Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Natsett Amuinn
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1740
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 14:27:00 -
[271] - Quote
Thutmose I wrote:
From what I understood from what you say, you PvP quite a lot, You are a player, and you compete with the other players who sell things in VFK, doesn't competition between players count as PvP?
I don't subscribe to that.
Yes, it's competition. Yes, it's other people I'm competing with.
I don't really want to get into this arguement though, it's silly.
Let's just say that when I say "PvP" I'm talking entirely about interfering with another person, in space. Whether that be bumping, ganking, or legalling exploding them.
Calling what I do "PvP", to me, is the equivilent of a guy calling himself a proffesional fighter, when he's an unranked amatuer. |
Thutmose I
Paxton Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 14:39:00 -
[272] - Quote
Natsett Amuinn wrote:Thutmose I wrote:
From what I understood from what you say, you PvP quite a lot, You are a player, and you compete with the other players who sell things in VFK, doesn't competition between players count as PvP?
I don't subscribe to that. Yes, it's competition. Yes, it's other people I'm competing with. I don't really want to get into this arguement though, it's silly. Let's just say that when I say "PvP" I'm talking entirely about interfering with another person, in space. Whether that be bumping, ganking, or legalling exploding them. Calling what I do "PvP", to me, is the equivilent of a guy calling himself a proffesional fighter, when he's an unranked amatuer.
I was mainly going based on the convention where playing the market is refered to as "market PvP", I agree there is a distinction between combat/interference PvP and market PvP.
It is similar to how one could say that a fraction of gankers are actually miners. They are mining for Tears. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7532
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 15:13:00 -
[273] - Quote
Natsett Amuinn wrote:Thutmose I wrote:
From what I understood from what you say, you PvP quite a lot, You are a player, and you compete with the other players who sell things in VFK, doesn't competition between players count as PvP?
I don't subscribe to that. Yes, it's competition. Yes, it's other people I'm competing with. I don't really want to get into this arguement though, it's silly. Let's just say that when I say "PvP" I'm talking entirely about interfering with another person, in space. Whether that be bumping, ganking, or legalling exploding them. Calling what I do "PvP", to me, is the equivilent of a guy calling himself a proffesional fighter, when he's an unranked amatuer.
What you do is PvP in the most literal sense. Call it "market PvP" vs "Combat PvP" if it helps, but trying to deny that the fighting that happens through the market interface is PvP is nonsensical, regardless of how it "feels". Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Debora Tsung
The Investment Bankers Guild
38
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 15:31:00 -
[274] - Quote
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Being a goon doesn't put more content in our systems, nor does it make it better to produce T2 goods in null sec.
What a shock. The largest group of null players are constantly on the forums, pointing out the same things over and over. Almost like you've got this huge cross segement of players who have played in more than just a single are of EVE, to know what they're talking about.
Whoda thunk it, right?
In this case I believe It's less about what You said right now but more about the changes some of Your fellow goonies proposed in the past while at the same time giving the impression that they actually belived what they said. :)
Some of those changes proposed were, in short, attrociously bad to say the least and others simply would've put the goons in a position were they would've been the only ones with any noteworthy capacity for T2 production.
While that might not be Your own agenda it's those posts that will be seen as Your agenda since You belong to the same alliance.
Sad but true. There's nothing a million chinese guys can't do cheaper. |
Michael Nezerol
Silence of the Silver Night
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 15:43:00 -
[275] - Quote
How about the following?
- Reduction in production slots in High Sec (not as steep as from 20 to 10, but more like to 15 or so) - The 'ABC' minerals can only be found in 0-sec, and upon entering high sec an 50-100% 'fee' gets charged by C-Sec (what reason they'll use, dunno yet. Have to think that one up). Not only this will make production within 0-sec more viable (because the production costs within high sec will rise), also smuggling will get more interesting again. - Bump up of the production costs and times in high sec (times x4, costs x2).
- POS'es are easier to get destroyed depending on how much POSes the alliance/corp has. The more POSes, the easier to destroy. - Limiting of jumpbridges and the like.
This to make 0-sec more viable as a production/mining/trading center, while also making it easier for 'new' alliances to jump into 0-sec. (Because if you're honest, you have to admit 0-sec has become such a stalemate because of the massive alliances/NAPs) |
Rellik B00n
Lethal Death Squad
250
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 15:48:00 -
[276] - Quote
Natsett Amuinn wrote:Rellik B00n wrote:so perhaps like this: your personal 4 point plan (quarters) for what CCP should be working on in 2013. im tired atm so i dont want to waste mine but maybe a few bullet points could help any influential people that drop by the thread Give high sec coroporations the ability to control stations in all .7-.5 systems so that they can set tax and manufacturing rates, as well as the focus of the station. Player corporation should control the flow of T2 products, and be able to tax NPC corp members. I even have a post in the featrues and ideas forums about focusing on high sec industrial corporations. I don't CCP to "nerf" high sec, I want them to put high sec in the hands of the people who leave the NPC corps.
from the OP:
Rellik B00n wrote:
to those of us living freely in our own area of the sandbox ask the following:
of a given request for change, who will benefit most?
I read your original post in F&I about this change over in the .7 - .5 systems. I cannot help but zero in on this one point because I have to wonder: who does benefit from this change?
We give all those stations to player corps, what then? Null sec declares war on all of them? Net result: null sec take control of all these stations. This goes back to the OP and its suggestion of hidden agendas (even if it is a bit :tinfoil:) - in the end .7 - .5 just become part of the blue donut and the space in the middle of the donut gets much smaller.
Or am I wrong? please look at my thread in F&I about stealth and camo in EvE |
baltec1
Bat Country
5001
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 15:52:00 -
[277] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:baltec1 wrote:March rabbit wrote:baltec1 wrote:We did do something about it but the high sec bears put an end to it. exactly "you did do something...". killed like 10% of botters and 90% of people while "fighting bots". Don't you think anyone forgot about those "tears" everyone were crying about? Bots don't produce it. SO once you said "tears" you show - you fight real people. It was more like like 60% bots. They were very easy to spot as they would continue mining in a pod or go grab another barge we would then pop. The tears came from the botting websites which I must say were glorious. even with such easy spotting you managed to kill 40% of real players? such a great job! I guess everyone will agree to any medical operation with such conditions.... you really don't see anything wrong here? No. The plan was to make money, the destruction of hundreds of bots was just a very welcome side effect. |
Michael Nezerol
Silence of the Silver Night
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 15:53:00 -
[278] - Quote
Natsett Amuinn wrote:Rellik B00n wrote:so perhaps like this: your personal 4 point plan (quarters) for what CCP should be working on in 2013. im tired atm so i dont want to waste mine but maybe a few bullet points could help any influential people that drop by the thread Give high sec coroporations the ability to control stations in all .7-.5 systems so that they can set tax and manufacturing rates, as well as the focus of the station. Player corporation should control the flow of T2 products, and be able to tax NPC corp members. I even have a post in the featrues and ideas forums about focusing on high sec industrial corporations. I don't CCP to "nerf" high sec, I want them to put high sec in the hands of the people who leave the NPC corps.
And that latter (I bolded it) is exactly how it will work out... while EVE is (especially outside highsec) an PvP game, there also should still be room for casuals - and in case highsec gets handed over to the 0-sec alliances, chances are VERY high that as a casual you won't get 'into the game' anymore. I speak from experience with other games where control of 'casual' areas got handed over to large alliances. Well, it killed those games in the end.
|
March rabbit
Aliastra
517
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 15:55:00 -
[279] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:March rabbit wrote:baltec1 wrote:March rabbit wrote:baltec1 wrote:We did do something about it but the high sec bears put an end to it. exactly "you did do something...". killed like 10% of botters and 90% of people while "fighting bots". Don't you think anyone forgot about those "tears" everyone were crying about? Bots don't produce it. SO once you said "tears" you show - you fight real people. It was more like like 60% bots. They were very easy to spot as they would continue mining in a pod or go grab another barge we would then pop. The tears came from the botting websites which I must say were glorious. even with such easy spotting you managed to kill 40% of real players? such a great job! I guess everyone will agree to any medical operation with such conditions.... you really don't see anything wrong here? No. The plan was to make money, the destruction of hundreds of bots was just a very welcome side effect. and here we have reasons why those legendary "high sec bears" from your first post put an end to it.
And you know: there is nothing wrong with stopping people from making money from you. |
Michael Nezerol
Silence of the Silver Night
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 15:57:00 -
[280] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:and here we have reasons why those legendary "high sec bears" from your first post put an end to it. And you know: there is nothing wrong with stopping people from making money from you.
*sighs* Dumb statement... I'm not a 0-seccer, but I had facepalm about that.. |
|
Ginger Barbarella
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1128
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 16:32:00 -
[281] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:
Now that one has been provided, may I assume that the evidence hasn't changed your opinion one tiny iota?
I'm sure you can understand my position that a pie graph is NOT data, and can be modified easier than climate change models. Please provide a link to the data as collected by CCP; pie graphs and unqualified statements at the drunk fest that is Eve Fan Fest aren't the data points that I requested. Thanks. "Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." -á --- Sorlac |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Air The Unthinkables
2764
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 16:33:00 -
[282] - Quote
Sura Sadiva wrote:Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote: Taking Horus into your alliance, or an alliance leader that engages in RMT (Silent Dodger of RA) is a problem that tends to correct itself.
It become relevant when this people use - how did you define yourself? - "the most relevant player driven organization in an MMO" - for their RL business. And hsould be relevant for you guys in the first place, cause you and your gameplay are the main victims of this. Horus has never been part of Goonswarm, nor have I. He has managed to worm his endless supply of alts into White Noise., NCdot, Red Alliance, IRC Spire Collective, Imperial 0rder and most recently The Jagged Alliance. They all died or were evicted from 0.0 not long after his joining. His botted, cheated wealth doesn't go to his corpmates or their warchest, it goes to his bank account. Silent Dodger by RMTing his alliance's savings gutted his alliance's morale and ability to fight and RA under new leadership (because Dodger was thrown out) is struggling to claim one region when by this time last year they owned a dozen regions. If you didn't get this regular result of Horus' parasitical schemings, it's because Horus has a very high estimation of himself and his abilities, one that riverini doesn't challenge.
Riverini, for someone who claims to hate bots, shared an alliance with Horus with seemingly no ethical problems. It's a symbiotic relationship where Horus generates pageviews for riverini's website and in return Horus' rivals and enemies get a spotlight thrown on them by association with Horus. The only thing that suffers is an accurate image of botting in EVE with tons of people getting the impression that it happens in nullsec.
Quote:And while I agree with you that this shouldn't be an argument in a topic related to industry in null sec. Problem is when you start to push as a organized lobby (in some case threating of harrassment and demanding to dictate everyone's gameplay to the whole community and to CCP as well) have to expect people to see and adress everything related to this lobby. It's a diversion that willfully ignores that the vast majority of botting actually occurs in highsec, with single regions overshadowing all of 0.0 space. Incidentally, removing wardec evasion will help solve the highsec botting problem.
Quote:Even the best suggestions will be clouded by considerations like "oh wait, these are those people who had their alliance leader banned for RTM" "this is that group caught for that massive exploit abuse" and so on. You can ignore the opinions and feeling the rest of EVE community have toward you, but it's not wise becauses: CCP cannot ignore it. Goonswarm's CEO hasn't been banned for RMT, nor had Legion of Xdeath or Solar or TEST, etc., not once in 10 years of the game's existence. |
Ginger Barbarella
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1128
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 16:33:00 -
[283] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote: i mostly PvSSARBW (Player vs Serps, Sanshas, Angels, Rogue Drone, Blood Raiders or Whoever) lol.
Hah!! :) Nice, mind if I steal that? Good stuff. "Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." -á --- Sorlac |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7532
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 16:38:00 -
[284] - Quote
Ginger Barbarella wrote:Malcanis wrote:
Now that one has been provided, may I assume that the evidence hasn't changed your opinion one tiny iota?
I'm sure you can understand my position that a pie graph is NOT data, and can be modified easier than climate change models. Please provide a link to the data as collected by CCP; pie graphs and unqualified statements at the drunk fest that is Eve Fan Fest aren't the data points that I requested. Thanks.
Of course I will comply with your request which you know to be impossible. Just as soon as you explain your assertion that Sreegs is deliberately misleading us.
Oh, and prove it of course ;) Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Michael Nezerol
Silence of the Silver Night
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 16:38:00 -
[285] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:ncidentally, removing wardec evasion will help solve the highsec botting problem. And it will hurt players who just don't want to fight a war.... So you want to root out the relative incidental bot by hurting the proverbal 99 others?
|
baltec1
Bat Country
5001
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 16:53:00 -
[286] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:and here we have reasons why those legendary "high sec bears" from your first post put an end to it. And you know: there is nothing wrong with stopping people from making money from you.
Breaking an entire lineup of ships to stop people from killing ships that have no tank fitted isn't wrong? |
Thutmose I
Paxton Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 17:02:00 -
[287] - Quote
Ginger Barbarella wrote:Malcanis wrote:
Now that one has been provided, may I assume that the evidence hasn't changed your opinion one tiny iota?
I'm sure you can understand my position that a pie graph is NOT data, and can be modified easier than climate change models. Please provide a link to the data as collected by CCP; pie graphs and unqualified statements at the drunk fest that is Eve Fan Fest aren't the data points that I requested. Thanks.
Pie charts are data, if you want where it came from, then go find the relevant fanfest video from here: http://www.youtube.com/user/ccpgames
If you are going on the "data can be faked" stance, then those videos may also have been faked, as could the existence of bots, or real players for that matter. Show me proof that you are a real player playing eve and not a bot. This data cannot be in any form of electronic transmission, as those can be faked, neither can be shown to me via my senses, as those are also unreliable. |
Karrl Tian
Exiled Assassins Equestria Alliance
173
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 17:39:00 -
[288] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:Well. Nothing new here. i always say "standard suicide-ganker is just improved version of NPC"
Pity Incursion rats don't actually raid the highsec infrastructure like they're supposed to be doing. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Air The Unthinkables
2765
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 18:23:00 -
[289] - Quote
Michael Nezerol wrote:Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:ncidentally, removing wardec evasion will help solve the highsec botting problem. And it will hurt players who just don't want to fight a war.... So you want to root out the relative incidental bot by hurting the proverbal 99 others? Those players that want to take part in a game centered around a competitve player-driven economy fueled by PVP ship loss, but don't want to take on the costs that fuel the economy themselves? |
Michael Nezerol
Silence of the Silver Night
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 18:25:00 -
[290] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Michael Nezerol wrote:Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:ncidentally, removing wardec evasion will help solve the highsec botting problem. And it will hurt players who just don't want to fight a war.... So you want to root out the relative incidental bot by hurting the proverbal 99 others? Those players that want to take part in a game centered around a competitve player-driven economy fueled by PVP ship loss, but don't want to take on the costs that fuel the economy themselves?
And as a result, they have neither the risk of PvP-ship losses nor the (possible big) reward of destroying others. Cancels each other out, no? |
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Air The Unthinkables
2766
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 18:26:00 -
[291] - Quote
Michael Nezerol wrote:And as a result, they have neither the risk of PvP-ship losses nor the (possible big) reward of destroying others. Cancels each other out, no? No. If nobody PVP'd in EVE and everyone played PVE exclusively the result would not be a net-zero equivalent. Everyone would inject ISK and materials into the economy endlessly with no purchases except for enhancements towards furthing PvE gains, resulting in a feedback loop of cumulative wealth.
Without ships being regularly consumed through PvP and everyone undercutting each other endlessly, the value of occupations and work in the player-driven economy would hit rock bottom through deflation. This is why safe bots injecting ISK and commodities endlessly are bad as well.
Removing things like wardec immunity and NPC corps increases costs of operation in an equal and unbiased manner, said costs are passed along to the consumer, meaning skilled PvE pilots will prosper more then ever and AFK/botter pilots would lose more. |
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
221
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 18:57:00 -
[292] - Quote
I'm having problem in explain what I mean, probably is my bad english. Anyway, I try again:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote: Horus has never been part of Goonswarm, nor have I. He has managed to worm his endless supply of alts into White Noise., NCdot, Red Alliance, IRC Spire Collective, Imperial 0rder and most recently The Jagged Alliance.
The problem is not this or that alliance or if those banned guys were in that coalition or another.
Problem is the perception this minoritary (in term of players) groups as a whole give to the community. And when they pack in a lobby demanding to dicrate their own specific interest people see them as lobby and evaluate all this too.
When a coalition leader chats with a well known botter/RMTers and shows to consider founds from botting the same as T2 blueprint to support a war or host in his coalition a known organization of botters. And all this is considerated accettable and normal. This give an idea to the rest of EvE community.
When a CEO feels the urge to send a general warning like: "hey giys, be carefull, seems now CCP is enforcing the anti-botting/rmt policy" Then this mean something...
When alliance leaders (not some lonely grunt) get caught in some massive RMT this mean something.
Mean everyone in those alliances is guilty? No, of course. But give the idea that things like botting, exploiting, cheatting and so on, is commonly accepted and/or tolleated.
This people is hosted by you, use your standings, use your resources, your taxes, your systems, your logistic, support your wars....
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:The only thing that suffers is an accurate image of botting in EVE with tons of people getting the impression that it happens in nullsec.
Exacctly, and it was just my point. But having always the same people from the same lobby running to negate or minimize the issue only feeds suspects. Even if was only a wrong impression one should consider ti when starting some lobby activitiy (mostly when is only to bring on silly selfish claims).
i.e.: One is not credible in complaining against AFK mining when he host in his coalition botters alliances.
Quote:It's a diversion that willfully ignores that the vast majority of botting actually occurs in highsec, with single regions overshadowing all of 0.0 space. Incidentally, removing wardec evasion will help solve the highsec botting problem.
I totally agree, as well. In any MMORPG the open world PvP always works also to limit botting and such. Problem here is that even so you wouldn't attack them cause they woud proably be blue for you.
Quote: Goonswarm's CEO hasn't been banned for RMT, nor had Legion of Xdeath or Solar or TEST, etc., not once in 10 years of the game's existence.
I know, and I'm sure they're totally clean. But, as you see, is something that needs to be remarked...
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
2420
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 20:35:00 -
[293] - Quote
Natsett Amuinn wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote: Make resources finite and the problems are solved.
Well of course, there's always the drive everyone out of EVE by making the game really suck approach. If we're not playing, we have nothing to complain about. You could really be onto something here.
I said make resources finite, not disappear. If we mined every last bit of metal ore out of the earth and made them into cars, would we be out of metal?
|
Corey Fumimasa
The Advent of Faith
77
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 21:03:00 -
[294] - Quote
Highsec POSGÇÖs are a huge capital investment and while not the majority of production slots they are significant, and they are where most research happens. They are vulnerable to attack. And when they get blown up it is a significant setback for the industrialists involved.
And then thereGÇÖs this constant stream of highsec guys who are unhappy with all the ISK and power that that the null sec corps have. The funny thing is that very few of them could live in null.
GÇ£Arggg hate the blue doughnut!!!! Boring, no conflict!GÇ¥ That from a lot of highseccers WTF.
But from the null sec indi guy GÇ£I canGÇÖt compete out here, change the game for me. I know how to play, I put in my time, and this would make me happy.GÇ¥ How is that any different from that guy last week who wanted to go into lowsec but didnGÇÖt want to put his implants at risk.
Also GÇ£My miner friends all moved to highsec because mining out here isnGÇÖt profitable.GÇ¥ And GÇ£We all have highsec industrial alts because its more profitable.GÇ¥ Maybe nullsec indi isnGÇÖt designed to be profitable, if you want to play that game then thatGÇÖs on you. And WTF if you want highsec mining to be less profitable then stop blowing up highsec miners. Let a glut market do the damage.
Eve isnGÇÖt a good game because it makes things easy. ItGÇÖs hard. Would it be hard for goons to wardec highsec corps 10 or 50 at a time and blow up their POSGÇÖs? Yeah it would. That is no reason to change the game so that itGÇÖs easier for you to compete.
And on that note maybe the highsec group should also stop complaining because it might get to a point where CFC and HBC decide to do just that. It would sure be a lot more interesting than the blue doughnut.
And until Highsec POS's start getting blown up on a big scale there's no reason to complain that highsec players have nothing to fight for.
The real problem with Eve and with HBC/CFC is that a handful of people have too much control, and those people are using that control to make the game interesting for themselves and to hell with everyone else.
This is a youtube playlist going over my first 30 ship losses. Video sucks but the audio came out well.There are some good lessons, and if you know the game there's some funny stories. |
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 21:11:00 -
[295] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Mistah Ewedynao wrote: I would like Wardecs fixed so it costs a large corporation MUCH more than it does now for a War Dec. Stop the purely for Lulz wardecs. Presumably you also advocate a similarly increased penalty for corps which refuse to fight or which simply reform under a new name to evade the wardec. If you're asking the aggressor to pay a significant investment to declare a war, then the defenders must also have a similar investment at stake.
I will go along with costs that reflect the economic reality. My 4 man industrial corp was recently war-decced by a 100 man + Alliance, nothing but an isk shakedown attempt..PERIOD.
Do you actually believe it should cost me a significant amount to dodge that shakedown attempt?
Do you, as a CSM candidate, believe that large entities with more isk, people, assets etc should just be able to grief, bully and/or bankrupt small operations just because they can and have more isk to spend?
Nerf Goons
Nuke em from orbit....it's the only way to be sure. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Air The Unthinkables
2771
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 21:17:00 -
[296] - Quote
It's difficult to imagine these sort of arguments coming from anywhere but highsec.
"do you actually believe I should have to pay something to get out of this gatecamp who have my freighter tackled?"
"do you actually believe an alliance of 1000 should be able to reinforce a POS that belongs to a 100-man corp?" |
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 21:29:00 -
[297] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:It's difficult to imagine these sort of arguments coming from anywhere but highsec.
"do you actually believe I should have to pay something to get out of this gatecamp who have my freighter tackled?"
"do you actually believe an alliance of 1000 should be able to reinforce a POS that belongs to a 100-man corp?"
What is not difficult to imagine is a null-seccer distorting what I said so badly.
Nerf Goons
Nuke em from orbit....it's the only way to be sure. |
Corey Fumimasa
The Advent of Faith
78
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 21:32:00 -
[298] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:It's difficult to imagine these sort of arguments coming from anywhere but highsec.
"do you actually believe I should have to pay something to get out of this gatecamp who have my freighter tackled?"
"do you actually believe an alliance of 1000 should be able to reinforce a POS that belongs to a 100-man corp?" What is not difficult to imagine is a null-seccer distorting what I said so badly.
Just fold up your station and go somewhere else for a week. That is a way to avoid combat that is perfectly scaled to the size of a corp.
This is a youtube playlist going over my first 30 ship losses. Video sucks but the audio came out well.There are some good lessons, and if you know the game there's some funny stories. |
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 21:44:00 -
[299] - Quote
Quote:Just fold up your station and go somewhere else for a week. That is a way to avoid combat that is perfectly scaled to the size of a corp.
well aware of that, it seems like Malcanis thinks that should cost me alot of isk, avoiding the "privledge" of being attacked by a very large enemy, in high sec. Nerf Goons
Nuke em from orbit....it's the only way to be sure. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
1263
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 21:50:00 -
[300] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Quote:Just fold up your station and go somewhere else for a week. That is a way to avoid combat that is perfectly scaled to the size of a corp.
well aware of that, it seems like Malcanis thinks that should cost me alot of isk, avoiding the "privledge" of being attacked by a very large enemy, in high sec.
And he's right.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |