| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Grey Area
Caldari
   |
Posted - 2006.11.18 09:42:00 -
[121]
I'm still trying to see how this works...
You're PVPers. There are three basic groups within that brand. Alliance fighters, gatecampers and mission runner hunters. Forgive me if I've missed any, as you'll no doubt have gathered by now I'm assessing this from the outside looking in.
So the WCS nerf is an obvious change for alliance fighters, and I'd guess that all of them view it as positive...they've been heartily sick of hit & run tactics, and are glad to see the back of it. Though I don't understand why in a large fleet engagement, you couldn't get enough points of scrambling on a ship to hold it...more ships, more scramblers, surely? Failing that, there was nothing stopping you fitting WCS too. Like I said, this may just be the demented ramblings of a carebear.
Gatecampers...can't see why you'd support this. It's going to break your sniping ships, BUT at the same time, haulers will continue to fit multi-stabs.
Mission runner hunters...you THINK this will work in your favour, but those mission runners who operate on the borders of empire space will simply STOP COMING.
My suggestion: Allow ONE WCS without penalty, but increase the penalty for all subsequent WCS to 75%...this means that two WCS would give you the same effective range and lock time as under the current system on Sisi...three would make it even worse. One WCS might actually be enough of a "safety net" to convince L4 mission runners to continue nipping over the border into systems like Nalvula to risk the mission. Without it, we will consider rejecting the mission, and if that is happening too often, we have to consider moving to other agents away from the borders.
If you mission run in 0.0 to 0.3, please bear in mind that this probably doesn't apply to you...I'm specifically thinking of edge-of-empire mission runners, who get sent into 0.4 systems that are chokepoints and so are;
1. Heavily populated
2. Frequently camped
Regardless of your comments on my choice of playstyle, and my inability to watch local, try and see the bigger picture...there are a LOT of mission runners who think like I do, and those of you who like non-consensual PVP are going to find it harder to find, and when you do, harder to be successful...mission runner numbers will be decreased and haulers will be heavily stabbed. If you are a sniper, you are going to be more at risk from a covert ops warp in. I don't particularly LIKE sniping, and I don't particularly LIKE hit and run tactics...but both of them should remain a valid tactic in what is supposed to be a free combat environment.
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Laboratus
Gallente
BGG
Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.18 10:38:00 -
[122]
 Originally by: Auman
Originally by: Laboratus
Edited by: Laboratus on 16/11/2006 10:02:20
Edited by: Laboratus on 16/11/2006 10:02:03
All in all, at the moment the warp scambling system is borked.
You should not be able to stop someone warping with a single 20km distrupter.
It's way too easy and painless. You should at least have to use a 7.5km or two 20kms.
This unneeded WCS nerf further aggravates this problem.
Ships have racial propulsion types and strenghts. At some point the system was meant to use them, but it no longer does, if it has ever done so.
So, why not use those strenghts and make warp scambling chance based to get rid of this
Very _lame_ distrupt/web/jam that leaves you just wobbling about like a lame duck.
It's lame, and not interesting. At least make them use a dictor.
Chance based. Thank you.
No thanks, chance based ECM is bad enough.
The fact that it is too easy still stands.
Then perhaps all ships should have one point of warp core strength as a start, so you need at least 2 points of scram to hold down a ship to start with.
That could work too...
___
P.S.
Post with your main.
Mind control and tin hats |
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.11.18 11:34:00 -
[123]
Originally by: Laboratus
The fact that it is too easy still stands.
Then perhaps all ships should have one point of warp core strength as a start, so you need at least 2 points of scram to hold down a ship to start with.
That could work too...
No, I'd disagree. A pirate who fits one warp scrambler should have the upper hand against a victim who decides to fitt all cargo expanders, or all damage mods, thus ignoring all "safety" options. BUT, said safety options SHOULD remain viable, and yes, EVEN FOR A SHIP THAT HAS SOME INTENTION TO FIGHT. What should be RIGHTLY nerfed is intending to fight with 4 or 5 (or even 8, on some BS's) warp core stabs fitted without much penalty to effectiveness.
But to nerf even ONE so harshly, is too much.
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Kunoichi
Gallente
Fortunis Novum
|
Posted - 2006.11.18 11:58:00 -
[124]
Originally by: Grey Area
...
