| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 119 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 12 post(s) |

Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
294
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:42:00 -
[661] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Tippia wrote:Yes. His proposed solution is counter-productive. So risk free, high profit is best for the game?
ask the goons.. they should know since that's how they profit. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG] |

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1707
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:43:00 -
[662] - Quote
Herr Wilkus wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Yet we are presented with those LOL YOU MUST HAVE 32 K EHP OR YOU PLAY WRONG LOL fittings and they use a MAPC. End of MLU.
In the meanwhile I don't recall EVER having had to fit a MLU in any of my other PvP or PvE ships. And I have loads.
You don't fit MLU's into PvP ships. You fit Gyrostabilizers/TE's. And Nanos. You balance Tank with Yield and Cargo - just as combat ships balance Tank with Speed and Firepower. Gank ships are effective because they pile everything onto Firepower - to the exclusion of almost everything else, simply because Tank and Speed are useless vs the godlike CONCORD. Combat ships do not get to pick all three (unless they are Minmatar).  When a miner gets to pick all three - its no longer balanced. Except this is worse: you aren't even picking them with mods and rigs - they are being handed to you right off of the factory floor. My reaction when I find miners learning and 'doing it right' is actually quite positive. It means they are playing the game smart and I respect that. If they warp out. I don't get mad. I think, 'Great - they were paying attention - good for them." When I find a Hulk, clad in a DCII, MSEII and Shield Rigs - I don't cry about it - I respect it, and go looking for another target. (and there is ALWAYS another target....) I just don't understand why as a group, why these 'intelligent' miners are such an extreme minority. Is it just blind 'Goon hatred?' Or are these people who lost an Exhumer 3 weeks ago (or 2 years ago in the case of Krixtal Icefluxor) - and rather than learn from it, they just get mad and lose sight of the forest for the trees?
Way to create a blurb off an obvious copy paste typo (MLU <=> MAPC).
Also, when I see a DCII and shield rigs Hulk I think: "what a moron" or "what an overtank AFKer". Not respect. He's making easily 30% less than everybody else, who can get a ship exploded every now and then but make it back in 2 days and come well ahead off the overtanked scared afker.
The real risk vs reward does not come from having zero deaths in your life but from earning much more than you lose. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |

Mara Tessidar
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
643
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:43:00 -
[663] - Quote
evil goonie overlord checking in EveO is a circus train that is for bafflingly unclear reasons also carrying tanks of chlorine gas,-ácrashing and exploding in the middle of a small midwestern town. -áCalling it a mere train wreck gives neither the entertainment nor the horror it offers its proper due. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8773
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:44:00 -
[664] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:What I find tasty is the hypocrisy exposed You mean the GÇ£adapt or gtfoGÇ¥ dribble now coming from the exact class of people who could never adapt and who had to be helped by CCP to no longer be idiots? The dribble directed at those who have proven time and a gain that they can adapt just fine?
Yes, it's pretty hypocritical. But then, their lack of cognitive clarity was the entire problem to begin with and why their preferred tools apparently needed to be made idiot-proof. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|

Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
295
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:45:00 -
[665] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Yesterday in Sirseshin, several times. a tornado is a pretty expensive way to kill a hulk it seems that you're angry because hulks are able to die in hisec???????
but not unfairly expensive..considering the price of the target. Belly up to the bar if you want to drink otherwise move on.
An untanked T1 battle crusier will have nearly double the tank of an untanked T2 hulk... seems fine to me. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG] |

Arvantis Sauril
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:46:00 -
[666] - Quote
Quote:
The day every null sec player is not aloud by any means starting by NPC or Alt corporations to have full industrial organisations in high sec, mission corporations, shipping corporations, trading alts, High sec research/invention POS's and more funky stuff, then yep it will be time to change high sec. But as far as every major null alliance has hundreds/thousands of those in high sec and don't stop crying about high sec they will always be laughed at for not being serious for one second.
Alts of every shape, kind, and variety are definitely a problem. On the one hand its awesome to think about how this feature or that feature could make EVE into an even more complicated and intensive Space War Economy game, but you are correct, for every such feature, someone will "alt" their way around any consequences for their behavior.
Its a problem in almost every online game I can think of. Kills are rewarded. Losses are reimbursed, or marginalized. Die? Respawn. Punishments are evaded by logging out or logging in a new account. Even the most heinously one sided game of Counter Strike will eventually end and then you can just escape out and never go back to that server again. Having ramifications for behavior in a game, and enforcing those ramifications, will always be an issue. As there will always be people who just really want to ruin someone else's fun, I'm not sure what the answer is. But super buffing every tank of every mining ship, while leaving the mining asteroids themselves unchanged, definitely isn't the answer. |

Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
551
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:46:00 -
[667] - Quote
Haquer wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Tippia wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Yet we are presented with those LOL YOU MUST HAVE 32 K EHP OR YOU PLAY WRONG LOL fittings and they use a MAPC. GǪwhich are a response to the GÇ£but it's meaningless, they'll bring moreGÇ¥ argument. It's not something you have to do GÇö it's an escalation in response to their escalation that disproves a completely different myth about the tankability of Hulks. Quote:Then the answer is the same your ilk has always given to everybody else: adapt or quit. Answer to what? It has nothing to do with what you quoted. In fact, the issues caused by this fundamentally flawed concept of cost-balancing were fundamentally flawed exactly because there was no adaptation to it, and that's why they had to actually fix it by using some real balance measures. When people tell miners to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting. The miners generally refuse to and instead argue about cost and other irrelevancies. We should argue about the cost of supercaps .... at least that makes them rare compared to untanked.badly tanked hulks... The best thing about the barge/exhumer changes is that low end minerals are going to be hilariously low meaning for hilariously cheap supers. I can't ******* wait :3
Nothing show your claiming is true, what is true on the other hand is that now you will be able to mine in low/null and have enough tank so your friends come help you, this is good for the game.
Now you need REAL organisations and EFFORT to achieve the same ganking, leading to more ships destroyed witch is also good for the game.
As you can see, there's no problem, just cry babies tears by millions of M3 brb |

Andre Jean Sarpantis
University of Caille Gallente Federation
36
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:46:00 -
[668] - Quote
reading the whole thing i come to the conclusion CCP did a well thougth change if Gankers are whinning that hard in this thread.
Ahhh yes!! Ganker tears so delicious and tasty...so sweet and enjoyable.
Well...to be honest....as it is rigth now before the changes kicking in its far t easy to kill a Exhumer, even if the pilot to tries acting best as possible, even with tank fit....currently Exhumers are simply to easy killable.
So with the changes are kicking in 8th of august, Gankers just need to bring in more Firepower and more efforts to bring down this lousy Miner pilot and collect his tears...so what....its a fair change...More efforts needed...adapt or look out new easier prey! 
sincerly
Andre Jean Sarpantis ( Roleplayed nephew from the Serpentis founder ) |

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1707
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:48:00 -
[669] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Yet we are presented with those LOL YOU MUST HAVE 32 K EHP OR YOU PLAY WRONG LOL fittings and they use a MAPC. GǪwhich are a response to the Gǣbut it's meaningless, they'll bring moreGǥ argument.
... which is a wrong adding to a wrong. Does not make it a right.
Tippia wrote: When people tell miners to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting. The miners generally refuse to and instead argue about cost and other irrelevancies.
Well when you tell gankers to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting. The gankers generally refuse to and instead argue about cost (of bringing *1* more catalyst for 1 hulk) and other irrelevancies. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8773
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:49:00 -
[670] - Quote
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:Nothing show your claiming is true, what is true on the other hand is that now you will be able to mine in low/null and have enough tank so your friends come help you, this is good for the game. No. Far more sturdier ships than these are lost already because the difference in rules means that the friends will not get there in timeGǪ
Quote:Now you need REAL organisations and EFFORT to achieve the same ganking, leading to more ships destroyed witch is also good for the game. Not really, no. Unless you're talking about highsec, in which case what you said is already true if you choose to make it so. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|

DrSmegma
Smegma United Asgard Supplies and Logistics
63
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:49:00 -
[671] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Tippia wrote: When people tell miners to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting. The miners generally refuse to and instead argue about cost and other irrelevancies.
Well when you tell gankers to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting. The gankers generally refuse to and instead argue about cost (of bringing *1* more catalyst for 1 hulk) and other irrelevancies.
This is simply wrong as the gankers are not arguing like that. It has more to do with miners having an average IQ of about 75 (which is sadly too low to survive in a game of social darwinism like EvEO) and being unable to adapt, then crying until CCP makes the game idiot-proof for them which it was never meant to be.
But guys, we can blame miners all we want. Who really ****** up is CCP. I don't really want to troll you. If I trolled you anyway, I'll probably edit it out as soon as the rage fades. |

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1707
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:50:00 -
[672] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Tippia wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Yet we are presented with those LOL YOU MUST HAVE 32 K EHP OR YOU PLAY WRONG LOL fittings and they use a MAPC. GǪwhich are a response to the GÇ£but it's meaningless, they'll bring moreGÇ¥ argument. It's not something you have to do GÇö it's an escalation in response to their escalation that disproves a completely different myth about the tankability of Hulks. Quote:Then the answer is the same your ilk has always given to everybody else: adapt or quit. Answer to what? It has nothing to do with what you quoted. In fact, the issues caused by this fundamentally flawed concept of cost-balancing were fundamentally flawed exactly because there was no adaptation to it, and that's why they had to actually fix it by using some real balance measures. When people tell miners to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting. The miners generally refuse to and instead argue about cost and other irrelevancies. We should argue about the cost of supercaps .... at least that makes them rare compared to untanked.badly tanked hulks...
The PL screenshot in the EvE news should show how rare are supercaps these days... Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1707
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:50:00 -
[673] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Exhumers? Need a MAPC just to not suck complete balls. Incorrect.
Had it been incorrect they'd not change the mining ships. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1707
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:52:00 -
[674] - Quote
JamesCLK wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Exhumers? Need a DCU II just to not suck complete balls. FYP
No, because the DCU does not enable fitting shield mods to get to those conservative 30k EHP. The MAPC does. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |

Dave stark
Bombardier Inc
269
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:53:00 -
[675] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Tippia wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Exhumers? Need a MAPC just to not suck complete balls. Incorrect. Had it been incorrect they'd not change the mining ships.
don't try and argue the point with them, they just keep coming up with the same crap. Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |

Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
295
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:54:00 -
[676] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Then the answer is the same your ilk has always given to everybody else: adapt or quit. yeah but at least your mining bots can operate in peace :shobon:
strawman: you know mining bots are against the EULA. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG] |

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1707
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:55:00 -
[677] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:What I find tasty is the hypocrisy exposed You mean the GÇ£adapt or gtfoGÇ¥ dribble now coming from the exact class of people who could never adapt and who had to be helped by CCP to no longer be idiots? The dribble directed at those who have proven time and a gain that they can adapt just fine?
Then harden up and adapt. Your adaptable superiority should show, having it been proven time and again.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8773
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:56:00 -
[678] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:... which is a wrong adding to a wrong. Does not make it a right. No. It's a right correcting a wrong, making it right. Whether or not it's actually a good solution isn't the question GÇö it's whether or not the initial claim has any basis in reality (which it doesn't).
Quote:Well when you tell gankers to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting. GǪexcept that we're talking about the general failed strategy of cost-balancing, to which there is no adaptation. It is not an answer to the quote in question.
Quote:Had it been incorrect they'd not change the mining ships. Fallacy. It can be (and is) just as correct anyway, especially if the decision behind the change is driven by a fundamentally flawed and disproven balancing concept.
Quote:No, because the DCU does not enable fitting shield mods to get to those conservative 30k EHP. GǪexcept, of course, that 30k EHP isn't the qualifier for Gǣnot sucking ballsGǥ. The DCII is quite sufficient, and an MAPC isn't needed.
Quote:Then harden up and adapt. So you agree that the barge EHP changes are completely unnecessary then. Good. A but confusing given your previous statements, but still good. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|

Arvantis Sauril
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:56:00 -
[679] - Quote
Quote:
Nothing show your claiming is true, what is true on the other hand is that now you will be able to mine in low/null and have enough tank so your friends come help you, this is good for the game.
Now you need REAL organisations and EFFORT to achieve the same ganking, leading to more ships destroyed witch is also good for the game.
As you can see, there's no problem, just cry babies tears by millions of M3
This is good for the game!!!!
But only if there are more reasons for people to be out in low and null. Mining, missioning, whatever. If everyone is generating income behind Concord, this game doesn't happen. I'm just worried, with what I understand of CCP's track record, that even if this is their vision (Which would be a good vision) it will take 2 + years to get there... |

Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1457
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:57:00 -
[680] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Yesterday in Sirseshin, several times. a tornado is a pretty expensive way to kill a hulk it seems that you're angry because hulks are able to die in hisec??????? but not unfairly expensive..considering the price of the target. Belly up to the bar if you want to drink otherwise move on. An untanked T1 battle crusier will have nearly double the tank of an untanked T2 hulk... seems fine to me.
isk balancing is ******* stupid hope this helps a rogue goon |

Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1457
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:57:00 -
[681] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:JamesCLK wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Exhumers? Need a DCU II just to not suck complete balls. FYP No, because the DCU does not enable fitting shield mods to get to those conservative 30k EHP. The MAPC does.
use both in tandem and you get a rogue goon |

Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
552
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:59:00 -
[682] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:Nothing show your claiming is true, what is true on the other hand is that now you will be able to mine in low/null and have enough tank so your friends come help you, this is good for the game.  No. Far more sturdier ships than these are lost already because the difference in rules means that the friends will not get there in timeGǪ
What about considering these mining barges changes as the beginning of industry changes, just a step. New changes will hit over time like ring mining so yes these ships will be used lore in those regions. Then, and as many people claim it should happen and will probably happen, high sec minerals available amount and respawn time can/will probably also be tweaked.
But then, the same crying about mining barges buffs will cry because they will have to mine in low/null because :tears: isk/h
Quote:Now you need REAL organisations and EFFORT to achieve the same ganking, leading to more ships destroyed witch is also good for the game. Not really, no. Unless you're talking about highsec, in which case what you said is already true if you choose to make it so.[/quote]
Yep was about high sec just forgot to mention it, sry. And yes it's already the case for some gank activities, not in what concerns mining barges, this is shown by thousands and thousands of KM's where you can fit as much tank as you wish you can simple blow up whatever mining barge with minimal effort, this was wrong and needed changes. Bot argument is a false argument and goes against and makes fools of gankers rather than suit their arguments.
brb |

Ginseng Jita
PAN-EVE TRADING COMPANY
1675
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 20:01:00 -
[683] - Quote
Dave stark wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Tippia wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Exhumers? Need a MAPC just to not suck complete balls. Incorrect. Had it been incorrect they'd not change the mining ships. don't try and argue the point with them, they just keep coming up with the same crap.
Because you are too stupid to fit a proper tank on your barge.
|

Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1457
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 20:02:00 -
[684] - Quote
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:Bot argument is a false argument and goes against and makes fools of gankers rather than suit their arguments.
yeah nobody bots in hisec a rogue goon |

Dave stark
Bombardier Inc
269
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 20:04:00 -
[685] - Quote
Ginseng Jita wrote:Dave stark wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Tippia wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Exhumers? Need a MAPC just to not suck complete balls. Incorrect. Had it been incorrect they'd not change the mining ships. don't try and argue the point with them, they just keep coming up with the same crap. Because you are too stupid to fit a proper tank on your barge.
considering i've lost 0 hulks in my entire eve career, i disagree. Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |

Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
295
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 20:05:00 -
[686] - Quote
Danny Diamonds wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Danny Diamonds wrote:I am just guessing here, but I am willing to bet they chose this route to avoid "Creative" use of said Exhumers. Giving them more slots to fit a tank or more yield may have other implications (using one for tackle?). Just a guess, nothing more. hint: they don't need more mids to fit a better tank, just a slight bump in CPU and some grid. True for the Hulk, but not all of the Exhumers. One of the goals of the re-balance is to make ships within a group all have a well-defined role. Just adding some grid and cpu to all of them would not solve their lack of individual roles.
...and space training out better..while giving them continued value as a character progresses. the lowest yield exhumers will have better tanks.. the T2 hulks wiht the best yields will change a little in tanking but still have about as much tank as a T1 battlecrusier. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG] |

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1708
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 20:06:00 -
[687] - Quote
Tippia wrote:No. It's a right correcting a wrong, making it right.
Your opinion. Not absolute.
Tippia wrote:Fallacy. It can be (and is) just as correct anyway, especially if the decision behind the change is driven by a fundamentally flawed and disproven balancing concept.
You know that same Dev was an EvE player (a Goon none the less). You may as well send a curriculum and replace him and make your opinions law for the Higher Good of EvE.
Till that day, HE decides and YOU adapt or stop playing.
Tippia wrote:GǪexcept, of course, that 30k EHP isn't the qualifier for Gǣnot sucking ballsGǥ. The DCII is quite sufficient, and an MAPC isn't needed.
Care to share a DCUII fitting that lets a Mack survive 2-3 catalysts?
Tippia wrote:So you agree that the barge EHP changes are completely unnecessary then. Good. A but confusing given your previous statements, but still good.
No I don't agree. To me I have to have the same freedom fitting any ship in game. I can fit my Minnie ships in 50 different *and cool and powerful* ways each, I don't see why I have to settle for EITHER yield OR tank OR cargo for industrial ships. There's no middle way 20k EHP fitting for a Mack that lets use 1 MLU and hold 4 ice cubes (while I can fit 2-3 BCUs in my caldari ships *without losing a single inch of tank* or I can fit both gyrostabs and TEs on minnie ships with a smooth degree of choice of tank vs gank).
So the "proper way" for me would be to give freedom to get such 20k EHP Mack. Not a 200K EHP but something better than the current: "either it tanks a bit but sucks or it dies to a random fart". Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |

Ginseng Jita
PAN-EVE TRADING COMPANY
1675
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 20:06:00 -
[688] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:Bot argument is a false argument and goes against and makes fools of gankers rather than suit their arguments. yeah nobody bots in hisec
OMG I love you...have my babies. Never thought I would be siding with Goons, but, in this instance I support you 100%. Bot's are present now in large numbers and with these changes not only will you see rise in bots, but now...now,...get your mackinaws!
Go to the ice fields. Target ice. Activate strip miners. Walk away from computer. Go watch a movie. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8774
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 20:07:00 -
[689] - Quote
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:What about considering these mining barges changes as the beginning of industry changes, just a step. New changes will hit over time like ring mining so yes these ships will be used lore in those regions. GǪand that doesn't change the fact that far far sturdier ships than these are lost already because the difference in rules means that the friends will not get there in time. So still no, you won't really be able to mine in low/null any more than you can now because of this.
Quote:Yep was about high sec just forgot to mention it, sry. And yes it's already the case for some gank activities, not in what concerns mining barges Sure it is, if you choose it to be. You see, it's already quite easy to make the gankers require organisation and effort to get their kills. What's shown by thousands and thousands of killmails is that miners don't fit a tank, and thus get blown up to no-one's surprise but their own.
GǪwasn't even mentioned so what's your point?
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|

Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
552
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 20:07:00 -
[690] - Quote
Arvantis Sauril wrote:Quote:
Nothing show your claiming is true, what is true on the other hand is that now you will be able to mine in low/null and have enough tank so your friends come help you, this is good for the game.
Now you need REAL organisations and EFFORT to achieve the same ganking, leading to more ships destroyed witch is also good for the game.
As you can see, there's no problem, just cry babies tears by millions of M3
This is good for the game!!!! But only if there are more reasons for people to be out in low and null. Mining, missioning, whatever. If everyone is generating income behind Concord, this game doesn't happen. I'm just worried, with what I understand of CCP's track record, that even if this is their vision (Which would be a good vision) it will take 2 + years to get there...
There are already more reasons and there will be more reasons sooner than later:
-ring mining? -new DED complexes? -Station and POS changes about to hit?
And you know what? -those making gazillions of isk in high sec are not really those so called "bad at eve" carebears, sure 100% of those are null alliances alts using high sec facilities and concord protection to make their costs get even lower with still higher profits from null sec activities.
Again, I live in null and never claim I know better than everyone whatever crap thing, but this kind of thread and most threads where I see null sec guys come trying to give lessons of e-honour, how the game should be played by others etc just makes me really laugh. You know it's the story of the thief and the guy surveying, the thief gets caught and so the other guy but he just doesn't understand why he's also in jail. You see where the problem is? brb |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 119 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |