| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 |
1. Titan fair to bump or not? - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
GM Lelouch wrote: We will not suspend a player's account based on player testimony, Youtube videos or player-submitted screenshots alone. A decision to suspend a player's account must always be backed up by information in our server-side logs ...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.10.02 21:58:41
|
2. Titan fair to bump or not? - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
GM Lelouch wrote: We will not suspend a player's account based on player testimony, Youtube videos or player-submitted screenshots alone. A decision to suspend a player's account must always be backed up by information in our server-side logs ...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.10.02 21:58:00
|
3. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Mikhem wrote: Could Territorial Claim units require POS fuel blocks? This would force large alliances to maintain their areas. We already have towers in pretty much all systems that we control. Fueling TCUs in addition to the tower just mean...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 22:11:00
|
4. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Serendipity Lost wrote: If you think null is deserted now, wait until there are npc stations full of archon fleets and jump clones distributed neatly across all of null. It will make bridging and cynos feel like waiting for a postcard from your...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 22:09:00
|
5. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Ms Forum Alt wrote: The game is finished because the two largest blocs are too chicken to declare war on each other. Where's the point? There's nothing fun about shoving 1500 people (each side) into a system and have them slug it out at 10% ...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 19:51:00
|
6. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Arsine Mayhem wrote: Stupid people have problems focusing on the subject. everything that was to be said about the original subject must already have been said, because all that's come up in the last couple of pages have been conspiracy theor...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 19:28:00
|
7. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Arsine Mayhem wrote: R U Mad? yes, I tend to get angry when confronted with stupid people but do feel free to explain, at any point, how advocating for a tech nerf was one of those self-serving actions of ours, I'm genuinely interested
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 19:08:00
|
8. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Arsine Mayhem wrote: Mallak Azaria wrote: Maybe the blog person can explain how us supporting the tech nerf was self serving, considering we had an agreement on that due to the big coalitions owning all of it. Do I see tears? calling ou...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 18:53:00
|
9. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Ms Forum Alt wrote: It does now. But with my idea it might not in 3 months time. Someone would come along and tell you to GTFO wouldn't they. Would that annoy your line members? Having to move out for another corp in your alliance? I submit tha...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 15:25:00
|
10. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Ms Forum Alt wrote: Do you? Or do you mean to say that some corps have access to the best systems (lowest truesec) and the others can go **** themselves? uh yeah maybe you've not noticed but branch has different truesec from pure blind but so...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 15:08:00
|
11. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Speedkermit Damo wrote: Personally, I'm in favour of removing sov from the game entirely. Replacing sov null with what? FW? Keep in mind that Pre-FW lowsec was the least used space in the game, by a wide margin. Ms Forum Alt wrote: My su...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 14:50:00
|
12. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Speedkermit Damo wrote: No, lots of things ought to change. Power projection and caps/supers most of all. Okay, let's hear your proposals.
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 14:39:00
|
13. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Speedkermit Damo wrote: Yes, CCP should only listen to the blue donut boys who broke nullsec in the first place, and not listen to anyone anyone else. Especially not anyone from Providence. The only region where everyone isn't whining about how...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 14:33:00
|
14. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Toriessian wrote: So has the anti-occupancy based sov camp come up with a better alternate idea yet? Thats something missing from this thread. the anti-occupancy camp consists entirely of alliances who have no idea whatsoever about how sov wo...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 14:11:00
|
15. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Lucas Kell wrote: don't touch the poop
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 13:02:00
|
16. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Bunka en Daire wrote: Oh ask yourself how much of those who signed petition are RMT? I bet on my life, that 99% of them are RMT. RIP you Arya Regnar wrote: It surprises me that goons would propose this when it would hurt them the most. ...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 12:40:00
|
17. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
KatanTharkay wrote: I'm not in any way affiliated to TEST, but when they didn't wanted this type of gameplay (mega-coalitions) and tried to do something else, you crushed them, the "our way or the highway" style. Just saying. you'll have to e...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.30 09:09:00
|
18. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
PotatoOverdose wrote: What part of that is mud flinging? Allowing any coalition to condense all of it's nullbears and renters into a couple of constellations or less is the definition of dense, fortified space cities. This would give a massive ...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.29 20:56:00
|
19. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Veers Belvar wrote: This would be more compelling if your supercapital fleet wasn't sitting in drydock because your organization is far too risk averse to willingly commit it to a potentially even fight against N3/PL..... when we commited our...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.29 20:31:00
|
20. The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Retar Aveymone wrote: we dominate all lesser people as viciously as possible with the broken mechanic so that their suffering will convince ccp to fix it nb: running a broken mechanic into the ground by making the whole CFC abuse it mercile...
- by Enaris Kerle - at 2014.09.29 20:26:00
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |