EVE Search - War Dec System Needs To Change.

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

War Dec System Needs To Change.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2596	Posted - 2015.08.02 11:11:41 - [91] - Quote elise densi wrote: i live in nullsec some time now yes wardecs come and go but its not that mutch of an issue using our of ally alts etc to move in stuff the main issues also is new corps cant grow in highsec anymore let alone alliance forming when u get basicly perma wardecced this is also a main reason why eve doesnt get newer players into the game example new player joins a corp 1 day later corp gets wardecced new player is new he gets killed and he quits higher wardec costs for corp and alliance and limits would be mint to have 1-5 max wardecs Allow me to show you what you've just done; -WHs pay too well and are too safe. Example, I day trip into a C6 with my buzzard and solo 2 anoms and make 300billion off salvage in 10 minutes.- New corps cant grow in hisec anymore? Since when? Do you have all the information of every noob Corp that has ever started? Can you give actual examples of all these perma-decced noob corps? Names? Links? ANYTHING? The only thing in this post that is remotely true is that null sec groups use alts. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 1488	Posted - 2015.08.02 11:26:12 - [92] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: ... In fact, being killed early on in their EVE career makes them more likely to resub. [quote] I'm really not sure what this statement shows to be honest. I think it more likely shows that those who stay in Eve are the folks more willing to take risks and lose ships (as opposed to being killed is good for you!). An example would be my first month where i set myself a target to plex after the first signup month. To do so I mined better ore in losec, lost ships doing so but on balance achieved my goal. Being killed didn't make me more inclined to stay, but enjoying the kick from taking the risks did. [quote=Kaarous Aldurald]No. You do not get to talk about nerfing wardecs until the dec dodging exploit is removed. Until they're not 100% voluntary with no consequences for leaving, nothing about it warrants being nerfed. As wardecs stand right now I'm fine with this as corps can also check war histories to not dec rolling corps. This all needs a damn good looking at when the new structures come in though.
Lugburz SUPER GOOSE SQUAD Sons of Seraphinus 6	Posted - 2015.08.02 11:29:01 - [93] - Quote Actually highsec war decs do affect null operations specifically those that are dumb enough to have their jump frieghter guys not only in alliance but also on ap through hs. These wardecs hinder trade and supply lines to and from nullsec, imo what needs to change isnt the wardec itself but the players attitude towards it. In most null alliances you are actually specifically told not to operate in highsec whilst at war... wtf kind of stupidness is that? In reality what should happen, especially with larger groups is that they should form up and go fight, this would make the contracts groups like pursuit of happiness and marmite often take less appetising if they already have several decs up. In honesty i think thats what was intended but most null secers are miners or anom runners and wont fight.. its the same reason a lot of them are complaining about fozzie sov and being 'forced' to take a proactive approach rather than simply docking up.. You want easy made isk run incursions and remain in an npc corp; you want to interact with the rest of space and eve.. help defend your corpies and alliance folk and the image your all 'technically' portraying when some neut comes in local and you start spamming crappy smack talk like your an actual valued member.
Colt Blackhawk Viper-Squad pwn-O-graphy 310	Posted - 2015.08.02 11:44:17 - [94] - Quote I am really no highsec bear but CCP needs to do something about highsec. Let us face it: Yes there are players who simply want to do some occasional PVE and nothing else. Actually you can-¦t do that in high without getting forced to do PVP. But why the ** we try to force players into pvp when they don-¦t want it? CCP is really cutting off some customers from the game here completely. All these psychopaths who gank and wardec highsec bears can go to madhouse where they belong to and basta. This is not fighting, this is not pvp, this is simply destroying the game for other players by ganking and permawardeccing them. You can-¦t tell me that a catalyst idiot ganking peeps in high has good fights. Honestly every damn idiot could do that and no one can seriously tell me it is fun. This is not about fun, this is about saddism and nothing else. I would go even further and say we need something like super highsec without ganking and like that for people who REALLY only want to do some occasional pve. I really don-¦t know why CCP refuses something like that to a special customer group. [09:04:53] Ashira Twilight > Plant the f** amarr flag and s* on their smoking wrecks.
Karra Masamune Intelligence Operation NetCorp Khaos Legion 8	Posted - 2015.08.02 11:51:09 - [95] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: I am really no highsec bear but CCP needs to do something about highsec. Let us face it: Yes there are players who simply want to do some occasional PVE and nothing else. Actually you can-¦t do that in high without getting forced to do PVP. But why the ** we try to force players into pvp when they don-¦t want it? CCP is really cutting off some customers from the game here completely. All these psychopaths who gank and wardec highsec bears can go to madhouse where they belong to and basta. This is not fighting, this is not pvp, this is simply destroying the game for other players by ganking and permawardeccing them. You can-¦t tell me that a catalyst idiot ganking peeps in high has good fights. Honestly every damn idiot could do that and no one can seriously tell me it is fun. This is not about fun, this is about saddism and nothing else. I would go even further and say we need something like super highsec without ganking and ** like that for people who REALLY only want to do some occasional pve. I really don-¦t know why CCP refuses something like that to a special customer group. It's high sec it's not without RISK, if you want to do PVE do it smart, a bit less dps a bit more tank, or don't over bling your BS, or just use second character to scout ahead, or be in one of those intel channels where people say "watch out they are ganking in [insert system name]" etc etc etc There are ways to do it, but you need to be smart about it and not lazy about it, also being cost efficient helps a lot especially with how ship insurance work. I did forget, you can do 1 man corp that will almost never be deced, and even if someone does dec it you make new one before war start.
Lugburz SUPER GOOSE SQUAD Sons of Seraphinus 6	Posted - 2015.08.02 11:51:36 - [96] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: I am really no highsec bear but CCP needs to do something about highsec. Let us face it: Yes there are players who simply want to do some occasional PVE and nothing else. Actually you can-¦t do that in high without getting forced to do PVP. But why the ** we try to force players into pvp when they don-¦t want it? CCP is really cutting off some customers from the game here completely. All these psychopaths who gank and wardec highsec bears can go to madhouse where they belong to and basta. This is not fighting, this is not pvp, this is simply destroying the game for other players by ganking and permawardeccing them. You can-¦t tell me that a catalyst idiot ganking peeps in high has good fights. Honestly every damn idiot could do that and no one can seriously tell me it is fun. This is not about fun, this is about saddism and nothing else. I would go even further and say we need something like super highsec without ganking and ** like that for people who REALLY only want to do some occasional pve. I really don-¦t know why CCP refuses something like that to a special customer group. wrong, you want safe pve rejoin npc corp as they cant be decked. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=437679&find=unread
Colt Blackhawk Viper-Squad pwn-O-graphy 310	Posted - 2015.08.02 13:21:13 - [97] - Quote Lugburz wrote: Colt Blackhawk wrote: I am really no highsec bear but CCP needs to do something about highsec. Let us face it: Yes there are players who simply want to do some occasional PVE and nothing else. Actually you can-¦t do that in high without getting forced to do PVP. But why the ** we try to force players into pvp when they don-¦t want it? CCP is really cutting off some customers from the game here completely. All these psychopaths who gank and wardec highsec bears can go to madhouse where they belong to and basta. This is not fighting, this is not pvp, this is simply destroying the game for other players by ganking and permawardeccing them. You can-¦t tell me that a catalyst idiot ganking peeps in high has good fights. Honestly every damn idiot could do that and no one can seriously tell me it is fun. This is not about fun, this is about saddism and nothing else. I would go even further and say we need something like super highsec without ganking and like that for people who REALLY only want to do some occasional pve. I really don-¦t know why CCP refuses something like that to a special customer group. wrong, you want safe pve rejoin npc corp as they cant be decked. Wrong. You can be ganked. Probably eves no1 new player killer. [09:04:53] Ashira Twilight > Plant the f** amarr flag and s* on their smoking wrecks.
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 1489	Posted - 2015.08.02 13:24:51 - [98] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: ... wrong, you want safe pve rejoin npc corp as they cant be decked. Wrong. You can be ganked. Probably eves no1 new player killer.[/quote] 'Safe' PvE should only come from players taking the appropriate precautions for their style of play. Nothing is truly totally safe in Eve and nor should it be. I believe you are still told this from the very start too.
Lugburz SUPER GOOSE SQUAD Sons of Seraphinus 6	Posted - 2015.08.02 13:41:24 - [99] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: wrong, you want safe pve rejoin npc corp as they cant be decked. Wrong. You can be ganked. Probably eves no1 new player killer. I dont view ganking as pvp but either way it is a part of eve and always has been, it also has nothing what ever to do with war decs [unless it causes one] so im actually at a loss as to why you feel it relevant here? In effect if you do not wish to aid your corp or alliance when it is threatened or you are simply not willing or uninterested in pvp the option is there to remain or be in an npc corp; the rest of eve and its dangers are all associated with 'risk vs reward' and as such utalises the player base to add danger and challenges that AI will never (in any game i think?) be as hmm... as unpredictable and dangerous as only humans can be. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=437679&find=unread
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3327	Posted - 2015.08.02 14:35:27 - [100] - Quote You won't convince them. Just wait till fozzie sov fully hits n null falls apart n CCp realise most of there "pvp" pilots are nothing more than griefers in empire They want to "pvp" in empire, with booster alts, safe stations, the ability to run like cowards the second it looks like there gonna loose Its incredible. Hell ive killed more people in low/null than most of these high sec idiots ever have, they have no concept of true pvp, just there stupid griefer version of pvp
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3327	Posted - 2015.08.02 14:36:13 - [101] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: elise densi wrote: the main issues also is new corps cant grow in highsec anymore let alone alliance forming when u get basicly perma wardecced this is also a main reason why eve doesnt get newer players into the game Except that, according to CCP themselves, both of those statements are a lie. In fact, being killed early on in their EVE career makes them more likely to resub. Quote: higher wardec costs for corp and alliance and limits would be mint to have 1-5 max wardecs No. You do not get to talk about nerfing wardecs until the dec dodging exploit is removed. Until they're not 100% voluntary with no consequences for leaving, nothing about it warrants being nerfed. We will talke about whatever the hell we please codemonkey. You and your attitude are disgusting, period Go back to hiding behind ur mums skirt
Mag's the united 19944	Posted - 2015.08.02 15:18:24 - [102] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: You and your attitude are disgusting, period Go back to hiding behind ur mums skirt Irony. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Avvy Republic University Minmatar Republic 31	Posted - 2015.08.02 17:04:10 - [103] - Quote Valkin Mordirc wrote: Forcing players down a linear path is game breaking to a Sandbox type game. It certainly is. A sandbox is about choices, being a PvP sandbox means you can choose which toys you wish to play within the sandbox but you can't choose which toys are used against you.
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3327	Posted - 2015.08.02 19:33:07 - [104] - Quote Mag's wrote: Iam The Flash wrote: You and your attitude are disgusting, period Go back to hiding behind ur mums skirt Irony. Oh how?
admiral root Red Galaxy 2904	Posted - 2015.08.02 19:49:02 - [105] - Quote OP is absolutely right - wardecs need to change. CCP could make a good start by going back to war evasion being an exploit, lowering the cost of wars, getting rid of the silly NPC fees that defenders have to pay and ending the aggressor being able to chicken out when their victim makes the war mutual and starts kicking ass. No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13910	Posted - 2015.08.02 22:07:46 - [106] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: Let us face it: Yes there are players who simply want to do some occasional PVE and nothing else. Actually you can-¦t do that in high without getting forced to do PVP. But why the **** we try to force players into pvp when they don-¦t want it? The real question is: why are they playing a PvP sandbox game if they don't want to PvP? You're playing the game wrong, and you're playing the wrong game. "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.
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2597	Posted - 2015.08.02 22:18:38 - [107] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: I would go even further and say we need something like super highsec without ganking and **** like that for people who REALLY only want to do some occasional pve. I really don-¦t know why CCP refuses something like that to a special customer group. Because this is a PvP game at its core, with: PvP mining PvP market PvP hauling PvP combat Everything you do carries an element of risk and competition from other PLAYERS. Its the entire point of the game There is however the test server for your 'super hi-sec'. But you might as well whine that call of duty doesnt have dinosaurs for people who are only REALLY interested in dinosaurs. They are really cutting themselves out the market. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Colt Blackhawk Viper-Squad pwn-O-graphy 311	Posted - 2015.08.03 06:32:38 - [108] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Colt Blackhawk wrote: Let us face it: Yes there are players who simply want to do some occasional PVE and nothing else. Actually you can-¦t do that in high without getting forced to do PVP. But why the ** we try to force players into pvp when they don-¦t want it? The real question is: why are they playing a PvP sandbox game if they don't want to PvP? You're playing the game wrong, and you're playing the wrong game. Look my KB and you see I have nothing to do with highsec. Just saying that * like you should realise there are people who do not want do pvp. And actually CCP has nothing to offer for them tbh. Eve needs new players, so why not offer these people as paying customers some enviroment? [09:04:53] Ashira Twilight > Plant the f** amarr flag and s* on their smoking wrecks.
Barrogh Habalu Forever Winter Absolute Zero. 986	Posted - 2015.08.03 09:35:07 - [109] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: I suggest that corporations and alliances are limited to 5 war decs available. BRB making a few shell corps to start 5 permadecs and make myself dec immune. Iam The Flash wrote: Each corporation and alliance can only be declared war upon, 3 times. This prevents things like i.e Goonswarm being perma decked by every large griefer alliance in the game. BRB making even less shell corps to make my alliance permanently undecable. Iam The Flash wrote: For a corporation to declare war, they must have no fewer than 7 active members i.e 7 numbers. BRB making a bunch of free alts to pull of previous two plans. Tl;dr: please, think before posting. Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13912	Posted - 2015.08.03 11:35:43 - [110] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: And actually CCP has nothing to offer for them tbh. Eve needs new players, so why not offer these people as paying customers some enviroment? Why make the game something that it's not, in order to cater to functional non customers? "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.
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2597	Posted - 2015.08.03 11:38:24 - [111] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: Eve needs new players, so why not offer these people as paying customers some enviroment? sigh - Any product that is safe, quick and easy to acquire (like the rewards in your 'super hi-sec)' rapidly loses value in a player driven free market (like EVE's) to the point that it becomes worthless. This includes isk and is in fact exactly what happened in Ultima-online. - For anything to have value in EVE's market it must be risky, time consuming and/or difficult to acquire. The fact that every reward system in EVE is tied to the free market dictates that everything you do, no matter where or how you do it, is competitive. There is no choice in this. None. So whilst you might think its fine to let players be lonely and acquire wealth, every isk cent they use affects other players game for better or worse. And no, you do not get to affect other players game without having them affect you back, and when they do they can choose whatever tool in the sandbox to do it. If that means excessive weapons fire, thats just tough **. Welcome to the PvP sandbox. The only way to have your 'super hi-sec' not crash the EVE market would be to make everything inside very time consuming to acquire, give it an entirely separate server (oh look, sisi**) or unique set of rewards, hopefully including its own currency, but the latters not going to happen. TL:DR EVE is a PvP game at its very core and everything within is PvP. Get with the program or GTFO. True theres nothing wrong with more players. But the right kind of player. This is not a game for people who want to be left alone to do their own thing. Player interaction is not optional. It is instead the primary content of the game, and can never be optional without breaking core gameplay. It does not need hand holding like 'every other MMO'. It does not need safe zones like 'every other MMO'. It does not need to be uncompetitive like 'every other MMO'. The very reason we play this game is because its not 'every other MMO'. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Noc Raylicinn Blood Raider Militia Drip 0	Posted - 2015.08.04 21:05:26 - [112] - Quote If CCP ever decides to change war decs again they should focus on the aspects of regional game play. Instead of the dec applying to the entirety of empire space it would be based on region. Aggressors could dec anyone anywhere and choose which regions the dec applies. Defenders could fight for their home/space or relocate outside of the war zone. It would still be possible to declare war in all regions (perhaps a bit more expensive). The same elements are there, aggressors could choose to kick a corp out of a region, block trade hubs, stop mining/industry, except there is an out for the defender. The price for getting out (beyond what we already have) is to relocate, stay out of the main trade hubs, generally operate in the fringe regions of empire.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13939	Posted - 2015.08.04 22:53:10 - [113] - Quote Noc Raylicinn wrote: If CCP ever decides to change war decs again they should focus on the aspects of regional game play. Instead of the dec applying to the entirety of empire space it would be based on region. Aggressors could dec anyone anywhere and choose which regions the dec applies. Defenders could fight for their home/space or relocate outside of the war zone. It would still be possible to declare war in all regions (perhaps a bit more expensive). The same elements are there, aggressors could choose to kick a corp out of a region, block trade hubs, stop mining/industry, except there is an out for the defender. The price for getting out (beyond what we already have) is to relocate, stay out of the main trade hubs, generally operate in the fringe regions of empire. The part most people fail to realize is that wardecs right now are "broken" fully in favor of the defending party in just about every way. Therefore, if you're going to weaken wardecs so severely, you need to give something, and a large something at that, back in return. Otherwise you are just savagely nerfing the wardec corps who roam around looking for targets, and not touching the ones who just camp trade hub undocks. So what about wars will you be buffing in exchange for making them about 1/20th as effective? "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.
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2600	Posted - 2015.08.04 22:59:54 - [114] - Quote Noc Raylicinn wrote: If CCP ever decides to change war decs again they should focus on the aspects of regional game play. Instead of the dec applying to the entirety of empire space it would be based on region. Aggressors could dec anyone anywhere and choose which regions the dec applies. Defenders could fight for their home/space or relocate outside of the war zone. It would still be possible to declare war in all regions (perhaps a bit more expensive). The same elements are there, aggressors could choose to kick a corp out of a region, block trade hubs, stop mining/industry, except there is an out for the defender. The price for getting out (beyond what we already have) is to relocate, stay out of the main trade hubs, generally operate in the fringe regions of empire. not all wardecs are about territory or just kicking someone out. No. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Sirran The Lunatic Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 21	Posted - 2015.08.04 23:16:48 - [115] - Quote I am appalled and shocked someone would suggest that they in any way limit risk-averse (anything).
Noc Raylicinn Blood Raider Militia Drip 0	Posted - 2015.08.05 03:47:43 - [116] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Noc Raylicinn wrote: If CCP ever decides to change war decs again they should focus on the aspects of regional game play. Instead of the dec applying to the entirety of empire space it would be based on region. Aggressors could dec anyone anywhere and choose which regions the dec applies. Defenders could fight for their home/space or relocate outside of the war zone. It would still be possible to declare war in all regions (perhaps a bit more expensive). The same elements are there, aggressors could choose to kick a corp out of a region, block trade hubs, stop mining/industry, except there is an out for the defender. The price for getting out (beyond what we already have) is to relocate, stay out of the main trade hubs, generally operate in the fringe regions of empire. The part most people fail to realize is that wardecs right now are "broken" fully in favor of the defending party in just about every way. Therefore, if you're going to weaken wardecs so severely, you need to give something, and a large something at that, back in return. Otherwise you are just savagely nerfing the wardec corps who roam around looking for targets, and not touching the ones who just camp trade hub undocks. So what about wars will you be buffing in exchange for making them about 1/20th as effective? I would argue that 1/20th as effective is not an accurate statement. It would not be a "savage" nerf to empire wars. Unless the game population distribution deviates significantly from the last 10yrs there are a handful of regions that provide endless targets. How many regions would sane person want to roam? Specific targets could still be decced wherever they are. There isn't a reason big war decs would not be taken out that cover all regions. 50 mil isk to cover all of empire space is dirt cheap and essentially makes the war disposable for the aggressor corp. The result is mass semi-coherent war deccing as clearly demonstrated by viewing the Wars tab in the corp interface. Somewhere near 10-20 mil per region or a bulk ~ 200mil for all of empire sounds more sensible than current war costs. The poor minmitar women and children would still have access to affordable war decs.
admiral root Red Galaxy 2917	Posted - 2015.08.05 05:13:57 - [117] - Quote Noc Raylicinn wrote: I would argue that 1/20th as effective is not an accurate statement. It would not be a "savage" nerf to empire wars. Unless the game population distribution deviates significantly from the last 10yrs there are a handful of regions that provide endless targets. How many regions would sane person want to roam? Specific targets could still be decced wherever they are. There isn't a reason big war decs would not be taken out that cover all regions. 50 mil isk to cover all of empire space is dirt cheap and essentially makes the war disposable for the aggressor corp. The result is mass semi-coherent war deccing as clearly demonstrated by viewing the Wars tab in the corp interface. Somewhere near 10-20 mil per region or a bulk ~ 200mil for all of empire sounds more sensible than current war costs. The poor minmitar women and children would still have access to affordable war decs. It's trivial to avoid wardecs under the current setup and your proposed change would make it even easier. With that in mind: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: So what about wars will you be buffing in exchange for making them about 1/20th as effective? No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
Mag's the united 19966	Posted - 2015.08.05 05:48:19 - [118] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Mag's wrote: Iam The Flash wrote: You and your attitude are disgusting, period Go back to hiding behind ur mums skirt Irony. Oh how? I've heard of writers block, but that tends to happen before not after. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13947	Posted - 2015.08.05 06:11:18 - [119] - Quote Noc Raylicinn wrote: I would argue that 1/20th as effective is not an accurate statement. I would ask you how many regions you think there are in highsec. Quote: Somewhere near 10-20 mil per region or a bulk ~ 200mil for all of empire sounds more sensible than current war costs. The poor minmitar women and children would still have access to affordable war decs. And once again, what are you willing to give up in exchange for such a large nerf? You're proposing a literal 400% increase in wardec costs. (Nevermind that this will just push wardec groups into even bigger alliances, just like the last price hike did. Then you lot will be crying in less than half a year about how "unfair" it is that the average shitbag highsec corp can't compete, when you're the one who forced them to conglomerate to begin with) "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.
Arden Elenduil Unlimited Ripoff Works 374	Posted - 2015.08.05 09:12:30 - [120] - Quote They should just return to the good old days of 2m per dec and a max of 3 per corp, with 50m for an alliance dec but unlimited decs. Those were the days

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.