Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Bait'er De'Outlier
Trans-Aerospace Industries
37
|
Posted - 2016.10.22 01:32:32 -
[1] - Quote
How about adding a "Privateering License" as a purchasable game mechanic?
Suggestion for it:
In game function - allows engagement in PVP with any character not in the activating character's corporation without CONCORD or gate/station guns intervention.
Daily license rate of $1 or monthly license rate of $10. (or whatever CCP figures will work nicely)
Applies whether free to play or subscription based.
Allows one license for "Privateering" against members all of the other Eve corps, PC and NPC, except for members of the corporation the character is in when the license is activated.
Activating the "Privateer License" is done on a per character basis.
Once activated the "Privateer License" remains in effect for it's full duration, i.e. no "off switch" for it.
Once the "Privateer License" is in effect the "Privateer" is set to "Suspect" status for the duration of the license*.
Engaging as the aggressor in non-wardec PVP generates security status loss as normal for the Privateer BUT CONCORD WILL NOT intervene against the Privateer unless the Privateer is attacking a member of their own corp* or an NPC station/structure.
The "Privateer" is still subject to Faction Police action based on security status/faction status.
If the character the license is active for drops from a corporation the license switches automatically to the new corp and remains until the time runs out.
"Privateers License" could be a commodity like PLEX, i.e. trade item, maybe a rare loot drop during special events etc.
*which yes means anyone in the game including their corpmates can potentially engage the "Privateer" freely or assist against them.
**unless friendly fire is legal for said corp in which case no CONCORD intervention. |
Paranoid Loyd
9723
|
Posted - 2016.10.22 01:44:01 -
[2] - Quote
Sounds like a well thought out waste of your time.
"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix
Fix the Prospect!
|
Starrakatt
Celtic Anarchy Complaints Department
593
|
Posted - 2016.10.22 02:35:07 -
[3] - Quote
I'd pay for the monthly fee, ohyes.
Then I would go about eradicating freighters out of main systems and trade pipes, and Plex all my accounts with the fat loot.
Even better, there would be no safe blingy mission runner left anywhere I'd operate.
Sec status loss? Bah, vast income from phat loot would pay for the sec tags.
No more NPC corp Freighters/Mission Runners would be safe anywhere.
I'd sadistically wring my hands with glee, hunting down and punish the guys that ever jump corp or drop into NPC corp to evade Wardec, and that would be JUST.
Multiply me by many, MANY more.
<<< Net effect: Likely, the majority of players that create 1 man corps or stay in NPC corps would stop playing, as anyone paying the fee could (and would) wipe the floor with them, daring to interact with their scacred right of being left alone.
Also, wrong subforum.
Sneaky bastard.
FETID now recruiting pvp pilots & corporations | lowsec pvp & piracy - Join Run and Gun
|
xXuber-NitsheXx
19
|
Posted - 2016.10.22 03:10:47 -
[4] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Sounds like a well thought out waste of your time.
This is OA, you are clear and readable, out to you Loyd.
Thieving pirates discuss INTEGRITY; Anarchist gankers give us LAWS; and Whoring merc's cry then blow off clients with INSULTS.
Up is down and down is up in the C&P Forum.
|
Noragen Neirfallas
Rabble Inc. Legio De Mortem
3196
|
Posted - 2016.10.22 04:09:30 -
[5] - Quote
This is just what eve needs. A good shove in the direction of pay to win...
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
ISD Max Trix favourite ISD
'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King-Griffin
|
Dark Lord Trump
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
153
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 16:49:39 -
[6] - Quote
The entire point of highsec is that you can't run up to someone and shoot them in the face without either a) getting CONCORDed or b) tricking them into shooting first. Do I think that hisec should be safe? No. That doesn't mean that you should be able to pay to turn it into lowsec.
I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
|
Pami Walker
Risen from Ashes inPanic
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 02:54:12 -
[7] - Quote
Dark Lord Trump wrote:The entire point of highsec is that you can't run up to someone and shoot them in the face without either a) getting CONCORDed or b) tricking them into shooting first. Do I think that hisec should be safe? No. That doesn't mean that you should be able to pay to turn it into lowsec.
I disagree, hi sec should be safe. If CCP is hurting for money, why is it that they allow their players to drive away thousands of possible subscribers each month. When people start playing, they do not understand aggression mechanics. The do not understand what a war dec means. Pretty much they do not understand much at all yet they are harvested to make pvp wannabes look good on the killboards.
Is this solution simple, no not at all. But some one, some place needs to step and make a lot of people unhappy by changing some mechanics. How, i don't know. Maybe make industrial ships ungankable in 8,9,10 space. Maybe by not canceling aggressor status till your podded. Like i said, i do not know, however if eve wants to be a game for more people than the usual sociopaths and psychopaths, then it needs to step out of the darkness and into the light.
Maybe a Privateer might be a start. It would allow them to shoot any one with an active weapons timer. Allow them to pod aggressors without penalty. I am not sure. I do know however that CCP is making a push to get more people involved with eve. It would just be sad if their efforts went to waste simply people the newbies quit cause they got ganked and didn't understand why. Especially when they get laughed at when they ask why. |
Natural CloneKiller
The Phoenix Rising Vendetta Mercenary Group
227
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 05:30:26 -
[8] - Quote
Bait'er De'Outlier wrote:How about adding a "Privateering License" as a purchasable game mechanic?
Suggestion for it:
In game function - allows engagement in PVP with any character not in the activating character's corporation without CONCORD or gate/station guns intervention.
Daily license rate of $1 or monthly license rate of $10. (or whatever CCP figures will work nicely)
Applies whether free to play or subscription based.
Allows one license for "Privateering" against members all of the other Eve corps, PC and NPC, except for members of the corporation the character is in when the license is activated.
Activating the "Privateer License" is done on a per character basis.
Once activated the "Privateer License" remains in effect for it's full duration, i.e. no "off switch" for it.
Once the "Privateer License" is in effect the "Privateer" is set to "Suspect" status for the duration of the license*.
Engaging as the aggressor in non-wardec PVP generates security status loss as normal for the Privateer BUT CONCORD WILL NOT intervene against the Privateer unless the Privateer is attacking a member of their own corp* or an NPC station/structure.
The "Privateer" is still subject to Faction Police action based on security status/faction status.
If the character the license is active for drops from a corporation the license switches automatically to the new corp and remains until the time runs out.
"Privateers License" could be a commodity like PLEX, i.e. trade item, maybe a rare loot drop during special events etc.
*which yes means anyone in the game including their corpmates can potentially engage the "Privateer" freely or assist against them.
**unless friendly fire is legal for said corp in which case no CONCORD intervention. You waste time dreaming. |
Noragen Neirfallas
Rabble Inc. Legio De Mortem
3208
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 05:36:10 -
[9] - Quote
Pami Walker wrote:Dark Lord Trump wrote:The entire point of highsec is that you can't run up to someone and shoot them in the face without either a) getting CONCORDed or b) tricking them into shooting first. Do I think that hisec should be safe? No. That doesn't mean that you should be able to pay to turn it into lowsec. I disagree, hi sec should be safe. If CCP is hurting for money, why is it that they allow their players to drive away thousands of possible subscribers each month. When people start playing, they do not understand aggression mechanics. The do not understand what a war dec means. Pretty much they do not understand much at all yet they are harvested to make pvp wannabes look good on the killboards. Is this solution simple, no not at all. But some one, some place needs to step and make a lot of people unhappy by changing some mechanics. How, i don't know. Maybe make industrial ships ungankable in 8,9,10 space. Maybe by not canceling aggressor status till your podded. Like i said, i do not know, however if eve wants to be a game for more people than the usual sociopaths and psychopaths, then it needs to step out of the darkness and into the light. Maybe a Privateer might be a start. It would allow them to shoot any one with an active weapons timer. Allow them to pod aggressors without penalty. I am not sure. I do know however that CCP is making a push to get more people involved with eve. It would just be sad if their efforts went to waste simply people the newbies quit cause they got ganked and didn't understand why. Especially when they get laughed at when they ask why. Please provide the proof that goes with this line of thinking about potential new customers quitting because of xyz. I eagerly await your response and proof.
PS CCP collected statistics given at fanfest about player retention would be a good place to start your search.
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
ISD Max Trix favourite ISD
'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King-Griffin
|
Crack Spawn
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
25
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 06:05:19 -
[10] - Quote
Pami Walker wrote:Dark Lord Trump wrote:The entire point of highsec is that you can't run up to someone and shoot them in the face without either a) getting CONCORDed or b) tricking them into shooting first. Do I think that hisec should be safe? No. That doesn't mean that you should be able to pay to turn it into lowsec. I disagree, hi sec should be safe. If CCP is hurting for money, why is it that they allow their players to drive away thousands of possible subscribers each month. When people start playing, they do not understand aggression mechanics. The do not understand what a war dec means. Pretty much they do not understand much at all yet they are harvested to make pvp wannabes look good on the killboards. Is this solution simple, no not at all. But some one, some place needs to step and make a lot of people unhappy by changing some mechanics. How, i don't know. Maybe make industrial ships ungankable in 8,9,10 space. Maybe by not canceling aggressor status till your podded. Like i said, i do not know, however if eve wants to be a game for more people than the usual sociopaths and psychopaths, then it needs to step out of the darkness and into the light. Maybe a Privateer might be a start. It would allow them to shoot any one with an active weapons timer. Allow them to pod aggressors without penalty. I am not sure. I do know however that CCP is making a push to get more people involved with eve. It would just be sad if their efforts went to waste simply people the newbies quit cause they got ganked and didn't understand why. Especially when they get laughed at when they ask why.
If you remember Freelancer old Microsoft space game new york system was a no shoot zone NO PvP maybe noob systems, birth systems should be same? just a thought.. |
|
Noragen Neirfallas
Rabble Inc. Legio De Mortem
3208
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 06:07:25 -
[11] - Quote
Crack Spawn wrote:Pami Walker wrote:Dark Lord Trump wrote:The entire point of highsec is that you can't run up to someone and shoot them in the face without either a) getting CONCORDed or b) tricking them into shooting first. Do I think that hisec should be safe? No. That doesn't mean that you should be able to pay to turn it into lowsec. I disagree, hi sec should be safe. If CCP is hurting for money, why is it that they allow their players to drive away thousands of possible subscribers each month. When people start playing, they do not understand aggression mechanics. The do not understand what a war dec means. Pretty much they do not understand much at all yet they are harvested to make pvp wannabes look good on the killboards. Is this solution simple, no not at all. But some one, some place needs to step and make a lot of people unhappy by changing some mechanics. How, i don't know. Maybe make industrial ships ungankable in 8,9,10 space. Maybe by not canceling aggressor status till your podded. Like i said, i do not know, however if eve wants to be a game for more people than the usual sociopaths and psychopaths, then it needs to step out of the darkness and into the light. Maybe a Privateer might be a start. It would allow them to shoot any one with an active weapons timer. Allow them to pod aggressors without penalty. I am not sure. I do know however that CCP is making a push to get more people involved with eve. It would just be sad if their efforts went to waste simply people the newbies quit cause they got ganked and didn't understand why. Especially when they get laughed at when they ask why. If you remember Freelancer old Microsoft space game new york system was a no shoot zone NO PvP maybe noob systems, birth systems should be same? just a thought.. They are... baiting in newbro systems is grounds for a ban
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
ISD Max Trix favourite ISD
'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King-Griffin
|
Gou Litvyak
Random inactiva corporation
4
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 09:40:05 -
[12] - Quote
Noragen Neirfallas wrote: PS CCP collected statistics given at fanfest about player retention would be a good place to start your search.
Yeah that is leaving out the fact that the ganking/griefing caused more players to leave initially, but the few who stayed stayed longer(which was the point). In the end it hurts player retention on the big scale. |
Noragen Neirfallas
Rabble Inc. Legio De Mortem
3208
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 09:48:16 -
[13] - Quote
Gou Litvyak wrote:Noragen Neirfallas wrote: PS CCP collected statistics given at fanfest about player retention would be a good place to start your search.
Yeah that is leaving out the fact that the ganking/griefing caused more players to leave initially, but the few who stayed stayed longer(which was the point). In the end it hurts player retention on the big scale. Excellent sounds like you have a good argument to go on. Please post the evidence to go with this undoubtedly easily proven fact
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
ISD Max Trix favourite ISD
'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King-Griffin
|
Gou Litvyak
Random inactiva corporation
4
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 10:42:50 -
[14] - Quote
You never even looked at the sources you refer to, did you? Reminds me of political discussions, where people refer to documents but none reads them, and base their opinions of what they imagine the sources say.
What was said at fanfest was that the amount of players who got ganked, and stayed, dedicated to EVE long term. That does not mean that all ganked players stay, that wasnt even part of what was presented. Most newbies who got ganked permanently left EVE on the spot, the stats focused on the few who didnt. |
Noragen Neirfallas
Rabble Inc. Legio De Mortem
3209
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 11:12:40 -
[15] - Quote
Gou Litvyak wrote:You never even looked at the sources you refer to, did you? Reminds me of political discussions, where people refer to documents but none reads them, and base their opinions of what they imagine the sources say.
What was said at fanfest was that the amount of players who got ganked, and stayed, dedicated to EVE long term. That does not mean that all ganked players stay, that wasnt even part of what was presented. Most newbies who got ganked permanently left EVE on the spot, the stats focused on the few who didnt. But thats not how things correlate.
Even if the few who stayed never got griefed/ganked, they would have dedicated to EVE anyways. I did watch it all. I was quite involved with a rather large group of fresh faced newbros at the time so I was rather intrigued. However I am still waiting for your evidence for the section I highlighted in bold. Or could it be you are kinda not really drawing your information from a quotable source. I find this is often the case and was hoping things would be different here
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
ISD Max Trix favourite ISD
'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King-Griffin
|
Gou Litvyak
Random inactiva corporation
4
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 11:23:34 -
[16] - Quote
Since you were also there and didnt understand anything at all, let me put it to you simply. Ganking newbies makes the majority of them quit, the few who dont quit stay because the content is meaningful. A ship is a ship, when you lose it its lost. It sets a value on their assets unlike meaningless items in other games. That is why the handful of ganked newbies stay.
That is what was presented on fanfest, when you gank a newbie that player will nearly always be confused, find out he/she lost the ship, be angry, quit and uninstall to never come back. The few who dont, dedicate to EVE.
You can glorify ganking all you want, that doesnt change what was said, it just changes what you think was said that day. |
Noragen Neirfallas
Rabble Inc. Legio De Mortem
3209
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 11:31:19 -
[17] - Quote
Gou Litvyak wrote:Since you were also there and didnt understand anything at all, let me put it to you simply. Ganking newbies makes the majority of them quit, the few who dont quit stay because the content is meaningful. A ship is a ship, when you lose it its lost. It sets a value on their assets unlike meaningless items in other games. That is why the handful of ganked newbies stay.
That is what was presented on fanfest, when you gank a newbie that player will nearly always be confused, find out he/she lost the ship, be angry, quit and uninstall to never come back. The few who dont, dedicate to EVE.
You can glorify ganking all you want, that doesnt change what was said, it just changes what you think was said that day. I'm not the one misunderstanding here. It was presented with those who were not killed as a comparison. Those who were killed had a much higher retention rate than those who weren't. Go back and watch it on youtube
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
ISD Max Trix favourite ISD
'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King-Griffin
|
Lan Wang
C.Q.B Snuffed Out
3585
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 11:34:29 -
[18] - Quote
i guess i could buy one of these and just sit in jita in my smartbomber popping everything
+1
Loyalist to Angel Cartel
Your killboard reads like a "how to get farmed 101" - Noah Reese
|
Bagatur I
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 11:44:53 -
[19] - Quote
it already exists and it is free. just move out of highsec. |
Merchant Rova
Pathway to the Next
60
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 16:15:02 -
[20] - Quote
Please dear lord let this thread be a joke.
"The laws of the Federation were written for the good of the many. Not the good of the Gallente nor the good of the Caldari. Hopefully, we can help them remember this." -Fronte Belliare
|
|
Galaxy Duck
Galaxy Farm Carebear Repurposing
80
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 19:17:28 -
[21] - Quote
Yeah dude, I'm a suicide ganker and even I can see that this idea is no good. Thanks for trying, though. |
Areen Sassel
142
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 00:31:19 -
[22] - Quote
Galaxy Duck wrote:Yeah dude, I'm a suicide ganker and even I can see that this idea is no good. Thanks for trying, though.
I wonder if we should have a standardised response form to these. Semi-seriously, in the hope people would read it and see all the other failure modes, some of which I fell into myself early on. Something like:
Your idea: [X] enables someone to aggress anyone they like in high-sec without CONCORD --- [ ] provided they are willing to drop 100,000 on the target's bounty first [ ] is the "just one more nerf" to highsec aggression which will make everything right [ ] provides a zone of perfect safety which vets will immediately move their operations into when practical --- [ ] vets and bot armies, rendering it in fact useless for newbros wanting to mine [ ] does not in fact provide more incentive to hunt people's bounties [ ] makes it practical for me to collect my bounty with an alt [ ] requires us to have working locator agents [ ] contains fundamental misunderstandings of the aggression mechanics as follows: --- [ ] -5 and below are free targets anyway so who cares --- [ ] capsuleers in question aren't normally undocked anyway except on their way to a gank --- [ ] no matter how noble your cause, provoking CONCORD puts a killright on you, too [ ] would result in constant CONCORDOKKEN from accidental bumping --- [ ] would then mean Alice can easily contrive for Bob to bump her and thus get CONCORDed [ ] neglects to consider that undocking is consent to PvP [ ] consists primarily of armchair psychoanalysis of people you have never met [ ] is to make industrials combat-equal to warships presumably thus leaving us wondering what warships are for [ ] was previously tried in [year] and didn't work then
Any more suggestions, oh C&P? |
Morgan Agrivar
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
598
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 02:25:59 -
[23] - Quote
When I did solo highsec wardecs, I killed quite a few newbies. A couple of them dropped corp right after I killed them but most of them did not.
Now is it the fault of the ganker/war target in where the newbies are not prepared for ganks/wars? The answer is no for both. In regards to ganking, I do believe that something in the New Player Experience should bring the art of ganking up so they are aware of it. A brand new player just starting up would have no clue playing...unless he joins a player run corporation.
If the newbie is part of a player-run corporation and gets ganked or killed during a war, then it falls solely on the CEO of that bad corporation. You cannot comprehend how many kills I got just because the CEO did not prepare (or even tell) his members for the war that I declared on them. In one instance, I killed an afk Venture and pod 15 seconds after the war started. I sat 6km off of her while she mined cloaked in a Hound while waiting for the war to start for 12 minutes.
When I got a kill on a newbie, I always messaged them afterwards to see if they were made aware of the war. Not one knew about it, or what it even meant. I would send some isk their way to recoup their loss and give them tips about what happens during a war and how to protect themselves.
Is that my job as their enemy to tell them how to protect themselves? Most highsec corporations are full of fail, you know...
TL;DR: If the newbie is in a player-run corporation, it is the fault of the CEO they got ganked/killed in a war. Most highsec player corporations are BADLY run...
YC 117 New Eden Capsuleer's Writing Contest Submission - "Heartache"
|
Mike Adoulin
Adolescent Radioactive Pirate Hamsters
1895
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 13:47:02 -
[24] - Quote
Morgan Agrivar wrote:TL;DR: If the newbie is in a player-run corporation, it is the fault of the CEO they got ganked/killed in a war. Most highsec player corporations are BADLY run...
^^^^^^
This a thousand times over.
Everything in EVE is a trap.
And if it isn't, it's your job to make it a trap...:)
You want to know what immorality in EVE Online looks like? Look no further than Ripard "Jester" Teg.
Chribba is the Chuck Norris of EVE.
|
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
7244
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 22:16:30 -
[25] - Quote
Thread has been moved to Player Features and Ideas Discussion.
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Noragen Neirfallas
Rabble Inc. Legio De Mortem
3211
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 23:59:29 -
[26] - Quote
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode wrote:Thread has been moved to Player Features and Ideas Discussion. A thread got moved out of crime and punishment to die??? Today was a good day
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
ISD Max Trix favourite ISD
'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King-Griffin
|
Viktor Archangel
Conoco. Caldari Armed Forces.
3
|
Posted - 2016.10.28 05:25:47 -
[27] - Quote
Aha Hahahaha, oh God I needed that laugh OP.
CCP: hey guys wanna kill everyone in highsec and not worry about silky wardecs/Concord? Extremely small minority: yeah buddy, let us elite pvp CCP: just pay us 1 dollar and start shaving off those highsec subscriptions today!
Ahahahahaha
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5428
|
Posted - 2016.10.28 19:50:37 -
[28] - Quote
Gou Litvyak wrote:Noragen Neirfallas wrote: PS CCP collected statistics given at fanfest about player retention would be a good place to start your search.
Yeah that is leaving out the fact that the ganking/griefing caused more players to leave initially, but the few who stayed stayed longer(which was the point). In the end it hurts player retention on the big scale.
Your evidence of this is what exactly?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5428
|
Posted - 2016.10.28 19:55:10 -
[29] - Quote
Gou Litvyak wrote:You never even looked at the sources you refer to, did you? Reminds me of political discussions, where people refer to documents but none reads them, and base their opinions of what they imagine the sources say.
What was said at fanfest was that the amount of players who got ganked, and stayed, dedicated to EVE long term. That does not mean that all ganked players stay, that wasnt even part of what was presented. Most newbies who got ganked permanently left EVE on the spot, the stats focused on the few who didnt. But thats not how things correlate.
Even if the few who stayed never got griefed/ganked, they would have dedicated to EVE anyways.
Wrong.
What was said was that:
1. Players who lost a ship illegally (i.e. were ganked) in their first 15 days played the longest. 2. Players who lost a ship legally (e.g. a war dec) in their first 15 days played second longest. 3. Players who did not lose a ship in their first 15 days played the shortest time.
As you can see, you claim that ganked players left quickly is not supported by the claims put forth by CCP.
Now, the analysis was not a definitive or comprehensive analysis of ganking, but it does point towards ganking not being the issue with regards to player retention at least early on for players.
Second CCP analysis contradicts exactly your claim that newbies who are ganked quit on the spot.
And you have no data, no analysis, but a load of made up Bravo Sierra.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5428
|
Posted - 2016.10.28 19:56:19 -
[30] - Quote
Gou Litvyak wrote:Since you were also there and didnt understand anything at all, let me put it to you simply. Ganking newbies makes the majority of them quit....
No, that is exactly the opposite of what CCP Rise said during that presentation.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |