rather than simply being about, "I want to kill this guy" and often "I want to kill this guy because he's an easy target"... heck, something maybe to make even New Order happy, but perhaps more exposed? A lot of stuff they could do really that'd encourage sticking with corps, getting out of the stations, etc rather than making high sec virtually pointless because a few people don't like it. |
EI Digin
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
454
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 06:31:00 -
[293] - Quote
It's a different story when you have no mechanic available to prevent them from dodging the wardec. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3062
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 06:35:00 -
[294] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:The game is harsh to 'EVE-born' players and we are in fact very lucky to have been a part of organizations that have allowed us to learn how to play the game without much risk involved. But I look at the community that the new player is exposed to first and it is very fragmented, highly unorganized, and generally hostile towards new players. There are very few organizations (basically Eve University and RVB) that are structured, trustable, and willing to help. If there were more open communities out there that would accept new players, you would see them stick around for longer.
No, what does and will happen is that those "open" corporations would be infested by griefers using every possible opportunity to plunder, pillage and burn. Thus we have layers of suspicion: I will recruit you into our quarantine corp. in that corp there are no assets of value apart from other player's ships. Some people can accept this, others find the lack of trust constrictive.
The EVE-born corps are at a disadvantage because they have no way of providing out-of-game consequences for in-game idiocy.
El Digin wrote:"Carebears" are imposing their will on players through wardec mechanic evasion either by hiding in a NPC corp or by recycling 1 man corps. If I pay 50-500 mil to declare war on you, you should be a target to me for a week. If you are not, you are imposing your will on me. If you skirt this by being in an unwardeccable corp, you are imposing your will on me by not allowing me to declare war on you. The only people who should be able to avoid wardecs are brand new players.
You still have the wardec against the corp/alliance, which is what you paid for. Wardecs are not about targeting individuals, they re about buying access to potential targets.
Do you consider "not logging in" as wardec avoidance?
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Air The Unthinkables
2922
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 06:49:00 -
[295] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:
No, what does and will happen is that those "open" corporations would be infested by griefers using every possible opportunity to plunder, pillage and burn. Thus we have layers of suspicion: I will recruit you into our quarantine corp. in that corp there are no assets of value apart from other player's ships. Some people can accept this, others find the lack of trust constrictive.
The EVE-born corps are at a disadvantage because they have no way of providing out-of-game consequences for in-game idiocy.
Or more importantly, in-game consequences because of wardec evasion. Another example of how NPC corps hurt newbies and disincentive working together in an MMO. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Air The Unthinkables
2923
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 07:06:00 -
[296] - Quote
Aren Madigan wrote: To be fair, by that logic, either way someone's will is getting imposed... honestly the guy mentioning expanding on a FW style system might be on to something... something to give wardecs more purpose rather than simply being about, "I want to kill this guy" and often "I want to kill this guy because he's an easy target"... heck, something maybe to make even New Order happy, but perhaps more exposed? A lot of stuff they could do really that'd encourage sticking with corps, getting out of the stations, etc rather than making high sec virtually pointless because a few people don't like it.
I proposed this back on page 2, where consequences for failing a wardec might be denial of access to a belt, or use of a station's services (not its ability to dock), but you were rampantly against the idea a because "highsec is for everyone". How could 'negative consequences' be had for failing a war but not impact their ability to generate ISK or hinder their mobility or options in any way is something of a mystery. |
Aren Madigan
EVE University Ivy League
37
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 07:11:00 -
[297] - Quote
You know... I just realized some of the futility of this whole thing... this isn't going to be about haulers... you can't stop alts at this point, which is what the haulers are. Even if wardec couldn't be easily broken, they'd switch to an alt, and no one's going to be able to afford to declare war on every single hauler that might be a threat to them It just isn't cost effective... in fact, I question if anyone would have that kind of money. So that logic ultimately gets thrown out the window. I mean, even if all that hauler's alts were decced, someone else would take over for that area. So in the end, the only thing changing war decs would do is make it easier to target individual people because you don't like them or just because which are not intended under high sec far as I'm aware. Essentially it'd be paying so your larger group can torture a few select individuals.... sooo, yeah. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Air The Unthinkables
2924
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 07:20:00 -
[298] - Quote
The only futility I see is taking a pro-NPC corp, pro-wardec evasion stance. Shutting down someone's operation + their alts would have cost, which would balance it from being placed on every newbie seen. Players that can afford protection and worth the wardec fee will have to adapt instead of expect free wardec immunity and riskfree, contentless grinding in a competitve player-driven MMO.
You ask "I question if anyone would have that kind of money", then point to a 'suicide gank' system that costs 600m-1b minimum to shoot at a lone freighter as an example of a 'balanced' highsec system. Aren Madigan wrote:I'm against your suggested style of it... I'm for adding new things that encourage war decs and corps and not slap the faces of individuals however. Corporations are collections of individuals. Players who play solo make a decided cost/benefit analysis if the smaller footprint and independence of being a lone wolf is worth the tradeoff being isolated when someone has violence in mind. As opposed to now where every benefit and advantage (except for a 11% bounty tax that effects a small minority of PvE activities) is geared towards advanced an asocial gameplay setting. |
EI Digin
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
455
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 07:23:00 -
[299] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:No, what does and will happen is that those "open" corporations would be infested by griefers using every possible opportunity to plunder, pillage and burn. Thus we have layers of suspicion: I will recruit you into our quarantine corp. in that corp there are no assets of value apart from other player's ships. Some people can accept this, others find the lack of trust constrictive.
The EVE-born corps are at a disadvantage because they have no way of providing out-of-game consequences for in-game idiocy. There are no out of game consequences if you screw over an out of game community, unless it is extremely tight knit like a WoW guild or something. We're just not awful at managing our players and assets. Everyone has to worry about betrayal, even out of game communities.
Mara Rinn wrote:You still have the wardec against the corp/alliance, which is what you paid for. Wardecs are not about targeting individuals, the' re about buying access to potential targets.
Do you consider "not logging in" to be wardec avoidance?
You were in the corp/alliance when I wardecced it. That should make you a target, even if only for a little while. Kind of like how corps are still shootable as they leave an alliance.
There's a difference between people who never log in during the wardec and people who actively avoid the wardec and continue playing regardless. If a wardecced player logs in a few times in the week and the hostiles never see them while they are targetable, thats OK in anyone's book because the hostiles should have scouted you out better. When the player drops corp and avoids being flashy red and goes about their business they are imposing their will to do whatever they want in spite of clearly planned and well thought out game mechanics. That's wrong. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Air The Unthinkables
2925
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 07:29:00 -
[300] - Quote
Attacking truly casual individuals who only log in a few times a week isn't cost-effective, so less people would waste a wardec fee on them, instead picking on the solo mission grinder in a 4bil pimp ratting ship. Either the optimized isk farmer would have to start taking on overhead of some kind to keep his playstyle safe against wardecs, economically evening the field with said casuals and newbies, or he takes the risk of becoming a loot pinata. Replacing NPC corps with wardecs against individuals is the furthest thing from 'anti-casual' or 'anti-newbie'. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |