Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1292
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 12:25:40 -
[181] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Make C7 wh. Make them monsters. Give them lots of moons. Give them dual statics. Static 1 is always to another c7. Give that connection liberal mass limits. NO SUPERS in wh space, but a c7/c7 connection that supports dropping 6 caps through it. You can put 3 in and get them back OR you can go all in and drop the fleet through. Make the second static any of the other flavors of wh. Make the c7 limited in number. This will give large groups that want to do wh pvp on a large scale a place to be big and do big things. The other details (amount of effect bonus and such) can be hashed out by the numbers nerds.
CCP theoretically has that opportunity currently with the Shattered Wormholes. Its pretty much a completely new and open space which they could "cater and create" the content needed to handle large wspace groups.
There is a finite amount of people that can really handle 1 wormhole before they either split apart or leave. Every Large Wspace Alliance entity has hit that mark. They outnumber and outgun whoever they run into and pretty much complain about dead content because nobody can really have a outright brawl with them at a moments notice (the 5 cruisers at the sun is merely a fun stopgap).
This was going on in 2012 (this is hardly new, the names have simply changed). Wspace mechanics are fine for the most part, but the space needs to be expanded, NOT contracted. I think the Shattered Systems can hold the solution to that (because they are essentially untouched, and can be modified and changed with little to zero blow-back from the community.
A solution? I don't have it. I see an opportunity, a rare one that hasn't existed in wspace for the past 5 years. Its evolving with the storyline, and CCP has the chance to make a totally new method of sandbox play in wspace to help with the pvp stagnation of c5 and c6 space.
That is how I see it. Any change to wspace itself will be met with A TON of criticism (as merely the topic of this thread has caused). So instead, I would look towards what has not been used and see what can be done to make the game play go there.
Yaay!!!!
|

Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
961
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 13:03:18 -
[182] - Quote
The difference between shattered (which are struggling to find a place) and C7 as proposed is pretty large.
C7 w/ moons means folks can move in. They can be evicted. They can build and that can then be destroyed.
Shattered are just multi connected battlegrounds that really aren't being used that much.
If I've leaned anything over the past decade (more or less) it's that adding more PVE plus signs has never improved the game. Oh I get that they are needed, but they don't make the game better. When I say game I'm referring to pvp (epic fight, hauler gank at a customs office, ganking a pve fleet). Red Plus Signs DO NOT make better content. PVE is a means to isk. The eve community is smart enough as a whole to disect any pve that CCP lays at our feet and post a guide for by the end of the week. Red plus signs are not the answer to more fun.
Just as any new PVE will be mastered quickly, any change to pve that 'drives conflict' or 'creates content' will also quickly be broken down and 'safe farming' will be mastered. It's what we do folks, and we're good at it. Moving farming to the static will more than likely add as much content to the game as the mass/range change did.
Another thought w/ C7 wh. All the good, marginal and outright terrible ideas that have been put forth in this thread can all, any or not be implimented in them. It would be an empty canvas. Go nuts CCP - create. And it's create on the cheap I would think. Just add a few systems and optimize them for large wh groups. The mandatory c7/c7 connection would be the key to conflict. It would make a c7 honey hole not possible. You can even throw in some cool extra benefit for being there (and I personally don't care what that would be).
|

Accountant O'Death
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 15:24:12 -
[183] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:The difference between shattered (which are struggling to find a place) and C7 as proposed is pretty large.
C7 w/ moons means folks can move in. They can be evicted. They can build and that can then be destroyed.
Shattered are just multi connected battlegrounds that really aren't being used that much.
If I've leaned anything over the past decade (more or less) it's that adding more PVE plus signs has never improved the game. Oh I get that they are needed, but they don't make the game better. When I say game I'm referring to pvp (epic fight, hauler gank at a customs office, ganking a pve fleet). Red Plus Signs DO NOT make better content. PVE is a means to isk. The eve community is smart enough as a whole to disect any pve that CCP lays at our feet and post a guide for by the end of the week. Red plus signs are not the answer to more fun.
Just as any new PVE will be mastered quickly, any change to pve that 'drives conflict' or 'creates content' will also quickly be broken down and 'safe farming' will be mastered. It's what we do folks, and we're good at it. Moving farming to the static will more than likely add as much content to the game as the mass/range change did.
Another thought w/ C7 wh. All the good, marginal and outright terrible ideas that have been put forth in this thread can all, any or not be implimented in them. It would be an empty canvas. Go nuts CCP - create. And it's create on the cheap I would think. Just add a few systems and optimize them for large wh groups. The mandatory c7/c7 connection would be the key to conflict. It would make a c7 honey hole not possible. You can even throw in some cool extra benefit for being there (and I personally don't care what that would be).
C7 space interesting; CCP should only add 5 and give them all 50 moons so those meanie weanie c5 and c6 bullies can fight over them using some sort of hybrid null sov ****. |

Obil Que
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
235
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 15:38:22 -
[184] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:
Make C7 wh. Make them monsters. Give them lots of moons. Give them dual statics. Static 1 is always to another c7. Give that connection liberal mass limits. NO SUPERS in wh space, but a c7/c7 connection that supports dropping 6 caps through it. You can put 3 in and get them back OR you can go all in and drop the fleet through. Make the second static any of the other flavors of wh. Make the c7 limited in number. This will give large groups that want to do wh pvp on a large scale a place to be big and do big things. The other details (amount of effect bonus and such) can be hashed out by the numbers nerds.
CCP theoretically has that opportunity currently with the Shattered Wormholes. Its pretty much a completely new and open space which they could "cater and create" the content needed to handle large wspace groups. There is a finite amount of people that can really handle 1 wormhole before they either split apart or leave. Every Large Wspace Alliance entity has hit that mark. They outnumber and outgun whoever they run into and pretty much complain about dead content because nobody can really have a outright brawl with them at a moments notice (the 5 cruisers at the sun is merely a fun stopgap). This was going on in 2012 (this is hardly new, the names have simply changed). Wspace mechanics are fine for the most part, but the space needs to be expanded, NOT contracted. I think the Shattered Systems can hold the solution to that (because they are essentially untouched, and can be modified and changed with little to zero blow-back from the community. A solution? I don't have it. I see an opportunity, a rare one that hasn't existed in wspace for the past 5 years. Its evolving with the storyline, and CCP has the chance to make a totally new method of sandbox play in wspace to help with the pvp stagnation of c5 and c6 space. That is how I see it. Any change to wspace itself will be met with A TON of criticism (as merely the topic of this thread has caused). So instead, I would look towards what has not been used and see what can be done to make the game play go there.
I completely agree here. I had an idea at one point for a kind of "hyperspace" that linked to w-space but was, in itself, super-connected. Shattered space could very well fill this role. The one difference or differentiation that I had was that this hyperspace contained some kind of resource that was desirable in both a PvE and PvP context making it something to be fought over. With the advent of the Entosis link, it actually plays quite nicely into this idea. Using a similar capture mechanism, these resources could be harvested/owned by w-space entities while providing contact points for combat.
What this resource actually gets used for could be quite varied. One idea could be to remove boosting entirely from w-space while implementing this and require this resource to be the "fuel" for boosts either system wide (using a structure benefitting PvE) or fleet wide (PvP). There could be plenty of others including fuel for new T3 modules, etc. etc.
I think this had the potential to benefit all of w-space while also giving it something unique to fight over. low-sec has faction warfare, null-sec has sov, but w-space lacks something specifically driving conflict other than the inherent social drive. Give people some kind of incentive to be out in space more and you'll find the fights naturally follow.
|

KIAGumpy
Free Throbbing Veinal Penii For Spacmens
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 15:59:58 -
[185] - Quote
Vote in a CSM who actually lives in wormhole space not a goon pet. |

Angrod Losshelin
Oath of the Forsaken Half Massed
114
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 16:54:59 -
[186] - Quote
Honestly, there are only a few people complaining about WH PVP that I know of. I think W-space is in a good spot right now, but some groups who have grown too large complain that no one wants to fight a blob. Well....no ****... take a note from NoHo and split up and fight each other if this is an issue.
I don't want to see anything make it easier for large groups to form and dominate everyone else. Current w-space allows for large groups and promotes banding together, which is fine, but it also means not many will fight them because they have alot more members to throw around and its more difficult to bring friends in.
I don't blame large groups for growing large and using all of their members, because I totally would and I would say anyone who says otherwise is lying to a degree. However, it is also up to these groups to cull their own members or split up if they "fall victim to their own success"
I like the current WH meta and would prefer to keep it than change it but if CCP can put in some cool new mechanics that make smaller groups more viable than large ones I am open to it.
IDK, we see plenty of PVP, more is always better but not when we get outnumbered every single fight. We hide from those people for obvious reasons. If they want to bring smaller groups in we fight them just like anyone, but alot of groups like Lazer have a reputation within my group as "don't fight them they'll kick your trash everytime with overwhelming numbers" so we don't we don't like losing **** only to placate large groups and I don't think anyone does.
I don't think Lazer or HK would like it any better if a full BL or PL fleet invaded their home and they couldn't call in any backup. They would get blobbed and ***** just like anyone else.
Either way, I think people are just victims of their own success and need to get over it. Then again, I have never been that successful so I rarely run into that issue.
Check out my Podcast!
My Blog!
|

Axloth Okiah
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
638
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 17:16:54 -
[187] - Quote
Lets learn a lesson from the terribleness of C6 space. It sucks because it is too small and it is too easy to hit specific hole - both for offense and defense. Removing C5s or making a new, even smaller C7 space would be even worse.
The solution might lie in the shattered holes, as was said before. Nerf "home" income, force people to farm other holes, make shattereds more profitable and more likely to get connected to. They should be the "gold mines" we might want to access by leaving the isolated safety of our homes and which also attract those who'd like to kill us. Make farming homesites and expos much less profitable, lets get rich by farming where it would actually be risky.
W-Space Realtor
|

Andrew Jester
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
1198
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 17:31:28 -
[188] - Quote
Angrod Losshelin wrote:Honestly, there are only a few people complaining about WH PVP that I know of. I think W-space is in a good spot right now.
stop talking in a mirror
If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy
|

Angrod Losshelin
Oath of the Forsaken Half Massed
115
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 17:46:24 -
[189] - Quote
Axloth Okiah wrote:Lets learn a lesson from the terribleness of C6 space. It sucks because it is too small and it is too easy to hit specific hole - both for offense and defense. Removing C5s or making a new, even smaller C7 space would be even worse.
The solution might lie in the shattered holes, as was said before. Nerf "home" income, force people to farm other holes, make shattereds more profitable and more likely to get connected to. They should be the "gold mines" we might want to access by leaving the isolated safety of our homes and which also attract those who'd like to kill us. Make farming homesites and expos much less profitable, lets get rich by farming where it would actually be risky.
I am Angrod and I approve of both of these messages.
Check out my Podcast!
My Blog!
|

HTC NecoSino
No Vacancies Lost Alliance
207
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 18:04:01 -
[190] - Quote
KIAGumpy wrote:Vote in a CSM who actually lives in wormhole space not a goon pet.
#RecallCorbexx
As for PvP content in WH space, it does seem to be a lot lower than this time last year. I've been having a lot of luck in lower-class WHs though, even if it's just harassing locals to try to get them to come fight me. |
|

unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
160
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 18:11:48 -
[191] - Quote
Would it work if you add those big holes in the c7 idea be added to c6 space? Would be a lot easier for ccp and might give the same effect?
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|

Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery Prolapse.
2259
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 00:11:41 -
[192] - Quote
Jack Hayson wrote:*High class needs more connectivity. (and by that I don't mean those useless frig holes) When I think about why we (Ixtab) left our C5 for a C4 it's mostly the better connectivity of the dual static and low class in general. From our C5 the chains would often look like Home->empty C5-> empty C5->C3->HS, where as our C4 chains now look more like this (which isn't even scanned down completely because people were lazy that day^^).
i agree with this point. C4 space is where it's at for OCD probe addicts. The example image you give, above, is weak and pathetic chain. We regularly have double that amount of systems in our chain.
But guess what? Most times it's all empty space. Lack of fights is not solely a problem in C5-C6 space.
The new fozziesov POS mechanics could help promote more activity, if done right. I've blogged recently about the potential problems i see with it, and made comments on the relevant threads, but as it stands right now content in w-space is either arranged fights - which i tend to avoid because it's mostly " Wait for it...we aren't ready...wait for it....wait for it...oh hey here's our batphone! Or we just pinged jabber and 20 other dudes logged in and we reshipped to hard counter you!" - or prompting fights and batphone bonanza by beginning a siege.
Reputedly the weekend's LZHX + HK fleet, after dunking their dreads on a Snigg-powered batphone, got sick of structure grinding in subs and extracted because the batphones kept ringing and people kept turning up to fight them. Also, they had made their point and got their fight, and it was a pretty good fight from the looks of it. Well, at least a lot of capitals died and then it was mass-guardian stalemate subcap folkdancing pointlessness thereafter.
So that's always the problem. You have to threaten the enemy to get a fight. Putting a timer on someone via RFing a POS is about the most absolute a threat as you can give someone in w-space. In C5-C6 space you can use dreads, which greatly assist in reducing POS defences. But in C1-4 space you're stuck using subcaps and some POS's are just too boring to attack without a really good sore buttock to propel the effort.
if you can somehow maintain hermetic hole control to deny the batphone you don't often get a fight, but if you can't maintain hole control, often what looks like 16 guys swiftly turns into 80+, like some disastrous siege we were invited along to attend on the weekend.
So, the problem is both mechanical and cultural.
There's a mechanic lacking to force content on people. In lowsec and nullsec the moon goo cash machines act as a conflict driver. One R64 moon can provide billions of ISK income for zero real effort (or close to zero) for a whole alliance. Other alliances covet it, and hence conflict.
In w-space the only resources which are unequal are system effects and moon count, given static choice is as much about farming and k-space luxury as anything else. So, basically, W-R's and Magnetars in high-class, followed by Pulsars for low-end farmers (fools, income is in your static). C4 Cats are the domain of Russians, who deploy stronk domiballs. And that's it, aside from mentioning how unpopulated E545/N060 Class 2's are, generally, and K346 C3's.
Most C5-6 Mags, Pulsars and Wolfs are already farm holes or owned and inhabited, and so heavily fortified it's laughable. C4 space is a bastion in and of itself because it's low-class no-caps but people tend to not be disorganised cowards, and aside from that there's enough empty space that no one needs to fight, and there's no free income, and sieges are so fraught and prolonged and prone to the cultural problems.....yeah, conflict is lacking.
If statics choice, effects and moon limits aren't enough to provoke conflict, then the only solution would be to add in income fountains which alliance-level people could covet and want and thus recreate the R64 mafia in w-space. Which would basically just entrench the current players at the expense of everyone else.
Prolapse. Taking fights since 2014.
Sudden Buggery. Got duumb? Hola, Batmanuel!
http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|

Andrew Jester
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
1198
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 00:23:53 -
[193] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote: There's a mechanic lacking to force content on people. In lowsec and nullsec the moon goo cash machines act as a conflict driver. One R64 moon can provide billions of ISK income for zero real effort (or close to zero) for a whole alliance.
this isn't really that true tbh, or rather not as big of a conflict driver as you'd think.
If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy
|

Dani Dusette
Isogen 5
6510
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 00:24:03 -
[194] - Quote
HTC NecoSino wrote:KIAGumpy wrote:Vote in a CSM who actually lives in wormhole space not a goon pet. #RecallCorbexx. I'm still waiting for Chance Ravine to weigh in on this.
Mizhir: "Dani Dusette, Best Dusette"
Samoth Egnoled: "Make sure you turn yourself often and bathe in your own juices."
ISD Ezwal: "Might I inform you that I am as real as it gets?"
|

Andrew Jester
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
1198
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 00:45:43 -
[195] - Quote
Dani Dusette wrote:HTC NecoSino wrote:KIAGumpy wrote:Vote in a CSM who actually lives in wormhole space not a goon pet. #RecallCorbexx. I'm still waiting for Chance Ravine to weigh in on this. keep dreaming dreamer
If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy
|

Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery Prolapse.
2259
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 01:07:42 -
[196] - Quote
He's only 2 minutes in to a 30 minute spree of staring at a Retriever wondering if it's bait before attacking it and discovering it is actually AFK. Give him time.
Prolapse. Taking fights since 2014.
Sudden Buggery. Got duumb? Hola, Batmanuel!
http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|

Adriana Nolen
Sama Guild
90
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 04:13:03 -
[197] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:He's only 2 minutes in to a 30 minute spree of staring at a Retriever wondering if it's bait before attacking it and discovering it is actually AFK. Give him time.
Thank you for inspiring me to create a new idea thread.  |

Na'hkin Oaks
Conquering Darkness
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 06:29:42 -
[198] - Quote
corbexx wrote:So I've had some one ask for me to look in to how we can try to increase pvp in the higher class wormholes and who was also worried that I was spending to much time sorting pve out for w space. Firstly I'm still of the opinion that better pve and increasing getting people in to space is the way to increase pvp. The lower class wormholes have all done better since the pve changes along with dual statics of C4. The biggest issue I see with pvp in C5 and C6 is that its a player driven issue, not mechanics. Atleast to me, the biggest issue is all the grouping up, which then leads to a vicious circle. Oh they teamed up, we wont fight them, their bound to have friends this time again. etc etc I've spoke to a couple people who are much better at player behaviour and theyall agree this is incrediby hard to change, if its even possible at all. What I'd like is suggestions on how we could maybe increase pvp in the higher class wormholes. Hidden fremen has already asked some people in his corp and he's sent me a list of some ideas, some admittingly controversial. I'll list them below and keep this updated as more people suggest ideas. Ideals from Hidden Fremen and Lazerhawks  Rewarding PvP active corps (harder to evict). Some Incursion-esque home system bonus.  Mass:spawn range when jumping wormholes kills small corp PvP tactics. True. Increases non-consensual PvP, but decreases consensual.  Getting podded into k-space and not in your WH home makes people more risk-averse. Controversial.  Give wormholes stargate treatment in that they appear on overview; no scanning needed. VERY controversial.  Reducing the number of wormholes. This would obviously increase encounters between players.
I can guarantee if you see one lazerhawk, you'll have about 40 of them in your hole within seconds of any c5/c6 activity. We played with them, when it was 4-5 vs 4-5, but usually they bring the mass **** in when they come.
Anyways on another note, ccp says the pos situation is for content...
Corps with multiple pos's with private pos's shouldn't fall under a content blanket. I don't know of any company I have worked for that gave me complete access to everyone's email information. Their should be way more control for pos's than currently is implemented. Let's say person A in a corp wants to have their own pos, however the corp will still have access to it, for under attack reasons. The person A shouldn't have the ability to go into any other pos and be able to access what they can do in their pos in some elses.
The stargate idea needs to go away, there is a reason why people live in wormholes, if you can't scan you live in null, or ls.
Make wormholes more lucrative. Enable moon mining, wormholes should have everything null/low has, but in high quantity. If you want more activity, make it to where people want to move there for the risk. It's far more riskier in wh than anywhere else.
The highsec ore sites still give a good amount of ore, to where roving bands seek these out to provide what they require to build items. |

Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
270
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 08:45:56 -
[199] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:He's only 2 minutes in to a 30 minute spree of staring at a Retriever wondering if it's bait before attacking it and discovering it is actually AFK. Give him time.
hahahahahhaahahaha laughed so hard you made my day. thank you sir |

Winthorp
2903
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 08:52:44 -
[200] - Quote
So will any of these bizarre ideas listed in the OP actually be put forward to CCP like they are an agreed upon consensus of WH space communities views or will you just be pointing them in the direction of this thread Corbexx?
I am Winthorp, you might remember me from such films as "Winthorp is to blame for persistent signature ID's".
.
.
.
Please note i don't engage in any meaningful discussion with NPC alts, nut up or shut up...
|
|

Robby Godfather
Lazerhawks
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 09:55:42 -
[201] - Quote
How about making wormhole spawn rate based on sleepers kill rate? The more sleepers you kill the more wormholes you will get. That would create more connections between used systems and force wh pve entities to be ready for pvp when doing sites. |

