EVE Search - My own little piece of Eden. Planning for citadels.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

My own little piece of Eden. Planning for citadels.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Hir Miriel Elves In Space 185	Posted - 2015.05.12 23:07:04 - [1] - Quote I'm in the throes of planning for a small POS with researching and reprocessing abilities. Or I was until I read the dev blog http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/shake-my-citadel/ Which changes things somewhat. Currently I need to get higher standing with Amarr Empire to place a control tower in Amarr high sec. I also need to balance the books to make sure I can pay for supplies like the 5,000,000 ISK per day running costs. But with the Citadel dev blog things look like they change a fair bit. For example one thing is that fuel might only be used when an Array is used. Which I assume to mean that costs may be lower than they are now. Which is understandable if CCP wants to encourage everyone to become owners of space bait, oh sorry, meant space habitats. It also means if I put up a control tower now, that I need to go through the whole erection process again later this year, with different structures and rules. And erections can be such painful affairs. Which also leads me to think about what happens to my old control tower if I put one up now? Will it become useless? Will CCP delete them at a certain time? Does anyone have any insights? ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~
Marsha Mallow 2113	Posted - 2015.05.12 23:34:24 - [2] - Quote Hir Miriel wrote: And erections can be such painful affairs. Which also leads me to think about what happens to my old control tower if I put one up now? Will it become useless? Will CCP delete them at a certain time? Does anyone have any insights? If it's only a small one I'm sure no one will even notice it. The initial structure devblog answers part of your question. The proposed maintenance costs for the new structures aren't in the blog released today. Bear in mind at FF they stated that these will take a while to roll out and the earliest structures will probably be the only ones released this year. These are very early phase discussions so I'd just keep an eye on blogs/announcements for the time being, participate with questions and feedback, but otherwise carry on with whatever you were planning. Solecist Project wrote: See, the issue isn't the rubbing ISD Ezwal wrote: Nope, no one will get banned for 'rubbing' Benny Ohu wrote: fire up the argument calibrators set phasers to outraged overheat keyboards reinforce the thread
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 37272	Posted - 2015.05.12 23:37:37 - [3] - Quote Hir Miriel wrote: IFor example one thing is that fuel might only be used when an Array is used. Which I assume to mean that costs may be lower than they are now. Which is understandable if CCP wants to encourage everyone to become owners of space bait, oh sorry, meant space habitats. It also means if I put up a control tower now, that I need to go through the whole erection process again later this year, with different structures and rules. And erections can be such painful affairs. Which also leads me to think about what happens to my old control tower if I put one up now? Will it become useless? Will CCP delete them at a certain time? Does anyone have any insights? Hope I answer these ok: 1. Yep, seems new structures might not use fuel just to exist, but only when doing somehing (see Service Slots under Structure Fitting here about 1/3rd the way down the page: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/back-into-the-structure/ ) 2. Yes most likely and with different skill requirements possibly as well. The skill requirement bit is mentioned in the latest devblog. 3. We don't know exactly, but CCP will plan a transition period (see Transition Plan at the bottom of the page linked above) 4. Yep, most likely. See previous answer 5. Don't know if I have any insights at all. Hope those answers provide something based on available information though. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Hippinse University of Caille Gallente Federation 68	Posted - 2015.05.12 23:54:44 - [4] - Quote Hir Miriel wrote: And erections can be such painful affairs. Especially if it lasts for more than four hours.
Ripblade Falconpunch Centurion Logistics 123	Posted - 2015.05.13 00:14:18 - [5] - Quote Hippinse wrote: Hir Miriel wrote: And erections can be such painful affairs. Especially if it lasts for more than four hours. I don't care what they say, that's not a medical emergency - that's a MIRACLE!
Unsuccessful At Everything The Troll Bridge 21306	Posted - 2015.05.13 00:22:07 - [6] - Quote So we're just done with phrasing, right, that's not a thing anymore? *Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?*
kyoukoku The Scope Gallente Federation 6	Posted - 2015.05.13 00:25:05 - [7] - Quote Hippinse wrote: Hir Miriel wrote: And erections can be such painful affairs. Especially if it lasts for more than four hours. I'm sorry.... Hey...
Hir Miriel Elves In Space 185	Posted - 2015.05.13 01:41:01 - [8] - Quote Okay, wait and see is it. ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~
DaReaper Net 7 2039	Posted - 2015.05.13 01:44:46 - [9] - Quote ib4l for redundancy btw OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
Jasmine Cheryu Perkone Caldari State 4	Posted - 2015.05.13 03:33:42 - [10] - Quote Hir Miriel wrote: Currently I need to get higher standing with Amarr Empire to place a control tower in Amarr high sec. Just if you're not aware.. you can place any control tower, anywhere in highsec now, without standings. The only limitation (that I'm currently aware of) is that your corp needs to be more than 7 days old

Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2357	Posted - 2015.05.13 03:55:03 - [11] - Quote I anticipate these things being a monumental pain in the ass in highsec. Particularly if a single structure intended for use by one player is going to be able to repel attacks by capital ships.
Hir Miriel Elves In Space 187	Posted - 2015.05.13 04:10:58 - [12] - Quote Jasmine Cheryu wrote: Hir Miriel wrote: Currently I need to get higher standing with Amarr Empire to place a control tower in Amarr high sec. Just if you're not aware.. you can place any control tower, anywhere in highsec now, without standings. The only limitation (that I'm currently aware of) is that your corp needs to be more than 7 days old Thank you! Been reading the wrong notes, and stuck in a time warp it seems. ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~
Hir Miriel Elves In Space 187	Posted - 2015.05.13 04:17:41 - [13] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: I anticipate these things being a monumental pain in the ass in highsec. Particularly if a single structure intended for use by one player is going to be able to repel attacks by capital ships. I'm not too concerned about being efficient. From that perspective they don't seem worth it. As to them being a pain to kill, well they should be, otherwise nobody will use them and it will all be a waste of time. Time that CCP could have used better elsewhere. Personally I don't think that there is a better way of creating content than by tying it into some sense of belonging. That the player actually owns a piece of Eden and belongs there. Maybe especially so since in the real world fewer and fewer will ever live the dream of owning property. Real estate, to coin a phrase. I'm wondering about the storyline for the introduction of Citadels. Especially any possible links to Drifters (don't try to kill them by the way). Drifters are homeless too, perhaps they become mercenary guards for Citadels in certain cases and we see a lessening of the power of Concord. All good fun to think about. ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2357	Posted - 2015.05.13 05:00:54 - [14] - Quote There's a difference between something being survivable enough to be practical and it being excessively difficult to destroy them. POSes being able to equip modules intended to protect them against fleets of capital ships in space where capital ships are inherently cannot be used for offense is fundamentally unbalanced. Particularly considering the low time and isk investment required to set up tower and the near zero risk of losing its contents in highsec versus the fairly expensive fleet, 50+ man hours, severe risk and total lack of reward (due to the ability to remove or trash all POS contents at any time) when attacking it. The current mechanics make organic conflicts over active POS structures really, really uncommon and when they do exist they're typically carried out by mercenaries which in turn results in carebear whine about faction battleship+logistics fleets and them being horribly outnumbered. Structure mechanics should give people prizes they want to take and assets worth defending against their rivals and competitors who have similar resources to them. They should not be unassailable fortresses capable of repelling almost anything that can hold billions upon billions of assets with near zero risk of anyone ever being able to harm them. Being the aggressor in a highsec conflict being too hard is a real problem, it allows merc alliances like mine to monopolize PVP in highsec because we are good at it and that's super unhealthy. Future highsec structures should be closer to POCOs than towers, people can actually fight over those.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 37277	Posted - 2015.05.13 05:17:56 - [15] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: I anticipate these things being a monumental pain in the ass in highsec. Particularly if a single structure intended for use by one player is going to be able to repel attacks by capital ships. That and with them being anchorable anywhere in space and not only at moons, there'll be **** stars at all major instaundock locations ready to scram and pop unlucky pilots. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Lew Dicrous Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 22	Posted - 2015.05.13 05:55:21 - [16] - Quote Meh, they will undoubtedly stick in some entosis-link loophole to turn these into huge "come troll me" signs. It burns when I PVP
Solecist Project Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD 24236	Posted - 2015.05.13 06:58:41 - [17] - Quote pus on Beavis&Butthead He said Erection. hehe hehehe. hehehe. hehehe. Errrrrrrrection. hehehehehe. hehehehe. hehe. Erections definitely can be a PITA. Sheesh, so subtle sense of humour, OP has. ^_^ S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD Abolish Rookiecorps.
Hir Miriel Elves In Space 187	Posted - 2015.05.13 07:53:43 - [18] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: There's a difference between something being survivable enough to be practical and it being excessively difficult to destroy them. POSes being able to equip modules intended to protect them against fleets of capital ships in space where capital ships are inherently cannot be used for offense is fundamentally unbalanced. Particularly considering the low time and isk investment required to set up tower and the near zero risk of losing its contents in highsec versus the fairly expensive fleet, 50+ man hours, severe risk and total lack of reward (due to the ability to remove or trash all POS contents at any time) when attacking it. The current mechanics make organic conflicts over active POS structures really, really uncommon and when they do exist they're typically carried out by mercenaries which in turn results in carebear whine about faction battleship+logistics fleets and them being horribly outnumbered. Structure mechanics should give people prizes they want to take and assets worth defending against their rivals and competitors who have similar resources to them. They should not be unassailable fortresses capable of repelling almost anything that can hold billions upon billions of assets with near zero risk of anyone ever being able to harm them. Being the aggressor in a highsec conflict being too hard is a real problem, it allows merc alliances like mine to monopolize PVP in highsec because we are good at it and that's super unhealthy. Future highsec structures should be closer to POCOs than towers, people can actually fight over those. It is very important to have content that helps bind people to being a part of this world. I'd say making everyone have a house in space is a great idea, and sure make it safe, no biggie, it helps get new players in and attached, CCP can always add much more challenging siege PvP so that expert PvPers like yourself can enjoy content. Having content such as safeish Citadels is an idea along the lines of not letting players lose skillpoints. CCP changed that, and I think that was a good idea, skill gains are very strongly attached to the character, best to keep them forever. I'd say make small Citadels safe in high sec, and make the gloriously huge content out in the wilds of space. Variety for everyone, and a path players can tread as they learn more of EVE. ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~
Solecist Project Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD 24243	Posted - 2015.05.13 08:06:40 - [19] - Quote You cqn expect that citadels in highsec will not be safe at all. Anything else would just be silly. If you can't defend it, you can't have it. The newplayerargument does not apply. Growing people into a safe world will render most incapable of dealing with how the world actually is. You can not own stuff you can not defend ! S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD Abolish Rookiecorps.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2363	Posted - 2015.05.13 11:06:10 - [20] - Quote There's no value at all in something that doesn't actually require effort to have. If "new players" can just crap out multi-million EHP death stars all over space without there being any reasonable possibility of anyone destroying them then there's no achievement in having one to begin with. Particularly if the thing is able to defend itself without assistance against a 20 man battleship fleet. One of thing things high security space is in dire need of is points of conflict, which is something new structures can be. It is not in need of more perfectly safe, invulnerable assets. POCOs are a great example of an actually good mechanic, people continuously fight over the rights for them, they're cheap as hell but can't defend themselves, as a result conflicts of various scale happen involving them depending on where they are. I don't care about me personally having things to shoot at, I've never had problems finding reasons to shoot things. What I'm tired of is nobody but us dedicated PVP people ever having the desire or ability to shoot at things. I want to see carebears reinforcing eachothers POS structures like they occasionally do POCOs.

Solecist Project Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD 24262	Posted - 2015.05.13 11:17:45 - [21] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: There's no value at all in something that doesn't actually require effort to have. If "new players" can just crap out multi-million EHP death stars all over space without there being any reasonable possibility of anyone destroying them then there's no achievement in having one to begin with. Particularly if the thing is able to defend itself without assistance against a 20 man battleship fleet. One of thing things high security space is in dire need of is points of conflict, which is something new structures can be. It is not in need of more perfectly safe, invulnerable assets. POCOs are a great example of an actually good mechanic, people continuously fight over the rights for them, they're cheap as hell but can't defend themselves, as a result conflicts of various scale happen involving them depending on where they are. I don't care about me personally having things to shoot at, I've never had problems finding reasons to shoot things. What I'm tired of is nobody but us dedicated PVP people ever having the desire or ability to shoot at things. I want to see carebears reinforcing eachothers POS structures like they occasionally do POCOs. I predict a full revamp of wardecs ... ... or complete removal for something much better. Good times ahead ! S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD Abolish Rookiecorps.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2364	Posted - 2015.05.13 11:44:06 - [22] - Quote Wars weren't presented as being anywhere on CCPs time line at all and given that CCP staff are literally prohibited from doing anything "mean" to people in the game and take all of their cues from people who want wars to be ineffective and/or nonexistent it's entirely unlikely that a revamp will happen at all and if it does happen it will essentially amount to nerfs that furthersolidify the current meta. The current meta bring the total dominance of dedicated PVP groups over all highsec PVP and a trend on larger and larger PVP groups with hundreds of wars at any one time. What's really great is the upcoming merger of marmite and forsaken. Carebears will finally get to see the monster they've created, I'm sure they'll love being continuously at war with a 500 man alliance.
Solecist Project Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD 24264	Posted - 2015.05.13 11:53:01 - [23] - Quote Your attitude towards the matter only makes it worse. You people yourself only make it worse, tbh. Try being reasonable at some point. The new structures leave them no other way than to revamp wardecs. The drifters also show that it will be happening, because there's a huge change coming. Of course I can be wrong, but so far everything points into that direction. The best explanation I can give you about the lack of talks ... ... is that it's still to come. In any way is your approach to this situation not helpfull at all. The attitude even more so. So then we have a 500man alliance. You only dig your own graves by only caring about your side, FORCING ccp to do something. It has been like this with ganking as well. It's not the complaints on the forums, it's people constantly pushing it tk a level that leaves CCP no choice and then exactly these people cry the most. Let's hope the leaders of this alliance have a bit more thoughtfullness. S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD Abolish Rookiecorps.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2365	Posted - 2015.05.13 12:03:58 - [24] - Quote My side is the one that has benefitted the most from the inferno war changes. The various nerfs to the aggressor side eliminated all competition from non-dedicated groups, trivialized finding targets and made contracts super easy. Which is bad.
Solecist Project Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD 24271	Posted - 2015.05.13 12:30:59 - [25] - Quote Sorry but that post makes not much sense. It sounds contradictionary. Please elaborate. Why did you benefit and what competition would you expect to see anyway? I have a followup question to this... but one after the other. S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD Abolish Rookiecorps.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2366	Posted - 2015.05.13 12:40:07 - [26] - Quote Me personally benefitting from something does not mean the net effect that thing has on the game is good. For example the same changes that solidified the existent merc groups also made it totally impossible for small groups of low SP players to get into highsec PVP without joining an established group. Even though the current conditions work really well for my alliance, if those conditions had existed 4.5 years ago when I made this character forming my corp would have been impossible both practically and financially. Which is bad.
Black Pedro Yammerschooner 1013	Posted - 2015.05.13 12:45:36 - [27] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: There's no value at all in something that doesn't actually require effort to have. If "new players" can just crap out multi-million EHP death stars all over space without there being any reasonable possibility of anyone destroying them then there's no achievement in having one to begin with. Particularly if the thing is able to defend itself without assistance against a 20 man battleship fleet. One of thing things high security space is in dire need of is points of conflict, which is something new structures can be. It is not in need of more perfectly safe, invulnerable assets. POCOs are a great example of an actually good mechanic, people continuously fight over the rights for them, they're cheap as hell but can't defend themselves, as a result conflicts of various scale happen involving them depending on where they are. I don't care about me personally having things to shoot at, I've never had problems finding reasons to shoot things. What I'm tired of is nobody but us dedicated PVP people ever having the desire or ability to shoot at things. I want to see carebears reinforcing eachothers POS structures like they occasionally do POCOs. They will destroyable by entosis modules - no EHP involved. If anything, this makes it easier to destroy a structure as if unopposed, you can do it in a T1 frigate (or perhaps a little more to avoid the automated defenses). That's way better the hours of boredom for a dozen players required to take down a large POS in highsec now even if the other side is logged off. The only question is whether this can be done without a wardec, or if a war is declared, does the defending corporation have the option to take down the space assets and decline the fight. Those answers will determine whether these structures will actually drive conflict or just be another toy for players in highsec.
Solecist Project Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD 24289	Posted - 2015.05.13 13:10:11 - [28] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: ... made it totally impossible for small groups of low SP players to get into highsec PVP without joining an established group. Great, verbose, no-nonsense post. The question I was mentioning ... ... as response to the line above ... ... and yeah I predicted your post a bit: Have you tried it for yourself ? If so, how ? If not, would you listen ? Surprise me with another no-nonsense, verbose response. :D S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD Abolish Rookiecorps.
Hir Miriel Elves In Space 187	Posted - 2015.05.13 16:02:15 - [29] - Quote Black Pedro wrote: Vimsy Vortis wrote: There's no value at all in something that doesn't actually require effort to have. If "new players" can just crap out multi-million EHP death stars all over space without there being any reasonable possibility of anyone destroying them then there's no achievement in having one to begin with. Particularly if the thing is able to defend itself without assistance against a 20 man battleship fleet. One of thing things high security space is in dire need of is points of conflict, which is something new structures can be. It is not in need of more perfectly safe, invulnerable assets. POCOs are a great example of an actually good mechanic, people continuously fight over the rights for them, they're cheap as hell but can't defend themselves, as a result conflicts of various scale happen involving them depending on where they are. I don't care about me personally having things to shoot at, I've never had problems finding reasons to shoot things. What I'm tired of is nobody but us dedicated PVP people ever having the desire or ability to shoot at things. I want to see carebears reinforcing eachothers POS structures like they occasionally do POCOs. They will destroyable by entosis modules - no EHP involved. If anything, this makes it easier to destroy a structure as if unopposed, you can do it in a T1 frigate (or perhaps a little more to avoid the automated defenses). That's way better the hours of boredom for a dozen players required to take down a large POS in highsec now even if the other side is logged off. The only question is whether this can be done without a wardec, or if a war is declared, does the defending corporation have the option to take down the space assets and decline the fight. Those answers will determine whether these structures will actually drive conflict or just be another toy for players in highsec. From what I read of (the subject to change) dev post was that one account trolling attacks of citadels wouldn't be possible, so it it will require multi boxing at least. There was also some mention of wanting players to have a spot they feel safe in. If citadels don't provide that, then why would players change their behaviour when they can just stay safe in NPC buildings? ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~
Hir Miriel Elves In Space 187	Posted - 2015.05.13 16:13:40 - [30] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: There's no value at all in something that doesn't actually require effort to have. If "new players" can just crap out multi-million EHP death stars all over space without there being any reasonable possibility of anyone destroying them then there's no achievement in having one to begin with. Particularly if the thing is able to defend itself without assistance against a 20 man battleship fleet. One of thing things high security space is in dire need of is points of conflict, which is something new structures can be. It is not in need of more perfectly safe, invulnerable assets. POCOs are a great example of an actually good mechanic, people continuously fight over the rights for them, they're cheap as hell but can't defend themselves, as a result conflicts of various scale happen involving them depending on where they are. I don't care about me personally having things to shoot at, I've never had problems finding reasons to shoot things. What I'm tired of is nobody but us dedicated PVP people ever having the desire or ability to shoot at things. I want to see carebears reinforcing eachothers POS structures like they occasionally do POCOs. What you say about losing things you cannot defend is true of everything. It includes CCP losing players if they cannot defend EVE from attrition to other games. And I know EVE is meant to have a learning cliff, but if you want new players you need to let them learn. That's one of the purposes of high security zones. People can wade into the shallow waters of EVE first, before heading into the darker waters where some of us live. But high security isn't just about new players, it's about playstyles. Not everyone is like me, nor are they like you. Having a variety of arenas lets players choose what they want to do. Sandboxes should have a variety of toys in them. Me, I don't care about PvP, maybe once I did in RTS type games, but nowadays I'm fine with being boring. EVE lets me do that quite happily, doesn't force me to confront other players all up and flossing in my face. If high security citadels are easy to defend, I'll get one, if they aren't, I won't. I'd prefer them to be easily defensible, because I like having more content, more things to do. Last thing I want to do is stress about a game I pay money for, and have to log in at odd hours to make sure I haven't lost my stuff. That's just yuk. And hey it would be nice to have some SKINS for Citadels and other cosmetic whatnots, especially if we can make them. ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~

Solecist Project Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD 24366	Posted - 2015.05.13 17:44:39 - [31] - Quote Hir Miriel wrote: Text. A few things in your post need to be corrected. No, it's not a matter of opinion. > And I know EVE is meant to have a learning cliff, but if you want new players you need to let them learn. > That's one of the purposes of high security zones. > People can wade into the shallow waters of EVE first, before heading into the darker waters where some of us live. That's not how reality works. One does not learn how to be safe by being safe. One needs to be un-safe to learn how to be safe. HighSec is the absolutely worst place for new players to learn the game, because there they only learn that they are being protected and have it easy. All the spoonfed babies who couldn't deal with life if there wasn't some force actually governing and protecting them will, of course, disagree. That's the kind of self entitled people who run a big mouth until you slap them. Virtually or in reality. Doesn't matter, they start crying and yelling for CCP, mommy or the police. > Having a variety of arenas lets players choose what they want to do. New Eden does not have "arenas". The idea that people should move to specific "zones" for doing specific things has no connection to the game at all. Yes, some space allows for things the other doesn't, but that doesn't turn them into specific zones for specific "playstyles". > I'd prefer them to be easily defensible, because I like having more content, more things to do. > Last thing I want to do is stress about a game I pay money for, > and have to log in at odd hours to make sure I haven't lost my stuff. That, of course, is perfectly fine. I see that you aren't the type who whines about things he does not actually deserve. Nowadays every idiot believes he deserves anything. By that I mean ... as said above ... if you can't defend it, you can't have it. S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD Abolish Rookiecorps. Baaldor > ... Sol's Haiku manner of response ...
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2370	Posted - 2015.05.13 17:52:36 - [32] - Quote I think you forgot that reinforcement timers and soon ~vulnerability periods~ are things, even with freaking mobile depots. It is not currently and will not in the future be the case that structures require continuous attention. My point is they should actually require effort from the owner to protect if they are attacked. Unlike current POS mechanics where they can effectively fight off entire fleets by themselves without the owner touching anything. Defense should be something a player actively does because that is what is engaging and fun, not something the structure does entirely by itself.
Damjan Fox Fox Industries and Exploration 133	Posted - 2015.05.13 18:39:19 - [33] - Quote Quote: If citadels don't provide that, then why would players change their behaviour when they can just stay safe in NPC buildings? Let's see, if we'll have NPC stations left, when the Drifters are done with us.
Mr Mieyli Hedion University Amarr Empire 8	Posted - 2015.05.13 20:58:03 - [34] - Quote I would totally agree with Vimsy Vortis, in-space points of conflict are essential in the warp-to-0 combat style eve has. I also agree that small citadels should not take a fleet of capitals to knock over and that the same cost/ safety ratio can be gained by making small citadels relatively inexpensive (however this could be a hint towards caps in highsec). As much as some people deny it highsec is the "starting zone" of eve and many new or solo players base from there. There should be meaningful points of conflict for these smaller or less experienced groups to compete with each other. Variety in the different areas of New Eden is a good thing how many people can honestly say they've never got tired of one area of space and tried something new?
Hir Miriel Elves In Space 189	Posted - 2015.05.14 02:35:55 - [35] - Quote Solecist Project wrote: Hir Miriel wrote: Text. A few things in your post need to be corrected. No, it's not a matter of opinion. > And I know EVE is meant to have a learning cliff, but if you want new players you need to let them learn. > That's one of the purposes of high security zones. > People can wade into the shallow waters of EVE first, before heading into the darker waters where some of us live. That's not how reality works. One does not learn how to be safe by being safe. One needs to be un-safe to learn how to be safe. HighSec is the absolutely worst place for new players to learn the game, because there they only learn that they are being protected and have it easy. All the spoonfed babies who couldn't deal with life if there wasn't some force actually governing and protecting them will, of course, disagree. That's the kind of self entitled people who run a big mouth until you slap them. Virtually or in reality. Doesn't matter, they start crying and yelling for CCP, mommy or the police. > Having a variety of arenas lets players choose what they want to do. New Eden does not have "arenas". The idea that people should move to specific "zones" for doing specific things has no connection to the game at all. Yes, some space allows for things the other doesn't, but that doesn't turn them into specific zones for specific "playstyles". > I'd prefer them to be easily defensible, because I like having more content, more things to do. > Last thing I want to do is stress about a game I pay money for, > and have to log in at odd hours to make sure I haven't lost my stuff. That, of course, is perfectly fine. I see that you aren't the type who whines about things he does not actually deserve. Nowadays every idiot believes he deserves anything. By that I mean ... as said above ... if you can't defend it, you can't have it. sigh We are very different. You think there is such a thing as hard realities, whereas I think everything is a matter of opinion. You think "self entitled" is a phrase to demean people, whereas I think it is a phrase taught to sheep to make them keep other sheep in line. I'd say you were a fan of tough love, which I think is a rework of the self entitled school of thought. A way of saying other people are worse than oneself because oneself is so tough. Given what I think is the distance between our disparate views of the world, it's doubtful we can find any understanding, however, let me try. The real world is entirely uncaring of us. How we see the world makes it so. Depending on our point of view the Universe can be infinitely bountiful, or a cold uncaring oblivion. I prefer to see the world as a fairly fun place and I'm quite happy doing boring stuff which I find fun. And I don't really see the need to argue that EVE should be as hard a world as can possibly be. ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~
Hal Morsh Umbra Industry and Defense 302	Posted - 2015.05.14 03:20:27 - [36] - Quote Smaller structers should take a smaller fleet, but small citadels taking capitals?? I think CCP would only mean for larger citadels to do this. I don't think their other structures would be as difficult either like a mining array. I mean it is being meant as a corporation headquarters and market with stuff and whatnot. I'm going to assume these are meant as corporation structures, and the smaller structures wont be as difficult if they are personally deployable. Limits to larger structures of this kind deployed is a smart idea. Here I come to a thread thinking to ask if CCP intends for WiS in our corporation headquarters and find out people are actually talking important things. I'll go away now. Dun'Gal > Hal is simply an imperfect ai, though if drunkeness ever gets programmed into ai's I foresee both a hilarious and tragic end to humanity.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2154	Posted - 2015.05.14 03:25:30 - [37] - Quote Lew Dicrous wrote: Meh, they will undoubtedly stick in some entosis-link loophole to turn these into huge "come troll me" signs. Like.... 'your defence are awesome but the ai doesn't use them at all so we have taken your defended pos and capped on it so any guy in a frig can wardec you and unless you spend ages at just the right time watching your pos it dies'. That kind of entosis link loophole? As for complaining anti cap defence are unfair vs subcaps. These little things called tracking and sign radius on guns say otherwise.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12983	Posted - 2015.05.14 03:37:21 - [38] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: I think you forgot that reinforcement timers and soon ~vulnerability periods~ are things, even with freaking mobile depots. It is not currently and will not in the future be the case that structures require continuous attention. My point is they should actually require effort from the owner to protect if they are attacked. Unlike current POS mechanics where they can effectively fight off entire fleets by themselves without the owner touching anything. Defense should be something a player actively does because that is what is engaging and fun, not something the structure does entirely by itself. Very much this. And from the looks of things, even the ones in highsec can have two or more goddamned reinforcement timers before anything happens, even totally undefended. Nevermind the awful mechanic of "Your stuff is 100% safe" from loot drops. Yeesh. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 2085	Posted - 2015.05.14 10:56:58 - [39] - Quote I thought they removed standings requirements for POS? Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Solecist Project Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD 24458	Posted - 2015.05.14 11:00:47 - [40] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Vimsy Vortis wrote: I think you forgot that reinforcement timers and soon ~vulnerability periods~ are things, even with freaking mobile depots. It is not currently and will not in the future be the case that structures require continuous attention. My point is they should actually require effort from the owner to protect if they are attacked. Unlike current POS mechanics where they can effectively fight off entire fleets by themselves without the owner touching anything. Defense should be something a player actively does because that is what is engaging and fun, not something the structure does entirely by itself. Very much this. And from the looks of things, even the ones in highsec can have two or more goddamned reinforcement timers before anything happens, even totally undefended. Nevermind the awful mechanic of "Your stuff is 100% safe" from loot drops. Yeesh. What? Did I miss that or just ignored it ? Why, the **** ? Since when, ever, can't we take the stuff from what we shoot ??? S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD Abolish Rookiecorps. Baaldor > ... Sol's Haiku manner of response ...

Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2377	Posted - 2015.05.14 15:42:29 - [41] - Quote You can either remove or trash all POS contents at any time. There is no way you will ever get loot, or even killmails indicating the actual value of the destroyed POS unless the owner lets you. A certain manufacturing tower for example that had an estimated value of in excess of a hundred billion and the destruction of which likely caused losses in the form of lost jobs in the range of several tens of billions by conservative estimates dropped no loot and returned empty kill mails. These kinds of garbage mechanics compound with the extreme difficulty of attacking structures with millions of EHP and ECM and energy neutralization capabilities intended for use against capital ships entirely using subcapitals to make highsec POS takedowns of even undefended towrrs not worth anyone's time unless someone is paying through the nose to make it happen. I don't want to see that kind of crap, gameplay repeated with citadels. Ultra-safe, risk-free, non-lootable structures are anti-fun, anti-conflict, boring content that shouldn't exist.
Kaye Kaye Mining and Trade 6	Posted - 2015.05.14 16:25:25 - [42] - Quote After reading the Blog post on Citadels, they seem rather pointless in HS. Like every thing else in this game, it's all about making it easy to allow PVP in HS.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2377	Posted - 2015.05.14 16:28:16 - [43] - Quote Fun fact: PVP is allowed everywhere in this sandbox PVP game.
Mr Mieyli Hedion University Amarr Empire 8	Posted - 2015.05.14 21:05:02 - [44] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: Fun fact: PVP is allowed everywhere in this sandbox PVP game. And as an addition, PvP can take different forms in different areas of space. Variety is the spice of life. Why can't highsec have low value not too hard to kill points of conflict that might be meaningful to one guy and his friends but wouldn't be meaningful in the grand scheme of things?
Hal Morsh Umbra Industry and Defense 306	Posted - 2015.05.14 22:14:29 - [45] - Quote Mr Mieyli wrote: Vimsy Vortis wrote: Fun fact: PVP is allowed everywhere in this sandbox PVP game. Why can't highsec have low value not too hard to kill points of conflict that might be meaningful to one guy and his friends but wouldn't be meaningful in the grand scheme of things? The problem is if you give them even one pretzel they will likely just rip the whole damn bag out of your hands. CCP has to avoid getting to the point where you get a plate of cookies and a gila to play with just for logging in I get that. The issue is if it isn't painful to deal with people are going to make it painful for everyone else, it's not so easy to give a little in such areas. Dun'Gal > Hal is simply an imperfect ai, though if drunkeness ever gets programmed into ai's I foresee both a hilarious and tragic end to humanity.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2155	Posted - 2015.05.14 22:26:45 - [46] - Quote Hal Morsh wrote: The problem is if you give them even one pretzel they will likely just rip the whole damn bag out of your hands. CCP has to avoid getting to the point where you get a plate of cookies and a gila to play with just for logging in I get that. The issue is if it isn't painful to deal with people are going to make it painful for everyone else, it's not so easy to give a little in such areas. Except item safety isn't about high sec, it's about null sec and structure use. High sec just gets it by extension also. If items are not safe in structures, no-one will put them in structures to start with. What you fly is at risk, and I'll never ever support changing that, what you are actively using (i.e. manufacturing jobs, citadels) should also always be at risk. But something sitting around in mothballs should not be at risk. Otherwise people simply won't move out into those areas, and will just stay living out of NPC stations with the bare minimum they can possibly live with in a player structure. And that's not a good way to create fun. This includes ships people are currently not flying, and super caps who are offline (even if moored). Sure, people like shiny loot drops, but there can be a balance where the use of the structure for jobs and the modules/salvage themselves are shiny enough, imagine if when you destroy a structure, if it was half way through a production run of 50 Thoraxes, it said 'enough time has gone by for 25 to have been made, so I'm going to roll the loot fairy dice for 25 thoraxes, and also on the remaining 50% of the raw materials as well, and you might even get a BPC with 25 runs left on it (or a bpo)). Suddenly you get shiny loot drops from the jobs in progress, rather than simply destroying all jobs in progress outright. But the persons individual assets just sitting in storage are safe. Both sides win there.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 592	Posted - 2015.05.14 22:35:39 - [47] - Quote Solecist Project wrote: hehe. Erections definitely can be a PITA. Sheesh, so subtle sense of humour, OP has. ^_^ Wow. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2378	Posted - 2015.05.14 22:41:04 - [48] - Quote Mr Mieyli wrote: Vimsy Vortis wrote: Fun fact: PVP is allowed everywhere in this sandbox PVP game. And as an addition, PvP can take different forms in different areas of space. Variety is the spice of life. Why can't highsec have low value not too hard to kill points of conflict that might be meaningful to one guy and his friends but wouldn't be meaningful in the grand scheme of things? It can, but the carebears will of course whine endlessly about not being safe enough. Because it is literally impossible for it to ever be safe enough for carebears. They will want to be safer even when it is totally impossible for anyone to attack them in any way.
Hir Miriel Elves In Space 190	Posted - 2015.05.15 00:45:42 - [49] - Quote Zappity wrote: I thought they removed standings requirements for POS? The requirement for standings in high sec space were removed with, erm, Crius update? Forget how to spell it. ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~
Mr Mieyli Hedion University Amarr Empire 10	Posted - 2015.05.15 09:45:34 - [50] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: Mr Mieyli wrote: Vimsy Vortis wrote: Fun fact: PVP is allowed everywhere in this sandbox PVP game. And as an addition, PvP can take different forms in different areas of space. Variety is the spice of life. Why can't highsec have low value not too hard to kill points of conflict that might be meaningful to one guy and his friends but wouldn't be meaningful in the grand scheme of things? It can, but the carebears will of course whine endlessly about not being safe enough. Because it is literally impossible for it to ever be safe enough for carebears. They will want to be safer even when it is totally impossible for anyone to attack them in any way. The item safety arguement doesn't really apply to highsec as why would anyone in highsec store their valuables in a destructible citadel anyway when nearly every system is already full of indestructible npc stations? POCOs work because by owning a poco you actually get benefits from it and people are willing to fight over those benefits as each planet can only have one poco. The new player owned structures should likewise provide similar benefits, under similar limitations, to the people who own them and that will partly offset the risk of having an asset floating in space while still giving points of conflict.

Hir Miriel Elves In Space 191	Posted - 2015.05.15 09:59:16 - [51] - Quote Mr Mieyli wrote: The item safety arguement doesn't really apply to highsec as why would anyone in highsec store their valuables in a destructible citadel anyway when nearly every system is already full of indestructible npc stations? POCOs work because by owning a poco you actually get benefits from it and people are willing to fight over those benefits as each planet can only have one poco. The new player owned structures should likewise provide similar benefits, under similar limitations, to the people who own them and that will partly offset the risk of having an asset floating in space while still giving points of conflict. Safety is an interesting topic of its own. In the real world we can attack anyone at any time for any reason. There are some risks to that of course, and those risks, usually deter us from doing as we wish whenever we wish. Games like EVE and GTA V let us explore our dark side, they let us unclip the safety belts and drive recklessly across space and time, and other people. However I do think that having a safe blankey to hold is an appealing idea. A warm little citadel next to the fire, keeping us safe. I think EVE would benefit from having a differing citadel scape of possibilities. From warm and cozy to death star grim. Mainly because it would let people have a stake in EVE, that would always tie them to the game, if they wished to be safe. I think that's good for EVE's safety. Not only because carebears are a huge market, but also because we all have a little carebear in us, that sometimes just wants to sit at home in a warm citadel by the fire, eat some popcorn and watch some movies, without feeling like being an extra in a suspense movie all the time. ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~
Eve Solecist Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD 2988	Posted - 2015.05.15 17:49:39 - [52] - Quote Hir Miriel wrote: Not only because carebears are a huge market, but also because we all have a little carebear in us, that sometimes just wants to sit at home in a warm citadel by the fire, eat some popcorn and watch some movies, without feeling like being an extra in a suspense movie all the time. They are a huge market, indeed. You are so fake, really. That huge market is a market full of sad people with issues. If you don't believe that, simply look at the games these people play. How these games feed these people with fake senses of superiority and how they manipulate them. That's the carebears. A huge market full of victims. I definitely do not have a little carebear inside of me. No sane person wants even more of these kind of "people" around here. They are self centered, self entitled, greedy, have gigantic personality issues, and a lot of other things which you can find spread out in a lot of carebears you can find right here on the forums. Just look at Istanchuck or Basil. How these people can actually participate in society makes me question society. So ... No. The last thing EVE needs is more losers who suck at living. 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
Bagrat Skalski Poseidaon 8476	Posted - 2015.05.15 17:59:10 - [53] - Quote Having no home is a good way of living also. Ship is your home. You can fly anywhere and do everything. Stuff you carry with yourself is all you need. I have been spending a lot of time in eve doing that. But I also like to watch the CQ screen with all those scope news, sightseeing videos and commercials, and thinking about game. Its like meditation. Custom ship skins \| Since 2014 \| Character creator style "repaint" \| Bring back the dream
Hir Miriel Elves In Space 191	Posted - 2015.05.16 02:50:39 - [54] - Quote Eve Solecist wrote: Hir Miriel wrote: Not only because carebears are a huge market, but also because we all have a little carebear in us, that sometimes just wants to sit at home in a warm citadel by the fire, eat some popcorn and watch some movies, without feeling like being an extra in a suspense movie all the time. They are a huge market, indeed. You are so fake, really. That huge market is a market full of sad people with issues. If you don't believe that, simply look at the games these people play. How these games feed these people with fake senses of superiority and how they manipulate them. That's the carebears. A huge market full of victims. I definitely do not have a little carebear inside of me. No sane person wants even more of these kind of "people" around here. They are self centered, self entitled, greedy, have gigantic personality issues, and a lot of other things which you can find spread out in a lot of carebears you can find right here on the forums. Just look at Istanchuck or Basil. How these people can actually participate in society makes me question society. So ... No. The last thing EVE needs is more losers who suck at living. :) It's not going to be possible to get a real sense of our true selves on these forums, these virtual meeting places where we can wear any face. The whole thing with the derision of carebears is an age old exercise in making ourselves feel better by putting others down. We are tough and macho, true Rambos of unreality. Carebears are soft mewling and helpless. Or that's the fiction anyhow. The truth is... Carebears have teeth. ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~
Hir Miriel Elves In Space 191	Posted - 2015.05.16 02:56:00 - [55] - Quote Bagrat Skalski wrote: Having no home is a good way of living also. Ship is your home. You can fly anywhere and do everything. Stuff you carry with yourself is all you need. I have been spending a lot of time in eve doing that. But I also like to watch the CQ screen with all those scope news, sightseeing videos and commercials, and thinking about game. Its like meditation. Just for the fun of it I did some POS stuff and it's quite fun! It's not like I need it for anything, but it involves a fair bit of logistics and thought and you pretty much make your own little home. Lost in space. If I had any interest in EVE's long term future I'd think about how to give every player a better chance of doing that. Luckily I don't have any such onerous responsibility and can fly through varied virtualities having a think about things, and sometimes talking about those thoughts. You are very much right, when we meditate about the abyss of space, the abyss meditates upon us. It's good for us. ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2388	Posted - 2015.05.16 04:02:35 - [56] - Quote I'm actually much worse in real life.
Eve Solecist Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD 3005	Posted - 2015.05.16 07:14:25 - [57] - Quote Hir Miriel wrote: Eve Solecist wrote: Hir Miriel wrote: Not only because carebears are a huge market, but also because we all have a little carebear in us, that sometimes just wants to sit at home in a warm citadel by the fire, eat some popcorn and watch some movies, without feeling like being an extra in a suspense movie all the time. They are a huge market, indeed. You are so fake, really. That huge market is a market full of sad people with issues. If you don't believe that, simply look at the games these people play. How these games feed these people with fake senses of superiority and how they manipulate them. That's the carebears. A huge market full of victims. I definitely do not have a little carebear inside of me. No sane person wants even more of these kind of "people" around here. They are self centered, self entitled, greedy, have gigantic personality issues, and a lot of other things which you can find spread out in a lot of carebears you can find right here on the forums. Just look at Istanchuck or Basil. How these people can actually participate in society makes me question society. So ... No. The last thing EVE needs is more losers who suck at living. :) It's not going to be possible to get a real sense of our true selves on these forums, these virtual meeting places where we can wear any face. The whole thing with the derision of carebears is an age old exercise in making ourselves feel better by putting others down. We are tough and macho, true Rambos of unreality. Carebears are soft mewling and helpless. Or that's the fiction anyhow. The truth is... Carebears have teeth. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA sorry but typing on forums does not equal "having teeth", it equals "being a slave to authority" and "Crying always helped me get what I want from mommy". 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
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12990	Posted - 2015.05.16 07:21:17 - [58] - Quote Hir Miriel wrote: The whole thing with the derision of carebears is an age old exercise in making ourselves feel better by putting others down. For my part, it's because I've grown tired of watching them kill perfectly good games with their mewling pleas for more safety in a PvP game. I'm an Ultima Online refugee, after all. In addition, I deride the concept that all opinions are equal and have equal merit, purely by virtue of belonging to someone who has managed to continue breathing up to this point. That's pretty much one of the dumbest ideas Mankind has ever put forth, if you ask me. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Eve Solecist Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD 3005	Posted - 2015.05.16 07:31:27 - [59] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Hir Miriel wrote: The whole thing with the derision of carebears is an age old exercise in making ourselves feel better by putting others down. For my part, it's because I've grown tired of watching them kill perfectly good games with their mewling pleas for more safety in a PvP game. I'm an Ultima Online refugee, after all. In addition, I deride the concept that all opinions are equal and have equal merit, purely by virtue of belonging to someone who has managed to continue breathing up to this point. That's pretty much one of the dumbest ideas Mankind has ever put forth, if you ask me. Too many illuminati references nowadays. Everyone thinks high of himself and his opinion. Opinions matter more than actual truth. Truth is swamped by bullshit. Ignorance is Strength. People whine to authority like it's a big brother. Fascinating how the western world looks like today. 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
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12990	Posted - 2015.05.16 07:38:37 - [60] - Quote Eve Solecist wrote: Fascinating how the western world looks like today. I blame the public school system, personally. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.

Eve Solecist Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD 3005	Posted - 2015.05.16 07:44:50 - [61] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Eve Solecist wrote: Fascinating how the western world looks like today. I blame the public school system, personally. This is also something. Of course you do. It's part of the problem! People blame literally everything else before they blame what is actually at fault. Themselves. Anyhow, that's not the topic. Not that there is much of one. OP is the typical, amarrian carebear. 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
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12990	Posted - 2015.05.16 07:50:11 - [62] - Quote Eve Solecist wrote: Of course you do. It's part of the problem! People blame literally everything else before they blame what is actually at fault. Themselves. I'd have to say that, given the role they play in formative development, at such an early age, and permeated throughout a person's lifespan for such a long time, they are at fault. At least in part anyway, for a variety of the ills of the current generation(s). And yes, OP is typical carebear, with typical carebear whine. Until highsec's NPC stations become valid targets for attacks, or the ability to manufacture is removed entirely from said stations, there really isn't much to complain about, as there aren't enough reasons to own one in highsec these days. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Eve Solecist Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD 3005	Posted - 2015.05.16 08:18:12 - [63] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Eve Solecist wrote: Of course you do. It's part of the problem! People blame literally everything else before they blame what is actually at fault. Themselves. I'd have to say that, given the role they play in formative development, at such an early age, and permeated throughout a person's lifespan for such a long time, they are at fault. At least in part anyway, for a variety of the ills of the current generation(s). And yes, OP is typical carebear, with typical carebear whine. Until highsec's NPC stations become valid targets for attacks, or the ability to manufacture is removed entirely from said stations, there really isn't much to complain about, as there aren't enough reasons to own one in highsec these days. No they aren't. Who let them become that way? The people. Who let politicians do what they want? The people. Who keeps being a slave to consumerism? The people. Who just let's the assholes, in our case carebears, run rampant? The people. Until it's realised that the fault is one's own ... ... people will keep talking about everything they perceive as wrong ... ... without realising the actual source. Ignorance is Strength. OP fits into the example, like so many other carebears. They whine. People speak up. Discussion is the wrong approach, because trying educating the ignorant is futile. The only valid solution is the one solution that is out of their reach. "Talking" is the only thing they can, so killing them is the best way to progress. 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
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12990	Posted - 2015.05.16 08:21:58 - [64] - Quote Eve Solecist wrote: No they aren't. Who let them become that way? The people. That isn't entirely true. It's actually a rather interesting historical discussion, but public schools were framed as they are due largely to the pseudo dictatorial attitude of Franklin Roosevelt, almost entirely at the behest of corporate interests(unknown to the public at large), as a way to train the succeeding generation as brainless factory workers. Now, if you are pointing to his being elected as the fault of the people, I will not disagree. But then I don't believe in "one pulse, one vote" either. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Solecist Project Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD 24838	Posted - 2015.05.16 08:36:40 - [65] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Eve Solecist wrote: No they aren't. Who let them become that way? The people. That isn't entirely true. It's actually a rather interesting historical discussion, but public schools were framed as they are due largely to the pseudo dictatorial attitude of Franklin Roosevelt, almost entirely at the behest of corporate interests(unknown to the public at large), as a way to train the succeeding generation as brainless factory workers. Now, if you are pointing to his being elected as the fault of the people, I will not disagree. But then I don't believe in "one pulse, one vote" either. His election is their fault. Letting him do it is their fault. But it's deeper, actually. People get elected and people then have to stfu ... ... and that's exactly what they do. I see it in Austria just as much. The schools aren't to blame. Why? Because people confuse words like "schools" with who is teaching. The people. And it's the people who blindly accept what they are being told to do ... ... and don't speak up in masses against the bullshit that's happening. Like teachers who oppose gendercrap and anti-authority bullshit. So ... again. Not schools. The teachers. People. When you read newspapers here it's always "Austria has this", "Austria does that", "Austria is shocked", etc. Who is this Austria? The politicians. Yet it's meant as "the people". You read "schools" and think schools do anything. They don't. They are buildings. Who teaches? The people. You have this bullshit literally everywhere and people accept it without thinking. Try again ... I can adress every argument and it always comes down to those who do not speak up and blindly follow every bullshit that is being declared as correct. Me. You. Everyone. S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD Give a man fire and he has it warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he has it warm for the rest of his life.
Hir Miriel Elves In Space 191	Posted - 2015.05.16 10:28:17 - [66] - Quote Citadels of virtuality, that's what MMO games are. Where we can all be safe. Putting our stuff in our banks that are safe from the voracious greed of Wall St goons. Owning wonderful things that we will never own in real life. Doing things we wouldn't do in real life. Because MMOs are safe. Even if we die, we come back, reborn because we carebears don't like loss. And we are all carebears to some extent, playing safely at keyboards with CCP keeping the datastreams safe for us. Even keeping the forums safe for us. There's a little carebear in us all, not very cute usually, and with a financial bite that drives game designers to look at ways to let us ramp risk levels up on our own, as we learn the games and get bored with being too safe. As it is now, we have NPC citadels. Perfectly safe places to store our goodies, and alts that never go anywhere dangerous. For my money, having a more player designable version of that is a good thing. ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~
Minmatar Citizen 534612187 Citizen Corp. 40	Posted - 2015.05.16 11:11:49 - [67] - Quote Eve Solecist wrote: Everyone thinks high of himself and his opinion. Opinions matter more than actual truth. Truth is swamped by bullshit. Ignorance is Strength. People whine to authority like it's a big brother. Fascinating how the western world looks like today. I guess you're the one who speaks the truth, huh?


Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.