EVE Search - @CCP : Do not cave in to Goons on Inferno 1.1

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

@CCP : Do not cave in to Goons on Inferno 1.1

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 35	Posted - 2012.06.17 13:57:00 - [1] - Quote You know all you high sec people don't need a wardec to do anything to us? We live in space where wardecs do not matter, come try I promise you won't get concorded. Basically wardecs don't affect us so why would we care enough to change them? I'll head the idiocy off at the pass with the fact that we use neutral alts for our high sec dealings so you won't be causing any significant damage in high sec.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 35	Posted - 2012.06.18 01:10:00 - [2] - Quote Jade Constantine wrote: Well obviously hisec trade hub raider friends are not going to be as tight as formal alliance members in some nullsec pact that are only brought into the game from 3rd party forums are they? Really. The whole point of the Inferno 1.0 wardec allies system seemed to be to provide a quicker and neater way of growing dynamic war situations in the sandbox. But sure, you can always trot out the "well you should be more like us!" reponse - but the reality is quite a few people don't want to the play the game precisely how the nullsec blocs are playing the game - they like their independence. And lets remember another reality here. This is not hisec wardec people asking for a change in the in game to their benefit. CCP Soundwave wrote: The other thing is that war dec prices are determined by the value you get from them. If you want to go to war with someone, a higher number of potential targets should be more expensive. If you're a smaller alliance, this makes you a less attractive target, unless you've made someone angry in which case you're responsible for any social repercussions you've created.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 36	Posted - 2012.06.18 01:56:00 - [3] - Quote Jade less words more of this: CCP Soundwave wrote: The other thing is that war dec prices are determined by the value you get from them. If you want to go to war with someone, a higher number of potential targets should be more expensive. If you're a smaller alliance, this makes you a less attractive target, unless you've made someone angry in which case you're responsible for any social repercussions you've created.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 36	Posted - 2012.06.18 02:28:00 - [4] - Quote Alia Gon'die wrote: La Nariz wrote: Jade less words more of this: CCP Soundwave wrote: The other thing is that war dec prices are determined by the value you get from them. If you want to go to war with someone, a higher number of potential targets should be more expensive. If you're a smaller alliance, this makes you a less attractive target, unless you've made someone angry in which case you're responsible for any social repercussions you've created. but the more words he says the more we get to shoot at him, right? You're telling me you enjoy the tinfoil covered mass of words that are vomited into posts?
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 36	Posted - 2012.06.18 02:38:00 - [5] - Quote Jade Constantine wrote: La Nariz wrote: Jade less words more of this: CCP Soundwave wrote: The other thing is that war dec prices are determined by the value you get from them. If you want to go to war with someone, a higher number of potential targets should be more expensive. If you're a smaller alliance, this makes you a less attractive target, unless you've made someone angry in which case you're responsible for any social repercussions you've created. The quote doesn't really make sense though. Otherwise why doesn't the wardec cost ramp up when the defender adds more allies (thus targets) into the wardec? Also, why does the wardec cost against goons (for example) calculate 500m per week for (9000 members) when by admission of most of their members there are no more than 90 or so active in empire (and thus reachable through the hisec wardec system). As for the "social repecurssions" - well doesn't that cut both ways? If an alliance has made itself very unpopular in eve there are litterally dozens of hisec trade hub raiders who'd like to join wars against them but are now prevented from doing so by the exponentially-increasing wardec ally multiplier (which is a bit silly because it increases much further and more extremely than simply layering on additional wardecs would. Read it again it makes perfect sense. Keep reading it until you understand it and quit whining about semantics.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 39	Posted - 2012.06.18 15:57:00 - [6] - Quote Arrgthepirate wrote: Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Quoting an arghy post.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 39	Posted - 2012.06.18 16:35:00 - [7] - Quote Mara Tessidar wrote: These wardec rules are not in place for our protection. They're in place for yours.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 41	Posted - 2012.06.18 16:43:00 - [8] - Quote Barbara Nichole wrote: Mara Tessidar wrote: In nullsec, anyone can shoot you at any time without paying a fee. War decs change literally nothing for entities like Goonswarm, except that new players in the alliance that haven't made it out to nullsec yet can be shot. If we had to care about wardecs, people that fought us would be brought to their knees and then crushed. These wardec rules are not in place for our protection. They're in place for yours. most null sec corps do use Jita and other trade hubs... both to supply their efforts and sell products for good profits to a wider market. This does put them at risk during a wardec. war decs are just one tool against a null sec alliance. Neutral alts
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 44	Posted - 2012.06.18 16:55:00 - [9] - Quote Barbara Nichole wrote: Enaris Kerle wrote: Barbara Nichole wrote: most null sec corps do use Jita and other trade hubs... both to supply their efforts and sell products for good profits to a wider market. This does put them at risk during a wardec. war decs are just one tool against a null sec alliance. let me introduce you to this radical concept called "market alt" let me introduce you to another radical concept called recon scout - and market alt identification. Yeah cause most of you put forth the effort to do that.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 46	Posted - 2012.06.18 17:24:00 - [10] - Quote Weaselior wrote: Barbara Nichole wrote: Weaselior wrote: the anti-wardec fleet was lead by dbrb and was a drakefleet and murderized everything, the only wardec fleet that was a pain in the ass was an AAA fleet who showed up in good fits and was organized and could do something besides die horribly (until they got caught on the wrong side of the gate, and then vily murderized a few freighters since they couldn't jump into the fleet) that's true but what if allys had been able to jump on the wardec for cheap? more worthless unorganized nobodies who would have been slaughtered by the drakefleet because they had no organization at all I'd like to add we enjoyed slaughtering your shitfit fleets, DBRB pretending to be the Jita god was hilarious too.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 48	Posted - 2012.06.18 18:18:00 - [11] - Quote Arrgthepirate wrote: Holy ** this exploded into full ** while I was gone. I'm not sure who's dumber, Jade, or the Black Sun ****. I vote checkbox.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 48	Posted - 2012.06.18 18:25:00 - [12] - Quote CCP should lower wardec costs to 5 mill per entity and allow infinite wardecs just to spite all these people who don't understand that the new wardec mechanics are there to protect them.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 55	Posted - 2012.06.18 19:49:00 - [13] - Quote Arrgthepirate wrote: Jade Constantine wrote: Arrgthepirate wrote: When are you going to get that WE DO NOT GIVE A DAMN ABOUT ALL THE WAR DECS EVER. It does NOT hurt us. AT ALL. In ANY WAY. It might hurt a few idiots a week. They deserve it, it's funny, and they'll bounce back. We're not losing space, we're not losing our trillion isk a month moongoo, we're not having our assets locked in stations. We're not losing supers. If you want highsec to fight back, form an alliance, and go on a roam. I know that traveling through multiple regions might seem scary, but I promise it's fun. It hurts you in the most profound way possible. It hurts the feelings and ego of your leader. All the isk in the world won't make up for the sting when it becomes apparent that the Mittani lost a war to Jade Constantine and needed the 1.0 game mechanics to change in order to protect him from the consequences of defeat. This is fact, public record, simply the way things are. Ahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Quoting a not arghy post.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 55	Posted - 2012.06.18 20:05:00 - [14] - Quote Who wants to place bets when the puppet master defense will come out?
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 57	Posted - 2012.06.18 20:14:00 - [15] - Quote Enaris Kerle wrote: Richard Desturned wrote: Jade Constantine wrote: And winning a war against you guys puts the icing on the cake. Yeah, your alliance is visibly winning a war against us, with all that space you've taken. he's talking about the empire war, where you win by running more missions than the enemy Oh god I'd surrender that war.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 59	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:00:00 - [16] - Quote Jade Constantine wrote: For the record the Eve News article responses are general positive - people quite liked to hear a version of events that was not biased in the CFC favour. . :stare:
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 59	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:13:00 - [17] - Quote I think this quote from Macbeth best describes jade's logic: It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 59	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:29:00 - [18] - Quote Issler Dainze wrote: Kyle Myr wrote: Jade, your stated position is 'Keep infinite free allies'. Then, when this was explained as really, really bad, you changed it to 'keep infinite free allies up until the number of characters on the defender side of the war equals the number in the attacker's side', entirely ignoring the concept of corp-hopping. I've yet to see anyone from the CSM defend either of those positions. Them saying the 1.1 changes aren't a great final fix to the whole mercenary/allies system is very different from them agreeing with you. This isn't a binary debate. Our position, for its part, is 'we don't care, but you, Jade Constantine, are a bad poster and entirely too much fun to rile up.' Given that we're on EVE-O thread 3, and 1 EVE NEWS 24 article later, it's been a good week for you typing words. I mean, this is the EVE-O general forums. Top secret plans will doubtless be discussed in other channels so it won't be neccessary to infiltrate simply for the purpose of listening. I'm a CSM and I've basically supported what Jade has suggested several times in fact. I believe allies should be free up to a point based on the size of the opponent. The fees for extras in a manner that the fees are passed to the mercs you could hire. So pretty much the same as Jade suggests. Again, amazed at the goon ratio of posters in this thread. Issler You should go back to making the "we are being attacked by the CSM" posts those were more funny.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 59	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:33:00 - [19] - Quote Issler Dainze wrote: Kyle Myr wrote: Issler Dainze wrote: Kyle Myr wrote: Jade, your stated position is 'Keep infinite free allies'. Then, when this was explained as really, really bad, you changed it to 'keep infinite free allies up until the number of characters on the defender side of the war equals the number in the attacker's side', entirely ignoring the concept of corp-hopping. I've yet to see anyone from the CSM defend either of those positions. Them saying the 1.1 changes aren't a great final fix to the whole mercenary/allies system is very different from them agreeing with you. This isn't a binary debate. Our position, for its part, is 'we don't care, but you, Jade Constantine, are a bad poster and entirely too much fun to rile up.' Given that we're on EVE-O thread 3, and 1 EVE NEWS 24 article later, it's been a good week for you typing words. I mean, this is the EVE-O general forums. Top secret plans will doubtless be discussed in other channels so it won't be neccessary to infiltrate simply for the purpose of listening. I'm a CSM and I've basically supported what Jade has suggested several times in fact. I believe allies should be free up to a point based on the size of the opponent. The fees for extras in a manner that the fees are passed to the mercs you could hire. So pretty much the same as Jade suggests. Again, amazed at the goon ratio of posters in this thread. Issler You're the only one, as far as I can tell. Mea culpa for forgetting you were on the CSM. Forgive me if I think it's because we also declared war on you. And you have it opened and have 38 allies. I mean, you've also stated you'll spend the 3.5 *10^18 ISK to keep those allies in 1.1. Stating it doesn't make that plausible. You made up the number, I said I'd pay for the most effective allies, likely the top four. But nice try. So if you don't care about war decs why care that I have 38 allies? And thanks for letting me know the number, I lost track a while back! Issler I don't care that you have 38 allies, I think its funny that you and jade tinpost so many stupid things over it.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 62	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:37:00 - [20] - Quote Issler Dainze wrote: I've also said repeatedly while I don't like the change, I don't believe it was some sort of conspiracy. No tinfoil here, move along. Issler [Citation Required]
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 62	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:39:00 - [21] - Quote Alavaria Fera wrote: La Nariz wrote: I don't care that you have 38 allies, I think its funny that you and jade tinpost so many stupid things over it. Boat can practice his station camping in highsec, far far away from the rest of nullsec. I like the idea. He should use eve-voice and it should broadcast to all the people in that system.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 62	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:40:00 - [22] - Quote Issler Dainze wrote: La Nariz wrote: Issler Dainze wrote: I've also said repeatedly while I don't like the change, I don't believe it was some sort of conspiracy. No tinfoil here, move along. Issler [Citation Required] Citation citing the need for citation before a citation can be provided. Issler How about that mail regarding the CSM attacking you?
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 62	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:42:00 - [23] - Quote Alavaria Fera wrote: La Nariz wrote: Issler Dainze wrote: I've also said repeatedly while I don't like the change, I don't believe it was some sort of conspiracy. No tinfoil here, move along. [Citation Required] Wait, doesn't that make you a CFC alt? Yes we are all secretly alts.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 62	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:43:00 - [24] - Quote Issler Dainze wrote: If only most goon posts were this reasoned! We could have a dialog! Issler If only most pubbie posts weren't summed up by this quote from Macbeth: "It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury signifying nothing." Then there might be a dialog going on.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 62	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:44:00 - [25] - Quote Alavaria Fera wrote: La Nariz wrote: Alavaria Fera wrote: Wait, doesn't that make you a CFC alt? Yes we are all secretly alts. Some of us are openly CFC mains though. Z
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 65	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:47:00 - [26] - Quote Ranger 1 wrote: Cutter Isaacson wrote: La Nariz wrote: Who wants to place bets when the puppet master defense will come out? I want to place a bet on how long it takes for Jade to get banned for rumour posting, incessant personal attacks, asshattery, idiocy, poop stirring and a lack of good grace. Honestly, I doubt it will happen. All Jade is doing is winding up GS by trolling them, and trolling is situation normal on these forums. I'm just not sure why they are playing into it this time. Usually our esteemed GS members see through it long before it gets to this point. Either way, on with the drama. We're on the first reimbursable posting op.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 65	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:48:00 - [27] - Quote Issler Dainze wrote: La Nariz wrote: Issler Dainze wrote: La Nariz wrote: Issler Dainze wrote: I've also said repeatedly while I don't like the change, I don't believe it was some sort of conspiracy. No tinfoil here, move along. Issler [Citation Required] Citation citing the need for citation before a citation can be provided. Issler How about that mail regarding the CSM attacking you? Well, wrong on several accounts, the internal mail that was leaked referenced that we lost our towers to PL and the chair of the CSM is a PL member, so a CSM alliance had attacked us, but out in the OPEN! No conspiracy there! That also predates these changes quite a bit and the recent claim of tin foil headgear is specifically regarding this change, so again, far off the mark. Finally, and this is the real point. I asked for a citation indicated a citation was required. The leaked mail would not be such a citation. I await the citation indicating a citation is required. Issler So are you finally admitting to removing your tinfoil hat?
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 65	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:48:00 - [28] - Quote Alavaria Fera wrote: La Nariz wrote: We're on the first reimbursable posting op. We can be reimbursed for mental damage? How... They gave me some Tequila and it works marvelously.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 65	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:49:00 - [29] - Quote Lord Zim wrote: La Nariz wrote: Alavaria Fera wrote: La Nariz wrote: Alavaria Fera wrote: Wait, doesn't that make you a CFC alt? Yes we are all secretly alts. Some of us are openly CFC mains though. Z 0 r
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 65	Posted - 2012.06.18 21:50:00 - [30] - Quote Alavaria Fera wrote: La Nariz wrote: So are you finally admitting to removing your tinfoil hat? Admitting to removing tinfoil hat? What's going on here? I have no idea is issler going to remove it?