Blizzaro
Hard Knocks Inc. Hard Knocks Citizens
15
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 11:25:29 -
[202] - Quote
Robby Godfather wrote:How about making wormhole spawn rate based on sleepers kill rate? The more sleepers you kill the more wormholes you will get. That would create more connections between used systems and force wh pve entities to be ready for pvp when doing sites.
Only if it means these spawn to top null npc kill systems.
I would run homesites for Dek holes all day. |

Andrew Jester
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
1200
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 13:29:11 -
[203] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:So will any of these bizarre ideas listed in the OP actually be put forward to CCP like they are an agreed upon consensus of WH space communities views or will you just be pointing them in the direction of this thread Corbexx? really? This is the post of your prodigal return? I'm disappointed 
If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy
|

Bleedingthrough
Project AIice
164
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 14:05:34 -
[204] - Quote
Sorry for the late reply. Ab'del Abu, I agree with what you said concerning caps on the field.
Ab'del Abu wrote: As for rolling your hole safe, low class inhabitants do it too. Many groups actually collapse the holes in their statics as well, if they're going to run sites there. So much for content^^
The question is not if they do it (no one wants to lose a ratting fleet) but what the gain is for everyone. Compared to home sites ratting you need to find a decent static which is worth to rat in and you are able to control first. In the process you will more likely stumble across PvP opportunities and create them than simply shutting your home static down. Also sites outside home can not be done in one siege cycle and in general a fleet in your static is way more exposed.
While I enjoy the GÇ£unknownsGÇ¥ that come with static isk printing and the teamwork that is required this playstyle is not competitive: Having out of corp alts in an isk-printing C5s is the way to go for painless, for the most part contentless and efficient feeding of you PvP activities/paying for your alts/etc. .
Eve players are smart and want to win. Of cause there is a cultural dimension to this but ultimately players and their groups will adapt to what is the most efficient under given game mechanics. And if you add one and one together you are where we are now. I donGÇÖt know if this is enjoyable at the top, never been in the top of the food chain in w-space. Being part of a group that is more a punching ball than a puncher we have no trouble finding content and I personally donGÇÖt have a problem with groups being so large and competent that you can not hope to win in a fight against them. From a PR standpoint it is good to have these groups that make it to the news, something that attracts ppl to w-space, someone you want to be like, it makes you feel proud to be part of the w-community.
The question is if the WH community wants more centrifugal forces in WH space and a plainer battleground. If so, dealing with capital escalations and alt farming might be the right lever to tackle this.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5305080#post5305080
|

March rabbit
Federal Defense Union
1612
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 14:20:11 -
[205] - Quote
JeRaadtHetNooit wrote:Aderoth Anstian wrote:
Encourage static farming in C5/C6s problem solved.
Remove capital escalation farming from home sites maybe not really 'remove' but make it so your escalation appears not in your WH but in one of WHs connected to your at the moment. Plus replace capital escalations by something equally 'lucrative' but cruiser/BS level. ?
This will make people go outside or just gift this escalation to neighbours.
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|

HTC NecoSino
No Vacancies Lost Alliance
207
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 14:53:11 -
[206] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:Plus replace capital escalations by something equally 'lucrative' but cruiser/BS level. ?
Something, something, WR, something...
|

Neckbeard Nolyfe
Zero Fun Allowed
51
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 14:53:26 -
[207] - Quote
The dumb ideas regarding escalations really don't cease to amaze.
~lvl 60 paladin~
|

TurboX3
Hax. Wrecked.
77
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 16:38:49 -
[208] - Quote
Stop evicting the corps / alliances living within them.....
No Trolling Please
|

umnikar
Fishbone Industries
69
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 17:11:01 -
[209] - Quote
remove c5/6 |

Hidden Fremen
Lazerhawks
566
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 18:53:39 -
[210] - Quote
Thank you for disclosing our conversation, corbexx, and quoting me without permission. I know you're biased, but this is unbecoming of someone in your position. It was premature, out of context, and another betrayal of trust. The items you listed were just from the first page of a multipage thread on my forums (with my parentheses). |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |