| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 |
81. [PIE Inc] A Statement Regarding Today's Events - in Intergalactic Summit [original thread]
And in the wake of the biggest violations of interstellar law to date the devils come out to mock the word of the servants of God. If you are so opposed to what Amarrians have to say feel free to meet them in the name of the minmatar, otherwise y...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.10 21:22:00
|
82. Matari Elder Fleets, Tigers and Bears, Oh My! - in Intergalactic Summit [original thread]
The Republic were left in peace....Then a cowardly strike at the heart of our empire supported by all Matar. Only time will tell their punishment.
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.10 20:42:00
|
83. Matari Elder Fleets, Tigers and Bears, Oh My! - in Intergalactic Summit [original thread]
How do you explain the Republic forces allowing terrorists to escape into Republic space in a cowardly attempt to race retribution for their actions. The Minmatar race will be held accountable for the decisions of their elders.
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.10 20:33:00
|
84. Matari Elder Fleets, Tigers and Bears, Oh My! - in Intergalactic Summit [original thread]
How do you explain the Republic forces allowing terrorists to escape into Republic space in a cowardly attempt to race retribution for their actions. The Minmatar race will be held accountable for the decisions of their elders.
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.10 20:33:00
|
85. Statement of Support for Jamyl Sarum - in Intergalactic Summit [original thread]
We will see what becomes of this situation. Her claim is hardly valid, she may be a hero but by the terms of the succession trials she should be dead. She has alot to explain.
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.10 20:29:00
|
86. [Issue] CSM Candidate started threads. - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Edited by: Ikar Kaltin on 06/06/2008 23:19:04 As it seems that it is not in the rules, I think it would be fair if threads started by CSM members require the same as other threads started by the player base in order to reach the agenda. As som...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.06 23:18:00
|
87. [issue] The feasibility of destructible player-built outposts in Eve - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Edited by: Ikar Kaltin on 06/06/2008 23:14:19 Originally by: Kelsin Originally by: Ikar Kaltin As you said, the goal is to gain the support of a representative, not be posted by a rep to instantly be moved to the agenda. Th...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.06 23:13:00
|
88. [issue] The feasibility of destructible player-built outposts in Eve - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Originally by: Maggot 2000+ people voted Jade in on the basis that this was a key issue. I am sure one of us can post the "issue" if he likes and then he can support it thus meeting the criteria. in my view: -make them destructable -make ...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.06 23:12:00
|
89. [issue] The feasibility of destructible player-built outposts in Eve - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Originally by: Kelsin Originally by: Amarr Holymight I never read the part in the CSM draft that they were allowed to push their own personal projects against the face of popular opinion, cite examples please or you and your argume...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.06 22:50:00
|
90. [issue] The feasibility of destructible player-built outposts in Eve - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Originally by: Kelsin Originally by: Ikar Kaltin So because a CSM decides to push his/hers opinion despites the general opinion, lacking even the support of other CSM members (and drawing the oppositiion of some) should mean that t...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.06 20:34:00
|
91. [issue] The feasibility of destructible player-built outposts in Eve - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Originally by: Kelsin Originally by: Ikar Kaltin Ok, I have alot of better things to do right now so Ill point out. Less than 50 votes, no other CSM support other than the OP and its on the CSM agenda. Every issue on the CSM ag...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.06 20:23:00
|
92. [Issue] Re-examination of 0.0 Sovereignty System - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Ok, lets put this simply. CCP put a thread in general discussion i believe it was, asking for suggestions on improving the sov system. CCP have understood their is a problem. They have asked for an opinion. They are considering this. This thread ...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.06 20:21:00
|
93. [issue] The feasibility of destructible player-built outposts in Eve - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Ok, I have alot of better things to do right now so Ill point out. Less than 50 votes, no other CSM support other than the OP and its on the CSM agenda. Enough Said.
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.06 20:16:00
|
94. [issue] The feasibility of destructible player-built outposts in Eve - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Originally by: Jade Constantine Originally by: Ikar Kaltin Simply answer this question: Considering that outposts were given destructible station services which means they can be effectivly made useless which in essence for outpo...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.06 06:34:00
|
95. [issue] The feasibility of destructible player-built outposts in Eve - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Lets see if you actually respond to points raised if I remove the point questioning your experience on an issue, as it actually relates to what your saying and whilst your choice to ignore it is unsuprising, its hardly how a CSM rep should act. In...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.06 05:49:00
|
96. [issue] The feasibility of destructible player-built outposts in Eve - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Originally by: Jade Constantine Originally by: Kelsin After all if what you suggest about the fate of destructable Outposts were true, why haven't the Goons swarmed across Eve destroying every POS a smaller alliance has out there...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.05 23:40:00
|
97. [issue] The feasibility of destructible player-built outposts in Eve - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Hold on. So on a post I wrote in a response to the points you raised about why this should go ahead your telling me to just argue why destructible outposts shouldnt be discussed. Last time I checked this was a discussion. You have made claims ab...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.05 22:45:00
|
98. [Issue] Re-examination of 0.0 Sovereignty System - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Originally by: Kelsin Originally by: Vantras If this is true then there is no reason whatsoever for this issue to be brought up. I think you're in a small minority if you aren't interested in knowing how CCP is going to handle ...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.05 22:00:00
|
99. [issue] The feasibility of destructible player-built outposts in Eve - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
When outposts were introduced and Soverignty was introduced based on POS warfare, how long did it take to destroy a single POS? How many capital ships were around, how many dreadnaughts were around? They were a limited factor designed to help pos...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.05 21:52:00
|
100. [issue] The feasibility of destructible player-built outposts in Eve - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Jade, I have no issue with destructible outposts being introduced as a different kind of outpost to current. Current outposts should not be destructible. My main issue is that it is not fair on outpost owners to have the rules changed on them a...
- by Ikar Kaltin - at 2008.06.05 20:56:00
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |