| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Ztagger Lee
   |
Posted - 2009.09.03 01:42:00 -
[1]
Actually, most who permanently populate ws... like my main and friends since day one in a class five... couldn't care less about sov. Just remove the sov requirements from outposts n such, give some player control over static wormholes, and let us mine moons. At that point the big alliance guys who don't want us to have our own 'private dyspro' moons and are scared to death of what ws is going to become will be the only ones who think 'colonizing' ws is bad. Its time the big alliances got some competition from folks who don't have/want thousands of whining pownage turds as members.
|
Ztagger Lee
|
Posted - 2009.09.03 03:48:00 -
[2]
Absolutely... we in ws don't want sov. Just remove the sov requirements for constructions. While you are at it CCP you should let us moon mine too. The only reason we don't have it is because back when ws first appeared there was no one to represent wormhole residents. The CSM reps from the big alliances didn't want us to have our own 'private dyspro moons'.... or so the argument went... even though they ALREADY HAVE their own private dyspro moons. They are simply wetting their pants with fear over the potential of wormhole space for people they can't control and easily grief. We already build caps and such out here and this is supposed to be sandbox. Let the chips fall where they may CCP. Give us the same things the whiners have.
|
Ztagger Lee
|
Posted - 2009.09.03 05:03:00 -
[3]
First... we don't want sov... jus sov requirements removed. That gives us an even playing field in that regard.
Second... If done right moon distribution and hole mass budgets will prevent exactly what you are talking about.
Third... Large alliances should not be able to monopolize null sec. This would make them have to work for it again.
Fourth... Established ws groups with stations and capitals won't go down as easily as you imply.
Fifth... This is a sandbox game. There is no reason to dissalow these mechanics other than political. Let the chips fall where they may.
Fifth... You sound like one of those big alliance trolls trying to neuter ws.
|
Ztagger Lee
|
Posted - 2009.09.03 07:41:00 -
[4]
Not one of your rebuttals has a shred of reason why any of this can't be done with balance and the proper mechanics. Also... aside from the fact that done right it would still be something that had to be defended and worked for I doubt you actually know squat about ws simply because of your assumption that we don't fight, work hard, and organize for what we get in ws.
I'm really pretty tired of big alliance patsies pandering bs every chance they get. The fact is that ws is viable on all points while still maintaining game balance. What needs to be fixed in the 'system' is the impunity with which big alliances are able to discriminate and dominate.
Go back to your alliance bosses and tell m we don't buy that crap anymore. Too many of us have lived here for too long. Your idiot songs are getting old. Hope to cya and your alliance buddies n the hole someday.
|
Ztagger Lee
|
Posted - 2009.09.03 09:54:00 -
[5]
Just because colonials have to import doesn't mean they didn't 'settle' there. It is also going to be hard for you to find one modern nation/culture that is actually self supporting in 50% of its' needs. The only truly self sufficient cultures that ever existed found their limits and are now long dead. Go figger.
WS has been and is being settled. Get use to it. Many have come to stay.
|
Ztagger Lee
|
Posted - 2009.09.03 10:34:00 -
[6]
Maybe its the poor english and I do understand the elements of what you are saying Helios... but i'm having trouble seeing where your point concerning the topic is.
Maybe a friend with better english could help you make it more clear.
No offense btw... just hard to make out where you were going with it.
|
Ztagger Lee
|
Posted - 2009.09.03 11:03:00 -
[7]
We have no desire to 'fix' sov in ws. The idea is to remove it and its' limitations completely from ws. There is no point to sov in ws. Just make sov not matter at all in ws... problem solved. You can work on 'fixing' sov all you want in ks.
|
Ztagger Lee
|
Posted - 2009.09.03 15:11:00 -
[8]
To Jowen: Yes I do and I don't think ws residents should get the bennies without a cost. My tz is forcing me to crash right now, however, but I will get back here tommorrow and yak about it.
Sry i'm not into it right now but I simply have to sleep.
Fly safe all...
|
Ztagger Lee
|
Posted - 2009.09.04 01:04:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Ztagger Lee on 04/09/2009 01:05:59
Back to Jowen: Now that i've had some sleep i'll be happy to expand on that Jowen. First I want to say that we don't need sov in ws at all. There is no need to introduce a load of mechanics there that serve no purpose. Simply remove all sov effects from ws. Thats enough.
Rather than talk about all of it... which is too much for one post... i'll just address the outpost first. Without sov requirement... first off... an outpost is immediately doable with no further changes. An outpost is of great benefit to an alliance at the moment because of the benefits it gives. Most of those would not exist in ws without sov. The removal of those benefits would be quite a cost up front considering what it takes to get and keep one.
My true desire is an outpost that is ws only and can affect a wh state but must be owned in the wh system to do so. There are a variety of ways to create a cost for this with mechanics that already exist in the mechanics for pos and outposts and others could be easily implemented. We would be getting several advantages in ws for this but still nothing compared to what an outpost does for the typical null alliance. I think its a reasonable way to grow ws capacity that is balanced. It also starts providing a middle ground for the small to medium operations that don't have or want hundreds to thousands of members just to operate out of hisec and so on.
|
| |
|