So the WCS nerf is an obvious change for alliance fighters, and I'd guess that all of them view it as positive...they've been heartily sick of hit & run tactics, and are glad to see the back of it. Though I don't understand why in a large fleet engagement, you couldn't get enough points of scrambling on a ship to hold it...more ships, more scramblers, surely? Failing that, there was nothing stopping you fitting WCS too. Like I said, this may just be the demented ramblings of a carebear.
Some Alliances do not allow their fighting force to fit WCS because it could be used as some "Flaming-Ammo".
In addition it is rather pointless if you got stabs or not because in most cases of .0 you will have to face multiple enemys. Even a +6 stabbed Occator might run into problems.
Then there is of course the Bubble - If you are unlucky enough to run into one only MWD will help you anyway.
So basically no big change for Alliance Fighters
Originally by: Grey Area
Gatecampers...can't see why you'd support this. It's going to break your sniping ships, BUT at the same time, haulers will continue to fit multi-stabs.
The "Warp to 0km" thingy made Gatecamping obsolete.
Nobody with brain will warp an Hauler to another range anymore.
And if you ever Gatecamped you would know that 95% of the people with instas get away.
A welcome change however is the fact that ppl wont be able to fit a rack of WCS on their Sniperguns.
Originally by: Grey Area
Mission runner hunters...you THINK this will work in your favour, but those mission runners who operate on the borders of empire space will simply STOP COMING.
And thats why Hi-Sec-Money-Making needs to be nerfed:
It became too easy to make serious money in Hi-Sec. Why should people bother to go into an Plex in lowsec when they can run an lvl4 mission in Hi sec.
Why should people rat in low sec for 10 mil/hour when they can mine Kernite in Genesis for 5 mil/h.
I am not saying Carebears should go to low sec and get killed but why can't they organize themselfes? Where are the mining ops? Where is the corpwide plexrun?
Where is there escort for the Hauler?
Simply: Where is the TEAMWORK?
Here some examples from my pirating experience:
E.g: 2 haulers transported a Small POS thru low sec and got raped by my corpmates Tempest.
Now the question: Why do they carry a 100 mil Pos in an IT5 and why is there no escort at all? - Would have been so easy to avoid that loss if the hauler was an Transport or an escort with an sensor dampener would have been with them.
Another Example: Mining OP in low sec: 1 Carrier 2 Barges 1 Megathron 1 Ferox
We killed the Megathron and the Carrier - The Chimera was actually mining with them.
So what could have been done better?
1st) The system they were in was an dead end system - Why didnt they use the Ferox as an scout in order to watch an 8 ship gang coming in?
2nd) Why did the carrier hang out in an belt? and MINE? - Carriers are supposed to be support guys!
3rd) Why did they held that Mining-Op for over 3 hours? if you are sitting ducks you will attract a lot of attention.
urgh server coming up - might write more later! 
___________________
Kunoichi
-think different- |
1CE WIND
|
Posted - 2006.11.18 13:20:00 -
[125]
I'm going to do something i never thought i would. I'm going to agree with Grey Area.
Allowing 1 single stab without penalty isn't that bad to warrant around 5 pages of carebear bashing.
You can make a number of points about how 1 wcs is still unbalancing etc. but when you come down to it the only truly, truly annoying thing about stabs was when someone fit upwards of 3 stabs. The compromisedeal of allowing 1 wcs without penalty is a nice mid point between completely nerfing stabs and having them the way they once where.
Why you would ever want to fit a single stab is rather beyond me but that is not the point. If these people really want to fit 1 stab on their mission running setups i don't have a problem with it and i don't really think it will affect the game all that much.
1ce Wind
(Pirate/Interdictor Pilot)
|
Leandro Salazar
Aeon Industries
Confederation of Independent Corporations
|
Posted - 2006.11.18 13:42:00 -
[126]
Actually I run missions in lowsec, and I NEVER fit a WCS. Neither does anyone else I talk to who is successful at running missions. Keeping an eye on local and/or scanning for probes > WCS. The pirates actually bothering to probe out mission runners are few and far between in my area of operation, and the few that do it can easily be picked up.
At the same time I rejoice at the WCS nerf since the pirates fit those a LOT to escape any kind of retaliation. So WCS nerf is actually good for the kind of militant mission runner that I am.
The problem I see, and which will probably drive me back to highsec, is the new easy-mode probing system, allowing every happy-go lucky pirate to probe a mission runner out. If every passing pirate is likely to cause me to interrupt my mission in lowsec, I will make more in highsec even with only half the rewards.
---------
ZOMG my sig was concordokkened!
Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
|
Colonel Drego
Caldari
Angels of the Apocolypse
|
Posted - 2006.11.18 16:26:00 -
[127]
Well, what about a single WCS for the mission itself? Often times at least one of the NPCs will have a warp scrambler, but you have no indication of which. If you have a WCS you can get out of the mission if you get in over your head and call for some help, but now with the nerf, that bit of security is gone. No second chances if you get in a bit of trouble.
|
Voltron
Caldari
Black Lance
Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.11.18 16:54:00 -
[128]
Slightly skewed perception of risk vs reward from the OP.
Volt
It's great touching your own dink isn't it?
|
Warlord Zinji
|
Posted - 2006.11.18 18:22:00 -
[129]
I started reading this post but i was sick in my mouth and swallowed my own bile.
I now understand internet rage, now all im thinking about is
1. axe
2. knife
3. chain saw
4. expanding foam up the rusty old sheriffs badge
I cant decide maybe all 4 |
The Fates
Perkone
|
Posted - 2006.11.18 18:52:00 -
[130]
What's a disgrace here is all these 0.0 alliance people in this thread complaining about empire mission runners. Thats so funny I could cry my ribs hurt so bad.
The wcs nerf is fine... it doesn't have anything to do with high sec mission running (if you fit wcs you are underskilled) and if you are in low sec, then you have consented to pvp imo anyway... I have to agree with the "grow a pair" argument in that case.
Originally by: My Best Friend
You do realize, you could get a college education before you train all those skills?
|
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.11.18 20:26:00 -
[131]
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
The problem I see, and which will probably drive me back to highsec, is the new easy-mode probing system, allowing every happy-go lucky pirate to probe a mission runner out.
I am sure I referenced this earlier in the thread. It is this proposed change TOGETHER with the WCS nerf that REALLY causes me concern. A single scanner will be able to track us down, and with a single warp scram hold us until we die, since the WCS is too harshly nerfed to fit.
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Commoner
Caldari
Emergent Chaos
The Core Collective
|
Posted - 2006.11.18 22:05:00 -
[132]
Edited by: Commoner on 18/11/2006 22:12:27
Edited by: Commoner on 18/11/2006 22:10:17
Edited by: Commoner on 18/11/2006 22:06:48
Originally by: Hoshi
If you like the stab nerf that much you are going to love the changes to the probe system.
My estimate is that for a competent prober with good skills it will take around 2-3 min from dropping the first probe until he is warping in on you with 0m accuracy.
The window of opportunity you have to see his probes on the scanner to warn you is around 40 sec long.
This estimate assumes you are in a BS and the mission take place within 40au from the system center.
Okay so a pirate can scan me out in less than 5 mins?? Gotta get hard to finish a mission in lowsec when the average mission takes about half an hour to complete :O
i see one of 3 solutions.
1)Bring a friend
2)Be ganged with corpies so they can warp in on me
3)Find a backdoor lowsec system with no activity in a three mile radius at and a crappy q agent.
Solution 1 won't work in many missions since having a wingmate often causes mass aggro from entire stage :)
Solution 2 wont work because most missions are deadspace, so you have to travel thru all the acceleration gates.
I Chose solution 3 ;)
Better start to scan 360 degrees 14au every 60s.
|
happyapples
Caldari
Eden Fight Club
|
Posted - 2006.11.18 22:18:00 -
[133]
this is dumb. i'm a pirate and i am against the wcs nerf. nerfing wcs will completely remove belt ratters from low sec... and belt ratters are my bread and butter. i really don't mind using a 2pt scram to get ppl! and if they're smart enough to have two stabs fitted, good for them - i really don't mind having to fit extra pts or bring a gang member to get them, and the extra challenge involved is fun!
nerf wcs and low-sec npcs will never be shot at again... and this is a very very bad thing for me.
this is my first post - i felt that this issue is important enough to register and post about.
|
Sebmagic
Caldari
In Articulo Mortis
|
Posted - 2006.11.18 22:23:00 -
[134]
Grey, I'm a mission runner.... and I have a no-penality WCS all the time.
It might not work all the times, but it's a way to look at it the issue.
Offer a GOOD ransom (isk isk ISK) to the pirate that jumps you. If your courteous and fast, the pirate might be satisfied by your offer and let you go for now. It's a way to look at things.
|
Leandro Salazar
Aeon Industries
Confederation of Independent Corporations
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 02:06:00 -
[135]
Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 19/11/2006 02:06:10
Originally by: Grey Area
I am sure I referenced this earlier in the thread. It is this proposed change TOGETHER with the WCS nerf that REALLY causes me concern. A single scanner will be able to track us down, and with a single warp scram hold us until we die, since the WCS is too harshly nerfed to fit.
IF you are probed out by pirates, I highly doubt they would bring only one point of scrambling in the first place. Would be kinda stupid...
So imho 1 WCS wouldn't make a difference.
Originally by: Grey Area
I can't explain to you how deep this runs. But just take some of the bile, loathing and hatred durected at carebears here (and I DON'T accept that it's directed at whiners...there's no Carebear monopoly on whining, or WCS wouldn't have been nerfed in the first place) and reverse it. If we suggested banning all PVP and turning EVE into one big empire system, forcing you all to run level 4's, what would you do? Would you kow-tow like good little players, or would you simply quit?
That is actually a very good point, and one that all these overinflated PvP-egos who think they have a monopoly on determining how the game is supposed to be played should think about a little. Though I read another interesting citation just today that is regrettably very true, especially with most EVE-players:
Thinking is hard, therefore most people judge. (Losely translated from german)
---------
ZOMG my sig was concordokkened!
Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
|
Vinni
Caldari
Aveatcay Emptorway
Intergalactic Freelance Corporations
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 02:21:00 -
[136]
Quote:
Stabs should only be used for travel, you want to shoot but you dont want to be shot at . You dont need stabs for mission running,
I have been scrambled by rats in L3 and L4 missions in empire space. I'm not crazy about the penalty with WCS because of this. If they do away with rats that scramble, then I'm all for it.
Don Vinni, Da Boss of Aveatcay Emptorway |
Gordan Freeman
Caldari
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 02:28:00 -
[137]
Edited by: Gordan Freeman on 19/11/2006 02:32:39
I think its time to call the WHAAAAABULANCE. The BEST part about the WCS nerf is these kinds of posts. I'm going to love every day up until the 28 of whiners about all the teir 2 BC's and the WCS nerf.. WCS were abused PVP which is a huge part of eve was becoming next to impossible in low sec with these combined jamming. Im not gonna argue with someone who has only npced his whole eve career cause his opinion will never change so all I can say is.
OWNED 
|
BlackMoon Thrawn
the Organ Grinder and Company
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 02:30:00 -
[138]
Quote:
I'm specifically thinking of edge-of-empire mission runners, who get sent into 0.4 systems that are chokepoints and so are;
So basicaly, if you ran missions in a constellation with no highsec or lowsec transitions we wouldnt have to listen to this?
|
Tyler Lowe
Minmatar
DROW Org
Sylph Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 03:13:00 -
[139]
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
Originally by: Grey Area
I can't explain to you how deep this runs. But just take some of the bile, loathing and hatred durected at carebears here (and I DON'T accept that it's directed at whiners...there's no Carebear monopoly on whining, or WCS wouldn't have been nerfed in the first place) and reverse it. If we suggested banning all PVP and turning EVE into one big empire system, forcing you all to run level 4's, what would you do? Would you kow-tow like good little players, or would you simply quit?
That is actually a very good point...
This is probably the most valid point I've read on the thread.
Here's one I'd like to add. Eve is designed with PvP in mind. As a PvE player in a game that focuses on the PvP aspect of play, you accept that you get what's leftover in terms of development time after the PvP portion of the game is enhanced or balanced. You accept the balance in game set in place for PvP and adapt it to PvE. Balancing for PvE is never a good choice. Balancing to please PvE players in a setting like Eve also isn't a good choice.
Removing level 4 agents from highsec is simply asking for cancelled accounts, on that I agree. For WCS though... if you accept that mission runners must learn to adapt and use modules/ships balanced for PvP (and I hope you can see this), then you have to show how the use of one WCS without penality will enhance or at the very least not harm that portion of the game. In other words, arguing for a single non penalized WCS for the sake of PvE players isn't going to cut it.
In order to do that, you need to ask the players that will be most affected (that would be the PvP oriented players) what they think would be the effect of that non penalized WCS, and if they don't like it, see if they can come up with a work around. Simply being combative when confronted with disagreement won't produce results. The same thing you point to as a theoretical example of forcing a playstyle or hurting a playstyle for the sake of seeing others suffer can be applied to not following through with a substantial WCS nerf. With warp to 0 coming, you'd make PvP all but impossible without one.
I'd like to think there is room for both types of players, and all variations in between, but it's mighty hard to come to a co-operative effort to enhance the game for all or any sort of understanding for that matter, if all people do is bicker and flame rather than hold meaningful discussion. The blame game goes both ways, not just from the direction of PvP players aimed at the PvE crowd. Worth considering before accusing anyone that likes getting shot at and shooting back of doing it for the sake of ego.
Just some additional food for thought, sorry if the rant went long.
J.A.F.O.
|
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 03:18:00 -
[140]
Originally by: BlackMoon Thrawn
Quote:
I'm specifically thinking of edge-of-empire mission runners, who get sent into 0.4 systems that are chokepoints and so are;
So basicaly, if you ran missions in a constellation with no highsec or lowsec transitions we wouldnt have to listen to this?
No one MADE you click on the thread...
REAL low sec (0.3 => 0.0) is less of a problem 'cos there's less population. 0.4's are a special case because most of them are "gateways to 0.0" and so are heavily camped and scouted.
---
I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment until you've looked at them. |
Shardrael
Caldari
AWE Corporation
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 03:20:00 -
[141]
Originally by: Jin Entres
Originally by: Grey Area
You'll certainly see a LOT less mission runners in low sec. I thought CCP wanted exactly the opposite?
You're right. Remove L4's from hisec!
Originally by: Pinky Denmark
Caldari have other options like using rails or train for other ships/weapons...
|
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 03:23:00 -
[142]
Originally by: Tyler Lowe
This is probably the most valid point I've read on the thread. (followed by coherent argument...hard to believe but true)
I've posted the idea. Not ONE person yet has said why the idea as given would cause them trouble. They have *****ed about my playing style, about ships with four warp core stabs, about the risk vs reward in empire, about snipers with multiple stabs and gloated about their "pwnage" over carebears and mission runners. Basically not ONE SINGLE person has actually said "this will not work because"...
And I'M defensive?
---
I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment until you've looked at them. |
Phenom Fighter
Euphoria Released
Euphoria Unleashed
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 03:49:00 -
[143]
you mix WCS with turrets/launchers its wrong. It will always be exploited.
WCS were made for safe 'travel' not for safe 'pvp/pve'
Tho imo with all this 'penalty is too large' thing going on my vote has always been make the **** things high slot. prob solved
-----------------------------
|
BlackMoon Thrawn
the Organ Grinder and Company
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 03:53:00 -
[144]
Originally by: Grey Area
Originally by: BlackMoon Thrawn
Quote:
I'm specifically thinking of edge-of-empire mission runners, who get sent into 0.4 systems that are chokepoints and so are;
So basicaly, if you ran missions in a constellation with no highsec or lowsec transitions we wouldnt have to listen to this?
No one MADE you click on the thread...
REAL low sec (0.3 => 0.0) is less of a problem 'cos there's less population. 0.4's are a special case because most of them are "gateways to 0.0" and so are heavily camped and scouted.
A great point which has nothing to do with my post or what you stated you were specificaly worried about. I will say it again, if you did missions in constellations entirely contained within highsec or >4 low sec what would the problem be?
|
Tyler Lowe
Minmatar
DROW Org
Sylph Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 03:58:00 -
[145]
Originally by: Grey Area
And I'M defensive?
Yes.
But hear me out on that.
You have to actively seek that input, since you are asking for a change to a planned game mechanic. I'd find it hard to believe that you expect people to simply stop arguing down the same roads they're used to without some heavy prompting. I know you've been on game forums long enough to know better than that. People understand less than 80% of what they read, and many don't bother to do more than skim a topic and end up with much, much less than an 80% understanding of the intent of the author. People argue points they are comfortable with, even though they may have nothing to do with what you were trying to say. So you're going to have to pursue people and get them to discuss points they may not be comfortable with, things they need to dedicate new thought to.
That means showing patience in the face of resistance, and again, seeking out that input. It means not becoming instantly argumentative when you run into someone that disagrees, but rather being prepared to listen to why they think as they do, and I mean really think about what they have to say. It means you may have to ask for the "why's" when they are not provided. It also means being prepared to re-evaluate your own opinion in trying to find common ground and in so doing accept that you may be wrong, which can be a difficult thing. Granted, you may not have success with every person you ask or even with more than one or two, but opening a meaningful discussion of the issue with even one person can allow others to start looking at it from a different perspective than the preset, hardwired, responses they are used to carting out in threads that have been similar to this one.
I guess I'm suggesting that being prepared to compromise means acknowledging that you may not and probably won't get exactly what you wanted, but hopefully can find a solution that no one finds completely objectionable.
I don't want that to come off as some sort of lecture, I'm certainly no one of importance, it's meant purely to be what I hope is helpful, and constructive advice.
J.A.F.O.
|
BlackMoon Thrawn
the Organ Grinder and Company
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 03:59:00 -
[146]
Originally by: Grey Area
Originally by: Tyler Lowe
This is probably the most valid point I've read on the thread. (followed by coherent argument...hard to believe but true)
I've posted the idea. Not ONE person yet has said why the idea as given would cause them trouble. They have *****ed about my playing style, about ships with four warp core stabs, about the risk vs reward in empire, about snipers with multiple stabs and gloated about their "pwnage" over carebears and mission runners. Basically not ONE SINGLE person has actually said "this will not work because"...
And I'M defensive?
first page I think(maybe second). If one stab can be fitted then 2 warp jammers will have to be fitted for pvp. In ships with >4 high slots this is too high of a price to pay imo. You, of course, are entitled ot your opinion. Just don't say there havent been valid aguements from teh other side. The risk vs reward part was a specific argument to the point your play style is being infringed upon. Basicaly, I dont feel your play style (high sec level 4 missions) is valid.
|
Matrices Reborn
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 04:42:00 -
[147]
The WCS nerf boosts carebears in 0.0 more than anything else. In the ASCN-BoB war a lot of BoB slave corp ratters field at least 1 WCS to prevent themselves from being caught and killed by solo raiders.
Now as if solo raiders aren't being nerfed enough in Kali, we're going to see ratters fitting WCS without any meaningful penalty. (Who cares about lock time and range in any ratting BS?)
|
BlackMoon Thrawn
the Organ Grinder and Company
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 04:47:00 -
[148]
Quote:
The WCS nerf boosts carebears in 0.0 more than anything else. In the ASCN-BoB war a lot of BoB slave corp ratters field at least 1 WCS to prevent themselves from being caught and killed by solo raiders.
And so do ascn members. Its commmonplace and will take some getting used to but the nerf is needed. As a side note, is there any reason to bring specificaly inflamitory terms(like bob slave corp) into this discussion?
|
Thomas Maleficus
Caldari
Freelance Unincorporated
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 04:58:00 -
[149]
You want the privledge of ratting or running missions in low sec? You earn it. That's why the rewards are so high. You have to work and sacrifice. It's not all free you know and tbh if you are in low sec ratting and running missions you have to accept you are going to have some losses but a decent player will make back those losses. Sorry you learn as much by losing as you do by winning. You know the risks of going low sec, deal with it. WCS are not a free pass and they should not be. There are ways of not getting shot in 0.0 anyway, join a corp/alliance or do some dimplomatic negotiations (iskies) for the priviledge to be there. I'm tired of people wanting free unhindered access to low sec/0.0 it wasn't free for those who have established their places there why should it be free for some noob corp mission runner who doesn't have to pay taxes to thier corp and need not care about their corp mates. Hurray for WCS nerf!!!!
Pirates stole my signature. |
Gordan Freeman
Caldari
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2006.11.19 06:40:00 -
[150]
Originally by: Thomas Maleficus
You want the privledge of ratting or running missions in low sec? You earn it. That's why the rewards are so high. You have to work and sacrifice. It's not all free you know and tbh if you are in low sec ratting and running missions you have to accept you are going to have some losses but a decent player will make back those losses. Sorry you learn as much by losing as you do by winning. You know the risks of going low sec, deal with it. WCS are not a free pass and they should not be. There are ways of not getting shot in 0.0 anyway, join a corp/alliance or do some dimplomatic negotiations (iskies) for the priviledge to be there. I'm tired of people wanting free unhindered access to low sec/0.0 it wasn't free for those who have established their places there why should it be free for some noob corp mission runner who doesn't have to pay taxes to thier corp and need not care about their corp mates. Hurray for WCS nerf!!!!
here here
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |