Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1661
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 09:59:00 -
[661] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
What do we have to fight over now?
You guys used to be way more powerful at the eve forums :P At least here you lost a lot of ground :P "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -įthen you are -įsurely not using enough!" |
Regatto
Euphoria Released Triumvirate.
3
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 10:10:00 -
[662] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:baltec1 wrote:
What do we have to fight over now?
You guys used to be way more powerful at the eve forums :P At least here you lost a lot of ground :P
+1 :D Days when they could troll neutral out of their system are gone...they kinda sound like new bob, old farts sitting on their fat behinds and hopping nobody will steal their pie. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13410
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 10:23:00 -
[663] - Quote
Regatto wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:baltec1 wrote:
What do we have to fight over now?
You guys used to be way more powerful at the eve forums :P At least here you lost a lot of ground :P +1 :D Days when they could troll neutral out of their system are gone...they kinda sound like new bob, old farts sitting on their fat behinds and hopping nobody will steal their pie.
Nobody can steal our pie and we don't want to get fat. We want people to try to take our pie off us as it provides exercise for us so we can eat our pie and not feel fat. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1661
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 10:49:00 -
[664] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Regatto wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:baltec1 wrote:
What do we have to fight over now?
You guys used to be way more powerful at the eve forums :P At least here you lost a lot of ground :P +1 :D Days when they could troll neutral out of their system are gone...they kinda sound like new bob, old farts sitting on their fat behinds and hopping nobody will steal their pie. Nobody can steal our pie and we don't want to get fat. We want people to try to take our pie off us as it provides exercise for us so we can eat our pie and not feel fat.
Then you need to find a competition where the numeric advantage of yours and your Eastern Peers does not represent an untouchable position. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -įthen you are -įsurely not using enough!" |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries Chelonaphobia
519
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 11:50:00 -
[665] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Pesadel0 wrote:I dont really think That those proposed changes would change that much i think That changing how the supers and capitals move True all the Space whould, the proposed change that manny posted here was far better
Nerfing supers doesn't change the fact that the current setup forces you to own large areas of space. This letter is to do with ending empire sprawl, supers and other null issues are a different matter that also needs to be fixed.
Empire sprawl isn't a problem. Null sux and no one wants to go there is the problem. Your problem is you can't force folks to go there. Your other problem is that null sux and your current player base are playing other games and you can't force them to go play null on a regular basis.
One of the long term fixes is to cut all the passive isk streams that allow folks to hoo haw on mech warrior while making bank for future SRP in eve w/out even being there. That's a long term thing, so any passive isk has to go. The whole Null station mission thing is just an attempt to create yet another passive isk stream. ANYTHING that allows large sums of passive isk into the coffers of large groups needs to go.
This won't touch the power projecting problems at this time, but down the road, if folks are afk landlording, the coffers will eventually go down to levels where they have to play the game or lose their turf.
It's not simple and there is no single or quick fix. If CCP goes w/ the mission scheme... well... we're not stupid and I'm sure null will become even more empty. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13411
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 13:36:00 -
[666] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Empire sprawl isn't a problem.
Two parties own 90% of null, how is that not a problem? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Regatto
Euphoria Released Triumvirate.
4
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 13:53:00 -
[667] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:
Empire sprawl isn't a problem.
Two parties own 90% of null, how is that not a problem?
Do you just pick random sentence out of context and comment on it? :P |
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
4392
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 14:06:00 -
[668] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:
Empire sprawl isn't a problem.
Two parties own 90% of null, how is that not a problem? The issue, in my view, is that we are getting results that are far too realistic.
Great, if we wanted to simulate power blocks and conflict in the real world. They inevitably run in multi-generational cycles, with power and influence snow-balling into effectively few sides, with static activity resulting from the inertia of the whole mess. It simply is not cost effective for anyone to attack the big power, and they will rearrange the rest to suit themselves anyways.
Unlike the real world, we want a controlled range of chaos in the game. Too much chaos, and there are no meaningful accomplishments, turning the game into a MOBA.
Too little, and we have this.
Right now, the major powers are equally if not more at risk from internal power struggles, but don't get your hopes up on that aspect. Enough of them would not have lasted as long as they did, without figuring out how to stabilize that detail.
Unless we want EVE to reach an endgame level of stability in null, the mechanics themselves need to counter our natural human urges to create dominating empires.
Null is simply easier to defend than to conquer, and that's the base problem. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked... |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13412
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 14:27:00 -
[669] - Quote
Regatto wrote:baltec1 wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:
Empire sprawl isn't a problem.
Two parties own 90% of null, how is that not a problem? Do you just pick random sentence out of context and comment on it? :P
The rest of it was rubbish that has already been discredited so many times its not worth going over again or utter tosh such as missions being passive income. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries Chelonaphobia
522
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 14:30:00 -
[670] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:
Empire sprawl isn't a problem.
Two parties own 90% of null, how is that not a problem?
Empire sprawl is not a problem because that 90% sux. HS is crowded (in your opinion), but no one there ( to my knowledge) is crying about not being able to go out to null. They can go to null, they just don't want to.
I'm not sure if that hurts your feelings or you just have some elitist mental block. Folks don't want to play your game your way and chose to play in other areas of eve AND they are OK with it.
It may bother you, but it is most certainly not a problem. You may not understand it, but some folks can happily play eve for years and never set foot in a null sec blob fest. I think part of it is that renting a station in Motsu is a lot cheaper than what you have to offer.
(maybe they just aren't that into you) |
|
Azami Nevinyrall
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
2027
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 14:31:00 -
[671] - Quote
With the debate of what to do with Nullsec SOV going strong. I believe I have a solution that'll solve the stagnation of Nullsec. Introduce conflict to all corners of Nullsec, and allow anyone to gain and hold space!
Remove the ability to "OWN SOV."
Currently, the cartels made a few "suggestions" while ignoring the reasons why Nullsec is the way it currently is. These "suggestions" aren't that bad...on paper. But, the community saw right through it for what it really is.
The #1 gripe with null is SOV based timers and the grind, TiDi is closely related to this.
By removing the ability to "Own SOV" it effectively becomes a free for all zone. No more timers, no more mass structure grinding, no more boring, no more renting and stagnation!
Anyone can dock anywhere, anyone can openly **** with anyone, just like lowsec.
This would also force players to be active in the space they "Hold." Combine this with the addition of more NPC space and stations. Allow several stations to be dropped in non-NPC systems.
Last but not least, sort out the risk vs. reward issue. Make all areas of space worth more or less the same. With some areas having more of X and less of Y, and vice versa. Deal with moon-goo properly. Then you'll have a rich, adverse, living world.
Where the actual size you your terrority will directly be tied in with how many members you have and how well you can defend it! Not how far you can throw a fleet and how fast!
Where a blue doughnut will be impossible to form again! EVE needs more Pssshhhh |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries Chelonaphobia
522
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 14:37:00 -
[672] - Quote
Regatto wrote:baltec1 wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:
Empire sprawl isn't a problem.
Two parties own 90% of null, how is that not a problem? Do you just pick random sentence out of context and comment on it? :P
He does, but give him a break. All the good goon propaganda alts don't log in anymore. I think he's probably doing the best he can. One of the many things goon that I've enjoyed over the years is their propaganda machine, but as I've said in other threads, they've kind of lost their way.
When the varsity is away, folks notice. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
2550
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 15:40:00 -
[673] - Quote
Why should CCP put more isk into areas of the game (increasing potential income of 0.0 systems) that have decided to blue themselves up and not fight each other?
The ability to control large swaths of systems at a lower levels of specific income (0.0 Null) in a passive manner (Moons, rent) has proven to be more powerful than controlling areas of the game with high specific income that must be generated actively.
So, bottom line, why should 0.0 be given higher levels specific income than other parts of the game? Those income streams will be dominated by null sec alliances and then be turned into passive income on a massive scale via rent or some other form of extortion.
I hope CCP considers this issue when as they update 0.0 sov.
|
Rahelis
Tris Legomenon
114
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 16:01:00 -
[674] - Quote
Just consider:
The ppl that totally ****** up null sex now care to provide input and make some suggestions.
In the first place all those nullbears proved one thing: The are not able to play EVE in a combat style manner.
When CCP changes null sex they should not lsten to the noobs that turned the biggest part of the game into high sec.
Null sex should be:
No rules - no sov - no player owned stations.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13414
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 16:15:00 -
[675] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:baltec1 wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:
Empire sprawl isn't a problem.
Two parties own 90% of null, how is that not a problem? Empire sprawl is not a problem because that 90% sux. HS is crowded (in your opinion), but no one there ( to my knowledge) is crying about not being able to go out to null. They can go to null, they just don't want to. I'm not sure if that hurts your feelings or you just have some elitist mental block. Folks don't want to play your game your way and chose to play in other areas of eve AND they are OK with it. It may bother you, but it is most certainly not a problem. You may not understand it, but some folks can happily play eve for years and never set foot in a null sec blob fest. I think part of it is that renting a station in Motsu is a lot cheaper than what you have to offer. (maybe they just aren't that into you)
This begs the question why are you even posting in their thread? You have zero stake, experience or relevance to null sov. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13414
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 16:17:00 -
[676] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Why should CCP put more isk into areas of the game (increasing potential income of 0.0 systems) that have decided to blue themselves up and not fight each other?
The ability to control large swaths of systems at a lower levels of specific income (0.0 Null) in a passive manner (Moons, rent) has proven to be more powerful than controlling areas of the game with high specific income that must be generated actively.
So, bottom line, why should 0.0 be given higher levels specific income than other parts of the game? Those income streams will be dominated by null sec alliances and then be turned into passive income on a massive scale via rent or some other form of extortion.
I hope CCP considers this issue as they update 0.0 sov.
Why would you earn your isk in null if you can earn more in near perfect safety in highsec? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13414
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 16:23:00 -
[677] - Quote
Rahelis wrote:Just consider:
The ppl that totally ****** up null sex now care to provide input and make some suggestions.
In the first place all those nullbears proved one thing: The are not able to play EVE in a combat style manner.
When CCP changes null sex they should not lsten to the noobs that turned the biggest part of the game into high sec.
Null sex should be:
No rules - no sov - no player owned stations.
Again, we didn't make this happen the mechanics did. The current state of null was inevitable no matter who ended up in charge. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
4392
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 16:31:00 -
[678] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Again, we didn't make this happen the mechanics did. The current state of null was inevitable no matter who ended up in charge. This.
The goons might have their face on that poster, but they just happened to be in the right place at the right time.
The game has pushed for some group to evolve this way, and I agree with the view that it was going to happen regardless of which group was put in the position.
The specific details of who, are practically meaningless.
The real take-away here, is that the mechanics seem inclined to produce this result: A large group, immune enough to internal turmoil to be stable, which sits on large regions of space.
They are the exact product of these mechanics of null, no more, no less.
Null is simply TOO stable. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked... |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
2551
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 16:45:00 -
[679] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Why would you earn your isk in null if you can earn more in near perfect safety in highsec? I earn my isk in low sec where it is imuch more dangerous than both high sec and null sec. Why? Because my in game goals have more to do with pvp and other objectives than earning isk. The isk comes in at a rate that allows me to have fun anyways.
Seriously, my isk income/hour has dropped considerably since they changed FW but the game has been so much more fun because of the increased PvP opportunities.
Why would you earn less than optimal isk in null? o Because you can potentially get pvp at the same time? o Because you can form up more quickly when there's a fleet running? o Because you enjoy building empires and part of that is securing your space? o Because you like having "Goonswarm Federation" be the biggest blob of color on Verite Rendition's map.
tbh, that's a question for you to decide.
Let's be serious though. Most every veteran in this game (not me because I'm not very smart about it) has an isk making alt anyways. They don't make bazillions of isk per hour on this alt, but they do make a moderate amount of isk with it doing easy stuff like mining and L4 missions in high sec, maybe some afk industry or market manipulation - while they are out pvp'ing. Whatever it is, it's enough to fund their pvp habit.
Your isk making alt(s) will still be out there doing what they're doing. Maybe it's in the Co-Prosperity Sphere earning isk running anomolies at a moderate rate in some back end system in the middle of 0.0. Who knows? Why these alts in 0.0 should be able to make more isk than high sec level 4 alts is beyond me. Maybe you can explain why.
The fact that they are willing to pay rent to make their isk tells me that they are already making more in 0.0 than they would running high sec Level 4 missions.
In fact, it can be argued that reducing the isk payouts of null sec would open it up to more entities owning space than anything else. There was an interesting comment in the Mittani on the "New Deal" page: Provibloc would hate to see their space become actually valuable and attractive to other parties because it would be quickly taken off them, much as it was in the early days of Dominion.
Reduce the fat isk in null sec, and more entities would be able to claim space - because it wouldn't be profitable for the blue donut to hold it. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13416
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 17:09:00 -
[680] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:
Reduce the fat isk in null sec, and more entities would be able to claim space - because it wouldn't be profitable for the blue donut to hold it.
What fat isk? Null is already abandoned and you want to make it even worse?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
4392
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 17:29:00 -
[681] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:X Gallentius wrote:
Reduce the fat isk in null sec, and more entities would be able to claim space - because it wouldn't be profitable for the blue donut to hold it.
What fat isk? Null is already abandoned and you want to make it even worse? If I may....
While many are likely to have strong opinions on this topic, I believe ISK to be nearly a byproduct. I believe it's significance plateaus at the point where it cannot be considered an obstacle to growth.
Players want to play a game, and specifically they want to believe they can win. The more they believe they can win, the less they feel to be at risk, so they may want to win more often to balance that. Larger groups, all else being equal, are better at winning than smaller groups.
Without risk, victory is meaningless. You must overcome the odds or some other challenging obstacle to make the game fun. The obstacle can be channeled into difficulty in organizing, such as with large or multiple fleets. (management on this level is more of a job skill, less of a gaming-centric one, because you need real life people management skills)
For those wondering: This is not just some philosophy rant, this is defining the rules which we want the mechanics to be measured against. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked... |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
2551
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 17:46:00 -
[682] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Reduce the fat isk in null sec, and more entities would be able to claim space - because it wouldn't be profitable for the blue donut to hold it. What fat isk? Null is already abandoned and you want to make it even worse? It's not abandoned due to "lack of easy isk" - how else do you explain the fact that there is more activity in Providence than Delve?
The amount of wealth generated in null sec is absolutely staggering. The powers in null have used that wealth to create the big blue donut that no other entity can possibly overcome. Why would CCP increase the income stream to a part of the game that is more intent on protecting its place in the game than it is in generating content?
- Occupancy based Sov: Yes. You guys want conflict? Occupancy based sov done right will generate content.
- More NPC Null: Why? The current NPC null is not used. But hey if occupancy based sov generates more content in NPC null, then yes add more.
- Make 0.0 income stream even greater: Why? You want conflict, not bigger income streams, right?
CCP should not "Negotiate from a position of weakness" wrt. 0.0 empires. The false argument that "Goons/N3/PL will give up regions if other areas become richer" is just that - false.
Goons/N3/PL will only give up areas in null sec if those areas are taken away through some mechanic that puts them at a disadvantage which Occupancy based sov will - if done right. You don't need to bribe Goons/PL with "richer space" for this to happen. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries Chelonaphobia
522
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 20:20:00 -
[683] - Quote
oops |
Arsine Mayhem
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
214
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 21:23:00 -
[684] - Quote
Power blocs are pushing their:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=376100
so they can get npc station jump points to every region.
They really seem to like it the way they're pushing this thread. But then I guess they would.
Just give all of null back to the npc's.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13433
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 06:06:00 -
[685] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:It's not abandoned due to "lack of easy isk" - how else do you explain the fact that there is more activity in Providence than Delve? The war going on?
X Gallentius wrote: The amount of wealth generated in null sec is absolutely staggering.
Citation please. All evidence gathered shows that line members will earn more per person in high sec running missions.
X Gallentius wrote: The powers in null have used that wealth to create the big blue donut that no other entity can possibly overcome. Why would CCP increase the income stream to a part of the game that is more intent on protecting its place in the game than it is in generating content?
There is no "blue donut", we own half of EVE and N3/PL own the other half. The thing that caused this is the mechanics not the players.
X Gallentius wrote:
Make 0.0 income stream even greater: Why? You want conflict, not bigger income streams, right?
Its there so that we can support our thousands of pilots on much smaller areas of space. Simply shrinking our empires without dealing with the ten pilot per system cap will mean no alliance could support its members within its borders. Even now GSF has nearly five times the population than can be supported by the systems we own.
X Gallentius wrote: CCP should not "Negotiate from a position of weakness" wrt. 0.0 empires. The false argument that "Goons/N3/PL will give up regions if other areas become richer" is just that - false.
Goons/N3/PL will only give up areas in null sec if those areas are taken away through some mechanic that puts them at a disadvantage in some systems - which Occupancy based sov will if done right. You don't need to bribe Goons/PL with "richer space" for this to happen.
We are not getting bribed, it is the only way you can make smaller more compact empires work. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
2552
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 06:36:00 -
[686] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: 1. The war going on? 2. Citation please. All evidence gathered shows that line members will earn more per person in high sec running missions. 3. There is no "blue donut", we own half of EVE and N3/PL own the other half. The thing that caused this is the mechanics not the players.
1. Yup. No blue donut protecting afk income stream in Providence. Players have decided to fight each other rather than not fight each other.
2. http://themittani.com/news/goonswarm-opens-rental-program-yes-really
3. http://targetcaller.blogspot.com/2014/09/b0tlrd-and-stagnation.html
Quote:X Gallentius wrote:
Make 0.0 income stream even greater: Why? You want conflict, not bigger income streams, right?
Its there so that we can support our thousands of pilots on much smaller areas of space. Simply shrinking our empires without dealing with the ten pilot per system cap will mean no alliance could support its members within its borders. Even now GSF has nearly five times the population than can be supported by the systems we own. They seem to be supported quite nicely now. The nullsec alliances are producing multiple Titans every month.
Quote:We are not getting bribed, it is the only way you can make smaller more compact empires work. Not yet, and you still haven't answered the question - Why would you voluntarily give up your rental empire when it is already so lucrative? |
Anthar Thebess
714
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 07:12:00 -
[687] - Quote
New NPC space yes - but not in this manner. I also suggested that every sov region should have connection to nearest NPC space by totally new stargate.
NPC space is not empty , it just needs enough stations ( yes stations , cloning ones especially ) and size.
Usually in NPC space you will find people that don't want to be blue to big blobs , and even don't want to blue guys that live few jumps away.
It is hard for small new group to come to NPC space without being shoot , camped and farmed by current residents.
I live in Stain. While you could say that for stainwagon guy whole stain is blue - i can still find neutral every 5-6 jumps as they can easily accommodate them self in less desired station systems.
They don't provide regular fights , but still from time to time, people hunt each other , and this provides both sides entertainment. Something similar you can see in Curse or Syndicate , but because of small size, low number of station you will not see this in GW, mordus or sisters space.
If CCP wants to bring more life to NPC space and create new content for sov people it should: - expand small pockets of NPC space and create there new stations for : Mordus , SOE, Society ... or simpler every NPC space that have less than 40 NPC null systems connected to each other. - CCP should seed there more stations , in all cloning capable systems there should be more than 1 station having this capability - GW should be left as they are currently - as this region is a bit different , what more i would say that bigger part of GW should be cyno jammed because of some anomaly ( just to create totally different space ) - from all sov space create stargate links to nearest NPC space by stargates, NPC exit should be 1-2 jumps from station system ( no direct station connection)
As for income.
SOV space should really go into mission system, new faction for LP , or totally different payout type.
NPC space should get current sov space anomaly spawning system like we see in Sov space, so more local pirates anomalies , but each cleaned anomaly can spawn ANY type of anomaly , and not the type you currently did.
This way both nullsec types will get enough income , while keeping them totally different in this manner. Support Needed : Jump Fuel Consumption Support Needed : Faction Crystal Changes |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13433
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 07:15:00 -
[688] - Quote
1. Again, there is no blue doughnut. They are also not fighting eachother for the sake of it, brave wants their space.
[/quote]
X Gallentius wrote:
They seem to be supported quite nicely now. The nullsec alliances are producing multiple Titans every month.
They bulk of null players earn their isk outside of their empires in more lucrative highsec. Again you are doing the mistake of thinking alliance level income is what the line members get, its not.
X Gallentius wrote: Not yet, and you still haven't answered the question - Why would you voluntarily give up your rental empire when it is already so lucrative (and will be even more lucrative if system value is increased)? Afterall, the other guys aren't, and you need to keep pace with them.
Same reason why we pushed to nerf Tech when we held a monopoly on it. People seem to forget that we have a history of pushing for changes that are good for the game even if it mean we get nerfed more than most. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Azami Nevinyrall
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
2028
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 07:17:00 -
[689] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:There is no "blue donut", we own half of EVE and N3/PL own the other half. The thing that caused this is the mechanics not the players.
Talk about a Contradicting idiot who drinks his own kool-aid!
baltec1 wrote:Citation please. All evidence gathered shows that line members will earn more per person in high sec running missions. What evidence?
I made more ISK as a line member in your space then I ever did in Highsec...
baltec1 wrote:There is no "blue donut", we own half of EVE and N3/PL own the other half. The thing that caused this is the mechanics not the players. How many agreements are inplace that prevent either side from starting a war? I...actually lost count of how many!
I never knew they were built-in mechanics?
Dude....CCP has their plan in place, and no one is buying your kool-aid.
EVE Online o7 - 32 minute mark wrote: GĒ£It has got kind of stagnant out there, people have, the major coalitions have basically solved the game and figured out how to win, and now they are winning and now it is boring for everybodyGĒ„
Also, the fact that at U.S. Primetime...for the past week alone, there has been barely 18k players. Compared to the 30k +a year ago. The game is boring, people are logging off and playing something else...DIRECTLY BECAUSE OF YOUR ACTIONS!
Everyone knows this, even CCP! They'll happily **** the game for a few people (like you) to satisfy the growing amount of people who are unhappy with your direct, out of game, not apart of the mechanics, actions! EVE needs more Pssshhhh |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13433
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 07:30:00 -
[690] - Quote
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:
Talk about a Contradicting idiot who drinks his own kool-aid!
So care to tell us why we deployed south for a few months to blow up entire fleets of them if we are all blue and refuse to attack each other?
Azami Nevinyrall wrote: What evidence?
I made more ISK as a line member in your space then I ever did in Highsec...
How about the years of mission guides and detailed knowledge of blitzing missions? Or the fact that when CCP did the pirate battleship changes it was discovered that a mach can earn over 80 mil/hr blitzing level 3 missions, the best anom income caps out at 90 mil/hr. The only people who still think null offers better rewards are the incompetent and high sec bears who have never been in null.
Azami Nevinyrall wrote: How many agreements are inplace that prevent either side from starting a war? I...actually lost count of how many!
.
Very few, the main reason we dont attack eachother in an all out brawl is because neither side can win it and nobody wants to grind through hundreds of trillions of HP.
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:
Everyone knows this, even CCP! They'll happily **** the game for a few people (like you) to satisfy the growing amount of people who are unhappy with your direct, out of game, not apart of the mechanics, actions!
If if it our actions that caused this then why has the exact same happened on the Chinese server? We could fold our alliance tomorrow and all of us quit EVE and you will have the exact same thing happen again with new names in charge. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |