|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
8794
   |
Posted - 2014.10.30 03:52:17 -
[1] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:Because being able to shoot corp mates without concord intervention makes no sense? I can't shoot blues and I can't shoot alliance mates w/o concord, so why should corps be any different?
Either pay the war dec fee or lose the aggressing ship to concord. It's not a hard concept.
The idea is a bad one, becuase it means corp recruiters get to stop being cautious about who the let into their high sec corp.
EVE is a game, the fun is in the conflcit and the danger, not in everyone holding hands singing Kuumbya in peace. The game should move towards MORE conflict and danger and ways for people to screw with each other, not away from it.
Notice how EVE was a more robust game (and how CCP was able to tout growing subscription numbers) when the game didn't have all this touchy feely crap like safeties and such? I "grew up" as a player (and learned to survive the game as a pve player) during those times, when EVE resembled a Biker Bar. Now it's starting to feel like a drum circle at UC Berkely where everyone is encouraged to talk about their feelings while monitoring their rising estrogen levels. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
8795
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 04:25:21 -
[2] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:*carebear bullshit*
I don't understand why people play a multiplayer video game if they don't like conflict and danger.
I've resisted the urge to invite mission runners I don't know into my corp because of the potential for awoxxing (which is why I only let friends in and don't charge any tax). After this change, I won't have to worry about that, I can set my corp tax to some low percent, invite mission runners to come (enticing them with access to some things like the abilty to go rat/mine in null if they want to sometimes) and sit back and rake in the isk from doing very little. I'd benifit from the change.
It's still a bad idea. Some people don't have the ability to see past their own narrow and self interested perspective (looking at you Potato), but the rest of us understand that making a sandbox pvp game 'safer' for anyone (except actual true "just subbed" newbies) is bad for the game. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
8795
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 04:48:59 -
[3] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:*carebear bullshit* It's still a bad idea. Some people don't have the ability to see past their own narrow and self interested perspective (looking at you Potato) I live and pew in low/null. I don't shoot red crosses for my isk, I trade. Do enlighten me on my "self interest" in this issue, that should be good.
I don't know what you do. I don't particularily care. But the fact that you don't understand why this is a bad idea tells me all I need to know.
You are letting your prejudice (against awoxxers) augment your ignorance (since you don't live in high sec as you say, you are ignorant here). By your own admission I'm more at risk fom awoxxing than you are, yet even I can see why CCP constantly adding more and more safety to this game is bad (even when it benefits me personally). |
|
|
| |
|