So you pretty much hand over PI to the larger alliances, **** over smaller solo players, and make Hi-sec more like low-sec and null-sec which stupidly is considered a "good thing".

PI was a boring piece of crap anyway so - goodbye PI.

In your aka the particularly ugly case of an alliance that is devoted to make the gameplay experience for all people of this game worse and unenjoyable: Yes, definitely heaven forbid. Your attitude alone proves all the negative sentiments against your alliance/coalition.

The problem is (as always and in US history) is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and we all suffer from the short-sighted greed that is your master plan or that plan of anyone being so space-rich they run out of ideas except to terrorize other people.

Wow - like I'm suppose to believe that key planets near well-known industrial sectors and Jita won't be taken over by the GOON turds or other Nul-sec alliances..

Yeah - why balance anything in the game right? Why should ships be balanced? Anyone who has a trillion bucks should be able to push an I win button and that will make it fun for all new subscribers and all the rest of the players in the sand box.

Thank you Einstein - let me ring you up when I'm thinking about building a new fun and varied MMO.

While you seem to think that things should be handed to the big guy.

I believe he and others don't want to see the system itself simply pull something they have out of their hands and handed over to the biggest alliances.

Given those opposing views, taking a stance somewhere in the middle would be the way to find balance, no?

Sooooooo if GEWNS start bashing an Interbus CO, players can't defend it or fight you back unless they pay to wardec you. That fee is higher for large alliances like you than anyone else in the game.

That's your idea of an even playing field?

I like the proposal generally, I just want to see some details reconsidered.

I think here is the problem in a nutshell. The idea that Eve must "get away from it's safe industrial base." I disagree. I think there is room in the sand box for both types of play. There is plenty of PvP in low-sec and nul-sec. Not every player in Eve wants to PvP - some actually want to build stuff, and do it in the relative safety of hi-sec.

The problem has been this insistence that the Builders of Eve must also be PvP'rs. I think that makes the sand box smaller.

There is plenty of ways to expand the game and make the game more exciting for nul-sec alliances other than just opening up hi-sec to them. It's just too bad CPP doesn't have the imagination or creativity to think of better ways than this idiotic hi-sec POCO plan (at least the way it stands now.)

But okay, what do you think about my recommendation that pilots shooting at Interbus COs should get a suspect flag? Or should those pilots be protected by CONCORD while they are doing this?

I am sorry, I read that as:

Ablooo bloo bloo, mean old high secc'ers might shoot at our nullbears while we take over their space.

Did I get that right?

Give me a fukken break. Maybe this is why hi-sec Industrialists don't want to deal with the nul-sec sociopathic crowd ...

This is the exact kind of nul-sec sheeeeet that players in hi-sec want to avoid. So much for a sand box where people can play the way the want eh? Not if you got Goon turds on the CSM ...

WE REALLY NEED A TOOL TO DO BOYCOTT. PLEASE CREATE IT.

If you want war every where, accept that the economical war is a way to do it.

Charters or some sort of low cost "fuel" seem like a good idea to keep this from becoming scatter and forget. Local involvement in their operation will lead to more interaction with the other players in the area. Or should this just be a passive hands off money print?

Except you have to compete with low and nullsec PI. Margins are already thin on highsec PI. Easily could end up paying to do this. If the goal is to make this infeasible, probably would be cheaper and easier to just remove PI from high sec entirely.