| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 76 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Jenshae Chiroptera
1470
   |
Posted - 2015.05.05 11:11:00 -
[481] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Nothing will change the fact that people not prepared to fight for their space will lose it. What fozzie sov does is reduce the size of the groups likely to dispute a challenger. What more would you want or expect of it? The same people will fight, the same people will mooch around in the safest systems. Sgt Ocker wrote:Nariya Kentaya wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:. We would like to remove these bonuses in future, but we donGÇÖt feel nullsec industry is in a sufficiently strong place that it would be prudent to do so right now.[/i] CCP should reduce the bonuses on black ops and industrials by 10% each month. actually, that would be a wonderful idea to go ahead and give nullsec a kcik and force them to start prepping for the eventual change. Would it possibly be smaller groups trying to establish themselves...? You would be surprised what a few miners and blockade runners with a scout, POS and BPCs can accomplish. 
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
228
|
Posted - 2015.05.05 20:08:30 -
[482] - Quote
Honestly, EVE has never been nor shall it ever be a sandbox game. I have never been in a sandbox where parts of it go into protected mode when a certain person isnt there to protect their sandcastle.
If you want EVE to move in the direction it appears you do then the complete removal of all protection of assets not provided by players in ships guarding it should be eliminated. Personally id hate the game but that would push the game more towards the sandbox mantra that many players claim is true of EVE and that CCP boasts about but which i said earlier EVE is not.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
16322
|
Posted - 2015.05.05 20:14:41 -
[483] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Malcanis wrote:Nothing will change the fact that people not prepared to fight for their space will lose it. What fozzie sov does is reduce the size of the groups likely to dispute a challenger. What more would you want or expect of it? The same people will fight, the same people will mooch around in the safest systems.
What does that even mean? I can't even tell if that means you're agreeing or disagreeing with me, because it could easily be read either way.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Tess Storm
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
7
|
Posted - 2015.05.05 20:37:02 -
[484] - Quote
The sandbox isnt shrinking. With fatigue up to 4-5 days, why log in?
Oh, you say: you didnt wait an hour?
Lots of better things to do than just sit and wait. |
Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
184
|
Posted - 2015.05.05 22:54:37 -
[485] - Quote
Every sandbox has four walls.
The chaos is a deception, it's all held together by rules.
The move to smaller group play is also mirrored in other games. Smaller raids in WoW, and emphasis on five player groups for MOBAs.
It may seem like four big groups will forever hold EVE space in thrall.
But remember when we used to think that about Yahoo and MySpace?
Now it's Google and Facebook.
Even if CCP changed nothing eventually the power blocs in EVE would change.
This adjustment makes it more likely to happen, because more groups now exert more influence.
~
~~
Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox.
~~
~
|
Sgt Ocker
Burning Sky Labs
440
|
Posted - 2015.05.06 01:24:53 -
[486] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:
And who would you think benefit most from forcing self reliance without creating a new balance of power?
Would it possibly be smaller groups trying to establish themselves OR the few dominating groups who already control such large expanses of space.
Infrastructure or lack of, is a minor component of self sustainability in nulsec. Availability of materials needed to support an alliance has far more impact than lack of a pos or station.
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: You would be surprised what a few miners and blockade runners with a scout, POS and BPCs can accomplish.
What building a few T1 ships or modules in a deserted back water system somewhere in NPC nulsec?
Or do you run to highsec to buy materials for a bit of T2 manufacturing?
Anyway - No I wouldn't at all be surprised, that is exactly how I got started, out in Curse, many years ago. Although I didn't have blockade runners, for a long time I used T1 haulers.
I made some isk, spent more time micro managing everything than I did anything else and so; gave it up once I realized, that was as far as I'd get if I didn't change up. (made more isk manufacturing and selling T1 ammo in the Domain in 6 months, than I did in nearly 2 years worrying about losing everything i owned if some gang decided to kill my pos in npc nul)
4 or 5 people in npc nul eking out a living in a backwater system isn't what I was referring to with snippet of my post you so selectively quoted. Keeping my original post (above) in context, there is a big difference between a few miners with blockade runners and a pos and a small group (small alliance) trying to take sov and make it pay.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
|
Sgt Ocker
Burning Sky Labs
440
|
Posted - 2015.05.06 02:13:36 -
[487] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Nothing will change the fact that people not prepared to fight for their space will lose it. What fozzie sov does is reduce the size of the groups likely to dispute a challenger. What more would you want or expect of it?
Yep those who don't want to fight for their sov will still lose it and those who do want to fight but are simply overwhelmed by opposing numbers will still lose. No change there.
Two or three minor changes to the way (the proposal states) Entosis links do their thing, would "change" the sov game, instead of just moving it slightly away from having to pay sov bills on unused space.
Put the proposal forward a few months in advance - then nothing (not even a curt, "we saw the feedback") - now a month till it is supposed to go live and ? ?
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
16324
|
Posted - 2015.05.06 08:32:17 -
[488] - Quote
Seems to me like quite a bit of feedback was taken on board, but it seems like you're determined to lose before the game even starts, so contrary facts aren't relevant.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Sgt Ocker
Burning Sky Labs
440
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 02:45:14 -
[489] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Seems to me like quite a bit of feedback was taken on board, but it seems like you're determined to lose before the game even starts, so contrary facts aren't relevant.
Wouldn't know if feedback has been taken on board or not, nothing has been said.
Certain groups may be privy to what feedback has or hasn't achieved but i'm not in one of those groups and only have 2 month old info to base my thoughts and feeling about the coming change on.
I wonder if not keeping players updated on what is gong on has anything to do with my seemingly contrary stance.
The ONLY facts at hand, are the ONLY relevant thing.
Less than 1 month from now the new sov game comes into play. At this rate we will get to see it what, a week, 2 if we're lucky before it goes live?
One of the most important changes to game play in years, that will hit the servers with little to no testing and no time (possibly deliberately) for player feedback to be relevant.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
36956
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 02:55:53 -
[490] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Wouldn't know if feedback has been taken on board or not, nothing has been said.
Certain groups may be privy to what feedback has or hasn't achieved but i'm not in one of those groups and only have 2 month old info to base my thoughts and feeling about the coming change on.
Everyone can see what has been said following feedback. No special group needed.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Sgt Ocker
Burning Sky Labs
440
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 03:41:57 -
[491] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Wouldn't know if feedback has been taken on board or not, nothing has been said.
Certain groups may be privy to what feedback has or hasn't achieved but i'm not in one of those groups and only have 2 month old info to base my thoughts and feeling about the coming change on. No special group needed to see what has been taken on board from the feedback so far. Here is for example, the next iteration in the entosis link as a result of feedback: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=416259&find=unread
There are bits and pieces around on other things too, though nothing I've seen so far on the primetime mechanic following the questionaire that was published. That would be good to have an update on. Posting completely off topic - Why not...
Sorry but I don't see anything there that has anything to do with entosis links or the looming sov changes. There is NO reference to them at all in the OP's post. As it is about icons on SISI, I wouldn't expect it to make reference to the Entosis link.
Maybe you linked the wrong thread??
As for the new icons, yeah, got on SISI, not impressed. Little grey circles and squares, with white highlights to tell them apart. 30 years ago when I could see well enough they may have been ok (not good, just ordinary and possibly practical) but now they are just really hard to tell apart.
Don't fix what ain't broke, is a great analogy here.
It is a reasonable ploy to distract attention from the important changes though. Keep players thinking about mundane unnecessary changes then just drop in the major game changers with little to no feedback.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
36956
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 04:19:26 -
[492] - Quote
Maybe you clicked the wrong link.
It links to the Features & Ideas discussion on Entosis Link Part 2.
Thought that was totally on topic, but whatever, you seem determined to see things only a certain way, so I'm sure the new mechanics will turn out exactly as you expect because you seem to have already drawn all your conclusions about them anyway.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Solecist Project
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
23896
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 11:13:07 -
[493] - Quote
Are we dead yet?
S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD
|
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
3512
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 20:10:27 -
[494] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Nothing will change the fact that people not prepared to fight for their space will lose it. What fozzie sov does is reduce the size of the groups likely to dispute a challenger. What more would you want or expect of it?
Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'small groups', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of larger, better organized groups.
73% of EVE characters stay in high security space. 62% of EVE subscribers barely PvP. 40% of all new accounts just "level up their Ravens". Probably that's why PvE content in EVE Online is sub-par and CCP is head over heels for PvP...
|
Sgt Ocker
Burning Sky Labs
440
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 21:57:41 -
[495] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Maybe you clicked the wrong link.
It links to the Features & Ideas discussion on Entosis Link Part 2.
Thought that was totally on topic, especially in relation to your concern that there has been nothing further from CCP since the original devblog.
Except that isn't the thread that was originally linked.
It originally linked to the thread for the proposed new icons.
Hard to click the wrong link when there is only one link there.
Maybe you having edited the link, made the difference.
On topic response to your edited one - The changes are ok but still don't address the fundamental "troll" use of the module.
When one alliance has to battle the combined efforts of 8 or 9 attacking alliances as a single entity, numbers win.
If each group (alliance) with an active entosis was and individual attacker it would lower the ease with which a smaller alliance could simply be overwhelmed by large groups from various alliances working together.
Every entosis link activated on a given structure should be an individual attack that needs to be overcome by every other entosis link before any capture progress is made.
Simply - If the concept proposed in the original blog for undefended structures applied to defended structures as well, it would open up the playing field.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
1484
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 23:28:03 -
[496] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Seems to me like quite a bit of feedback was taken on board, but it seems like you're determined to lose before the game even starts, so contrary facts aren't relevant. The very basis of it, that one ship can flip a station in under an hour is broken.
The whole approach is flawed and will be griefer's paradise.
Instead of swinging at the coalitions with a sledge hammer, they should create space where smaller groups could grow to challenge the Null alliances.
The current plan will be:
1) Too annoying to defend
2) A great honey trap
3) Leave people wide open for extortion
It is all built on the premises that
1) people will fight,
2) it will be just the two engagements
3) people will actually want the SOV.
Instead, the best approach is to just let them take the system, then come back and keep annoying them until they give up or just flip it blue later from free port.
Base out of NPC Null or Low Sec, control moons and just mess with the Null SOV.
You need ratting and mining indexes high but at the same time Infrastructure Hubs are going to pop so easily that you can't get those indexes up.
It is going to be an absolute nightmare for any smaller sized group to develop with all the larger coaltions stomping them for "tears" and "lulz".
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
36994
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 23:39:18 -
[497] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Except that isn't the thread that was originally linked.
It originally linked to the thread for the proposed new icons.
No, I never changed the link, nor posted off topic.
Maybe you had a different tab open or something, but the link was not edited. You even quoted it, so click the one in your quote.
Otherwise, feel free to submit a support ticket and ask because the link wasn't edited at all.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Sgt Ocker
Burning Sky Labs
440
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 03:45:34 -
[498] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Except that isn't the thread that was originally linked.
It originally linked to the thread for the proposed new icons. No, I never changed the link, nor posted off topic. Maybe you had a different tab open or something, but the link was not edited. You even quoted it, so click the one in your quote.
LOL, if you read my reply.. I DID respond to the link you posted, it starts out - As for the new icons.
Maybe is was a misdirected URL but that is the thread the link took me to. I would not have commented on the icons otherwise, I had not at the time seen the thread about them.
That aside. The newest proposal for the sov team is getting closer to good.
Still missing that "something" to encourage new comers to vie for sov.
In fact this latest iteration of "prime time, vulnerability windows" is an absolute deterrent to any new group entering the sov game.
18 hours per day vulnerability for at least the 1st week (longer if your sov is actually being contested) is just way too much.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
|
DaReaper
Net 7
2019
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 03:52:21 -
[499] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Except that isn't the thread that was originally linked.
It originally linked to the thread for the proposed new icons. No, I never changed the link, nor posted off topic. Maybe you had a different tab open or something, but the link was not edited. You even quoted it, so click the one in your quote. LOL, if you read my reply.. I DID respond to the link you posted, it starts out - As for the new icons. Maybe is was a misdirected URL but that is the thread the link took me to. I would not have commented on the icons otherwise, I had not at the time seen the thread about them. That aside. The newest proposal for the sov team is getting closer to good. Still missing that "something" to encourage new comers to vie for sov. In fact this latest iteration of "prime time, vulnerability windows" is an absolute deterrent to any new group entering the sov game. 18 hours per day vulnerability for at least the 1st week (longer if your sov is actually being contested) is just way too much.
no its not. you can get both the industry and military index to like 1 maybe 2 in a day. that would shrink your 18 hours down to like 8.
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
36995
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 04:22:04 -
[500] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:LOL, if you read my reply.. I DID respond to the link you posted, it starts out - As for the new icons.
Maybe is was a misdirected URL but that is the thread the link took me to. I would not have commented on the icons otherwise, I had not at the time seen the thread about them.
I have never even looked at the icons thread.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
3513
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 06:50:44 -
[501] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Malcanis wrote:Seems to me like quite a bit of feedback was taken on board, but it seems like you're determined to lose before the game even starts, so contrary facts aren't relevant. The very basis of it, that one ship can flip a station in under an hour is broken. The whole approach is flawed and will be griefer's paradise. Instead of swinging at the coalitions with a sledge hammer, they should create space where smaller groups could grow to challenge the Null alliances. The current plan will be: 1) Too annoying to defend 2) A great honey trap 3) Leave people wide open for extortion It is all built on the premises that 1) people will fight, 2) it will be just the two engagements 3) people will actually want the SOV. Instead, the best approach is to just let them take the system, then come back and keep annoying them until they give up or just flip it blue later from free port. Base out of NPC Null or Low Sec, control moons and just mess with the Null SOV. You need ratting and mining indexes high but at the same time Infrastructure Hubs are going to pop so easily that you can't get those indexes up. It is going to be an absolute nightmare for any smaller sized group to develop with all the larger coaltions stomping them for "tears" and "lulz".
Not to mention that any small group trying to set up a foothold will be forced to do it in the useless space left outside of the big groups' territory.
Those who hold worthy territories can defend them and those willing to hold uncontested territory will be forced to do it against the larger groups and without income because only barren lands are left uncontested. What could go wrong? 
There is no way in which a Sovereignty system is useful to small groups and acceptable to the big guys. The moment the big guys agree to any new Sov system, small groups are screwed by it.
"In other news, the old system which required large amounts of ships, a thorough organization and holding key territories, will be replaced with a completely new system which favors having large amounts of ships, keeping a thorough organization and holding key territories."
And now remember: this amazing feat of prowess to change everything in Sovereignty so everything in Sovereignty stays the same is taking resources from everything else in the game.
73% of EVE characters stay in high security space. 62% of EVE subscribers barely PvP. 40% of all new accounts just "level up their Ravens". Probably that's why PvE content in EVE Online is sub-par and CCP is head over heels for PvP...
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
36995
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 06:59:10 -
[502] - Quote
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:Not to mention that any small group trying to set up a foothold will be forced to do it in the useless space left outside of the big groups' territory.
That has been the core of a lot of feedback though, that unless the space is worth having, why go take it?
CCP seem to at least be listening to that. I agree with them that no region should be independent of others as resource shortages help fuel conflict, but there definitely needs to be more than an epeen reason to take sov for a small group.
They need to be able to survive and thrive in their space too. That will only encourage them to defend it better.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
16329
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 07:15:45 -
[503] - Quote
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Not to mention that any small group trying to set up a foothold will be forced to do it in the useless space left outside of the big groups' territory.
Delve, Fountain, Querious are "useless space", you heard it here first, folks!
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Lifelongnoob
The Motley Crew Reborn
26
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 09:54:44 -
[504] - Quote
i wonder what impact destructible stations will have on null sec?
without more npc null sec systems scattered around the outer fringes of new eden i suspect sov null inhabitants will drop once sov null outpost are destructible.
people wont want to risk leaving their stuff in sov null and then having to go salvage a station wreck to get their stuff back. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
1489
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 16:39:08 -
[505] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:... but there definitely needs to be more than an epeen reason to take sov for a small group. .... It is not for ISK.
Yes, I am in Provi, however, High Sec Incursions and WH diving far out strip mining, ratting or exploration in Null Sec.
Null Sec is a great big sucking hole for ISK. The ships you lose, the structures you put up, all the hidden costs, just wait until infrastructure hubs have to be replaced every five minutes and many ships are lost doing Entosis defenses with SRP to see the costs really sky rocket.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Halet Cu
Unemployed Pilots Association
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 19:59:47 -
[506] - Quote
CCP Falcon, I would be really interested to hear whether your perspective of the new and improved "Eve by numbers" has changed your "opinion" as quoted above.[/quote]
I'm glad you feel that way so here goes. ( sorry I didn't quote everything CCP Falcon said, but I wouldn't have room for what I needed to say)Top of thread if your interested.
CCP Falcon,I don't believe anything you said in your response really addresses the concerns of the OP. Anyone who plays Eve knows it can be a ball-buster at times. That kinda goes without saying. However, ball busting IN GAME is different than getting your balls busted because CCP is making multiple rapid fire changes that have a huge impact of things like sov. Please note that I DON'T object to the changes (well most of them) only the RATE of change.
Patches are coming out fast and furious. While I don't spend the majority of my time in null sec I feel for those who do. I think most players can/will adapt to their corporations being uprooted for various reasons... every now and then. But when you add in things like nerfs to cap ships that force null sec corps make major changes in deployment of resources while simultaneous turning those cap ships "white elephants" thereby forcing many corporations to give up large amounts of hard won territory too, then it becomes problematic. That has nothing to do with Eve being a rough and tumble game, it has to do moving the goalposts around.
That said, I have enormous respect for the devs, their commitment to the Eve community and their desire to make a good product even better. My only recommendation would be if you're going to make big changes that have large strategic and logistical consequences, take it slowly. The cap ship and sov changes could have been spaced further apart to avoid patch whiplash.
Eve has proven it's durability over the last 12 years and will likely be around for at least another decade. What's the hurry?
|
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
3516
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 07:09:50 -
[507] - Quote
Just one funny fact.
The price and traded amount of white glaze and Caldari fuel blocks in Jita are going down, and have been for months.
Less demand for ore + less demand for fuel = less towers consuming it + less industry? 
73% of EVE characters stay in high security space. 62% of EVE subscribers barely PvP. 40% of all new accounts just "level up their Ravens". Probably that's why PvE content in EVE Online is sub-par and CCP is head over heels for PvP...
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
37009
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 07:23:40 -
[508] - Quote
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:Just one funny fact. The price and traded amount of white glaze and Caldari fuel blocks in Jita are going down, and have been for months. Less demand for ore + less demand for fuel = less towers consuming it + less industry?
Could be people mining and consuming more of their own locally. Could just as easily be a sign of increased industry activity.
It could also be a sign of increased industry activity in stations following the changes to blueprint requirements with POS use.
It's not really conclusive one way or the other.
Only CCP's metrics could say conclusively.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Eve Solecist
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
2862
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 07:28:49 -
[509] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:Just one funny fact. The price and traded amount of white glaze and Caldari fuel blocks in Jita are going down, and have been for months. Less demand for ore + less demand for fuel = less towers consuming it + less industry? Could be people mining and consuming more of their own locally. Could just as easily be a sign of increased industry activity. It could also be a sign of increased industry activity in stations following the changes to blueprint requirements with POS use. It's not really conclusive one way or the other. Only CCP's metrics could say conclusively.
Haven't you heard? The game is losing subs.
The 40k we almost reached last week on sunday mean nothing.
Absolutely nothing.
Of course.
Do you notice how people blend out everything and pick every little straw
they find to get someone to tell them they're right?
No matter how many points have been debunked,
any small detail that might indicate anything even indirectly related to their point ...
... no matter the actual context ...
... suddenly proves them right.
Again and again.
...
Hey, you're right!
Eve is dying!
Thanks for letting us know.
/thread.
Abolish Rookiecorps
ISD Ezwal > And then Ezwal comes along and takes all that space(s) away.
Him after realising rigs don't need any skills: Chris Lazeare > That changes everything
|
Sgt Ocker
Burning Sky Labs
450
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 10:09:56 -
[510] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:... but there definitely needs to be more than an epeen reason to take sov for a small group. .... It is not for ISK. Yes, I am in Provi, however, High Sec Incursions and WH diving far out strip mining, ratting or exploration in Null Sec. Null Sec is a great big sucking hole for ISK. The ships you lose, the structures you put up, all the hidden costs, just wait until infrastructure hubs have to be replaced every five minutes and many ships are lost doing Entosis defenses with SRP to see the costs really sky rocket.
Those alliances who can afford SRP will be ok for the most part. They are generally well established, with reasonable income streams.
For any independent group considering a move to sov nul;
The ever rolling and soon, increasing cost of taking and holding sov only adds further barriers for anyone without a blue army.
The proposed changes are likely to do little more than create a bit of nuisance value for a few months. While at the same time weeding out those who can't afford the upkeep and time required to maintain sov.
There are some very good aspects to the new proposal, as long as they are implemented in the right way.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 76 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |