| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
   |
Posted - 2007.01.13 12:25:00 -
[91]
Thought I'd add a little perspective about the relative virtues of the two
Reasons to NRDS:
You're gaining from trade.
You're altruistic, and want to help others into 0.0.
You believe that the person over there who's neutral, might be a friend tomorrow.
Reasons to NBSI:
Alliances need PvP capability. PvPers leave if they get bored.
Maintaining security is expensive. It takes ships and time. If you've gone to the effort of 'taking' a region (and it's often an effort, especially for the really nice ones), why should you be protecting people who aren't contributing to that.
It's dead easy to have a 'neutral' alt, operating as a scout, making bookmarks, depleting resources, or setting up supply lines for a fleet. It takes a little more effort to establish 'blue' or alliance membership.
And reason number 1?
You can set your overview up to NBSI, such that anything you can 'see', you can kill. You cannot do this with NRDS (it's only recently that a 'neutrals' filter exists, and that's still not working AFAIK).
Now, I believe that the long term health of EVE, NRDS is 'good'. Pure Blind and Catch are thriving regions now, and I make the assertion that this is because NRDS entities set up stations there, where anyone can dock.
However, realistically, there is no way to maintain security without NBSI. NBSI _is_ the easier choice, and so many people do it. After all 'security' for 'the good of all' isn't often considered a good trade.
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 12:27:00 -
[92]
 Originally by: Ralara
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Heard of CFS?
They proved to EVE that a non-NBSI policy does not work for a large territory-holding alliance.
Hard of ISS up north? 
Actually, I'd make the argument that that actually worked. It's true the stations have been captured, but Pure Blind is a lot busier than it was a year ago.
|
Plutoinum
German Cyberdome Corp
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 13:03:00 -
[93]
Edited by: Plutoinum on 13/01/2007 13:01:50
Another reason, NBSI is not so bad from an economical view as it seems:
If the region is rich, you can select the corps yourself that are welcome. Usually they pay for mining passes, pay also refining taxes and for offices etc. They sometimes help, are reliable and if they are effective industry corps, they are maybe also not interested to share the belts with like 50 others and prefer to get some clear standings told, who is friendly to them and who is hostile.
So you get some sponsored corps in and everyone else gets shot by NBSI. Common model.
CTD/con-loss vs. log-out. A proposal for a fix. |
Rod Blaine
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 15:42:00 -
[94]
NRDSI and NBSI are largely the same thing. The only real practical difference about the relationships between alliance and guest under respectively NRDSI and NBSI is in the way in which the relationship is formed.
NBSI requires more pro-activeness on part of the the guest. It's like a country you enter with a visa compared to crossing a border within the EU in terms of requirements to act before entering the space.
Both countries will largely demand the same from you in order to nominally allow you to use it's territory. Respect for their laws and property.
Countries that require visa generally do that in order to make sure they only enter such a relationship of usage of their territory with those that they care to enter it with. Countries with more open borders tend to do the same, just differently.
Getting a visum is being set to blue. Being excluded form an open-border agreement between nations is being set to red. One is proactive, on reactive, they accomplish the exact same: largely only those get in whom you want in.
As much as the subject seems to be interesting to some or even a source of roleplay material to a fwe specific people, I really think you're all barking up the wrong tree here. What you should be looking at is judging alliances on the requirements they put on visitors. Wether those requirements are made as part of a NRDSI or NBSI system is irrelevant.
Old blog Originally by: Vriezuh
Naz: John is a realist
|
Doc Extropy
Gallente
Freelance Unincorporated
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 15:50:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Kovid
Originally by: Keshi Linegod
I understand the reasons for NBSI, but I also think that it is counter productive to what people have been trying to do recently that is repopulate low-sec and get people out of empire.
With NBSI you can never ask a few people who are not part of a large allience to take the risk of getting shot up every where and move out of the saftey of empire.
Likely, CCP would like to see more people out of empire and spread about.
And you should always be on your toes in lowsec - 0.0. People in NBSI alliances still have plenty of people getting ganked because they get lulled into a safe sense (which they shouldn't.) But that is a lesson learned really.
NBSI does not stop people in cloaked ships spying or disrupting mining operations by parking in a safespot and going to work for the day logged on safe and sound.
You shouldn't need NBSI to notice a hostile fleet in a well operated alliance.
If you allow a more lenient policy like NRDSI and let people dock in 0.0 stations trade can flow outside of empire without convoys or carrier runs. Trade hubs could be less important. 0.0 market prices would drop for alliances that did so. No longer would you have to pay 50-100k for a shuttle or something else stupid. Or just having a market stocked for that matter.
As for one comment on 0.0 being 99% for PVPers, that's far and away untrue. Plenty of industrialists get lured by rare rocks.
Yes, a lot of opportunities wasted, for both sides.
NBSI is bad for this galaxy.
|
Celeste Coeval
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 17:12:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Celeste Coeval on 13/01/2007 17:09:50
Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera
Originally by: Sean Dillon
Edited by: Sean Dillon on 12/01/2007 17:36:01
NBSI= better safe then sorry
You never know what the dude is up too.
Quote:
Yet in low sec people arent envoking NBSI. In some areas people have gone together to hunt down wrongdoers and keep space safe. But as soon as you hit 0.0 its like everyone goes crazy. why is that?
Simply because you dont lose sec status there, if in 0.1 and up everyone had to press nsbi there sec status would sink drasticly. Also many npc stations make it practicly impossible
so youre back at "because I can". Once you boil down to it, that is the reason for NBSI. If I can I will shoot anyone I like. Now isnt that a bit low? And is that the world we want to be living in?
Although I agree with alot of what you said...I have to say i support NBSI. If some dude is blasting the crap outta folks in Eve better that than in RL. Eve is a good place to vent agression.
NRDSI is an option for those of us that like to us our noggins, rather than the trigger finger
"If you are out to describe the truth, leave elegance to the tailor."
-Albert Einstein |
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 17:33:00 -
[97]
NBSI is even (in a roundabout sort of way) what we live by in RL.
In RL, a country operates. It has resources, infrastructure, amenities and so forth to provide to it's inhabitants. Each and every inhabitant, in turn, pays taxes- they are a Citizen - a member, if you will - of that nation (or, as you might say, alliance). Those people who are not a "member" of the "alliance" who try to get in are promptly arrested and deported (not quite blowing them up, but I'm sure you get the analogy). All those wishing to travel in national territory must either apply to become a "member" / Citizen themselves, or apply "to be set blue for a little while" / for a travel visa.
Where people get the idea that non-NBSI has any merits in a devloped organisation, I just don't know.
From a more EVE point of view- if me and my alliance buddies fiht for our territory, defend it daily fom pirates, invaders, marauding neighbors etc., all for the promise of living in the rich and luscious land of 0.0 (so we can mine the juicy roids, hunt the juicy rats, and run the juicy complexes), why should other people, who don't fight for us, don't pay us, don't contribute a damned thing that doesn't fatten their wallets, get to take my resources? Leaving als, pirates and spies out of it, I just don't want some freeloading neutral getting my valuable roids and rats just because I don't know him.
Those that want access to an alliance's territory should contact said alliance on behalf of their corporation and as to join, get residency, or pay for a set time of access. All of which are perfectly valid economic options, and mean the defender and owner of the space gets something out of it. If you have official bussiness in alliance territory, they'll be more than happy to set you blue for a few days, completely free of charge.
Anyone who wants a way into another guys territory without helping to defend it, without paying, and without contributing, is leeching of that alliance. This is fair enough, but just like criminals and deviants in real life, they better be prepared to be on the lamb- ninja ratting, anyone?
Ninja is fun
-----------------------------------------------
|
Glengrant
Minmatar
TOHA Heavy Industries
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 22:50:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Heard of CFS?
They proved to EVE that a non-NBSI policy does not work for a large territory-holding alliance.
Not true. It wasn't a lack of NBSI that killed CFS - snd NBSI wouldn't have saved it. NBSI would have made the lack of firepower vs superior numbers worse - not better.
And anybody who made trouble got on KOS list anyway - which became a long list.
CFS was killed by a combination of lacking staying power of most corps, blockade of Fix by Mo0, 2nd war with CA and new gates appearing in the backyard with conquerable stations which made our allies FA stab us in the back. And all that happening (almost) at once - plus some internal political stuff.
|
Feuergeist1
Caldari
Keepers of the Holy Bagel
The SUdden Death Squad
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 23:16:00 -
[99]
I personally go by the mantra, "If Not Blue, Pew Pew" :p |
Allen Deckard
Gallente
Rampage Eternal
Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 01:14:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Kovid
Originally by: Paddlefoot Aeon
Edited by: Paddlefoot Aeon on 12/01/2007 16:50:28
Lets say you own space, which your alliance lives in.
What purpose could a neutral have by entering your space?
1. A pirate themselves
2. An alt scouting for a pirate
3. Innocent bystander flying by
Reason they could be in your space or want to be if it wasn't hostile:
Mine asteroids
Kill NPCs
Missions
Use agents
Do a complex
Passing through to another area.
Deliver goods to a member of your alliance
Kentucky where the goats roam and the rednecks run free |
Tarkan Kador
Amarr
PanTarkan Kador Holdings
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 06:17:00 -
[101]
I think NBSI is going to be bad for 0.0 in the long run, because the developers will simply redirect development away from alliances/sovereignety/0.0. Its already starting to happen with things like factional warfare, the focus away from big fleets, and the corporation tourneys.
Why would they redirect the focus away from alliances/sovereignety/0.0? You serve more subscribers that way.
|
Ceanthar Cerbera
Minmatar
Lone Gunmen
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 09:29:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Tarkan Kador
I think NBSI is going to be bad for 0.0 in the long run, because the developers will simply redirect development away from alliances/sovereignety/0.0. Its already starting to happen with things like factional warfare, the focus away from big fleets, and the corporation tourneys.
Why would they redirect the focus away from alliances/sovereignety/0.0? You serve more subscribers that way.
well I think youre wrong there. they are talking about ways to reinforce your sov even more. Sentries, ability to lock gates etc. And I believe the ability to form a working "infrastructure" is whats lacking in 0.0. You take over a system and it says its your sov but you still cant police or control it in any way other way than warp bubbles and posting ships at gates all the time. And even so your options are limited to shooting people down or try and escort them out.
Im not finding it surprising most choose the former since its so much easier. Still Im not one for taking the easy way out especially when it goes against principles id like to hold on to.
But I most point out that most people recognices ownership of systems. In those 0.0 Ive been most people adhere to "laws" put down and follow them. What can they do for you you ask. Well for starters they can help to police your systems. Blue Space had a chat channel for information both ways. "Everyone dock we need to lock system down" or "hey theres a mrhyde here who stole my ore". And for the rest.. well I believe ISS take a fee for docking at their stations. You get minerals if people refine ore in your station. Im sure if you think about it youll find lots of other possible ways for people to contribute if you open up a little to them.
-----------------------------------------
For the liberation and safety of the Matari people! |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
MASS HOMICIDE
FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 11:39:00 -
[103]
One option i think would be. When you have sovereign of a system you may set the gate entrace for the following. The neutral incomming may choose to pay X ammount of isk to be "blue" for N hours.
That would make things interesting sicne would generate income to the owners and the ones that needed to travel trough the system would have a chance, expensive but a chance.
Even better if different levels were used. So in certain systems you needed to pay 1 million to enter. While in others 10 million...
If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!! |
Ceanthar Cerbera
Minmatar
Lone Gunmen
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 22:15:00 -
[104]
Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 14/01/2007 22:12:40
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
One option i think would be. When you have sovereign of a system you may set the gate entrace for the following. The neutral incomming may choose to pay X ammount of isk to be "blue" for N hours.
That would make things interesting sicne would generate income to the owners and the ones that needed to travel trough the system would have a chance, expensive but a chance.
Even better if different levels were used. So in certain systems you needed to pay 1 million to enter. While in others 10 million...
yeah very similar to road toll thats being used quite frequently in rl.
edit: but you can see how it would amount to huge troubles once every 0.0 gate have been set to 100m by some alliance..
-----------------------------------------
For the liberation and safety of the Matari people! |
Rod Blaine
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 22:25:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera
Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 14/01/2007 22:12:40
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
One option i think would be. When you have sovereign of a system you may set the gate entrace for the following. The neutral incomming may choose to pay X ammount of isk to be "blue" for N hours.
That would make things interesting sicne would generate income to the owners and the ones that needed to travel trough the system would have a chance, expensive but a chance.
Even better if different levels were used. So in certain systems you needed to pay 1 million to enter. While in others 10 million...
yeah very similar to road toll thats being used quite frequently in rl.
edit: but you can see how it would amount to huge troubles once every 0.0 gate have been set to 100m by some alliance..
No need, you onl;y need the chokepoints.
This is why nothing likethis will ever happen btw.
Anchorable gateguns, maybe, but I bet CCP is still very much in doubt on those purely because of this chokepoint problem.
Old blog Originally by: Vriezuh
Naz: John is a realist
|
Ceanthar Cerbera
Minmatar
Lone Gunmen
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 14:58:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera
Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 14/01/2007 22:12:40
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
One option i think would be. When you have sovereign of a system you may set the gate entrace for the following. The neutral incomming may choose to pay X ammount of isk to be "blue" for N hours.
That would make things interesting sicne would generate income to the owners and the ones that needed to travel trough the system would have a chance, expensive but a chance.
Even better if different levels were used. So in certain systems you needed to pay 1 million to enter. While in others 10 million...
yeah very similar to road toll thats being used quite frequently in rl.
edit: but you can see how it would amount to huge troubles once every 0.0 gate have been set to 100m by some alliance..
No need, you onl;y need the chokepoints.
This is why nothing likethis will ever happen btw.
Anchorable gateguns, maybe, but I bet CCP is still very much in doubt on those purely because of this chokepoint problem.
but still its a contraproductive solution if one wants more open and free 0.0. Now i guess not all are interested in just that but me for one likes to see 0.0 open and free. This is why i try and hunt pirates with resolve for the principle reason of keeping low sec space safe for those who cant or will not fight. Were I to form an 0.0 empire I would strive for the same thing.
And here is the turrets and other features helpful. Not for keeping people from coming in, but to keep the wrong people out so those who wants can enjoy those things that 0.0 can offer.
And sure I may be an idealist but I do believe the socialistic way of life is a better one for everyone in the long run.
-----------------------------------------
For the liberation and safety of the Matari people! |
Ralben
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 15:10:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera
I realize this also. But what happened to asking and telling? Its simple "hey we live here and dont want you here. leave now and youll live". The shoot first ask later is cowardice. Especially when you have established your precense in a region and is superior.
Better safe than sorry. The time you spend typing out your message in local or a convo is the same time the pilot/gang in question might use to locate and warp in on you.
|
Rod Blaine
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 15:20:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera
but still its a contraproductive solution if one wants more open and free 0.0. Now i guess not all are interested in just that but me for one likes to see 0.0 open and free. This is why i try and hunt pirates with resolve for the principle reason of keeping low sec space safe for those who cant or will not fight. Were I to form an 0.0 empire I would strive for the same thing.
And here is the turrets and other features helpful. Not for keeping people from coming in, but to keep the wrong people out so those who wants can enjoy those things that 0.0 can offer.
And sure I may be an idealist but I do believe the socialistic way of life is a better one for everyone in the long run.
Access to 0.0 for those not interestd in fighting shouldn't be attained by making them able to get there without a fight but by teaching them that they can strike a deal with those that *do* fight.
Believe me, you will never succeed in making space safe for those that not only don't fight, but also don't want to deal with those that do.
Fighting is a prequisite in Eve. If you don't want to, that comes at a price. The same goes for everything else in Eve btw, so that's quite allright.
The content out in 0.0 is not 'free'. It requires an effort to gain access, how you fill in that requirement is up to you.
Old blog Originally by: Vriezuh
Naz: John is a realist
|
Plutoinum
German Cyberdome Corp
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 15:25:00 -
[109]
Edited by: Plutoinum on 15/01/2007 15:22:40
Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera
And sure I may be an idealist but I do believe the socialistic way of life is a better one for everyone in the long run.
As long as you have enough opponents, who attack your 'paradise' it might be interesting. 
But peaceful 0.0 without any trouble would be totally useless. It would be like high sec, just with higher rewards. Everyone carebearing wealth for ... no idea.
0.0 is only worth something, because it's contested and people are fighting. Then the higher rewards also get a meaning like to fight for them or to reap them to make your alliance/corp stronger in comparison to others, stand a better chance in conflicts and gain more power.
I think that's the main motivation of territorial alliances, at least those, who control something and are not just guests.
|
Tasuric Orka
Antares Fleet Yards
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 16:14:00 -
[110]
NBSI is the safest guideline by which you can conduct yourself as an alliance, ships can wrap in a matter of seconds, and be at the next gate with wtz before you know it, and gone out of your reach.
Whatever business people think they may have in sovereign space, they should take it up with the ôgovernmentö before they go there, if you donÆt know who you are dealing with, you might want to reconsider being out there at all.
In this game where even corp mates and alliance members could be spies or thieves, why should we take our chances with a random player that.. isnÆt doing anything FOR us? He could be spying, popping a cyno,stealin our rats/ore, ganking our miners/ratters.. DonÆt have the decency to knock before you enter? You be dead.
Originally by: Deja Thoris
The dead horse has now been flogged into puree.
|
Gabriel Karade
Nulli-Secundus
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 16:34:00 -
[111]
IAC do quite well with the NRDSI policy. Basically not hostile until it fires upon an Alliance pilot. The whole standing thing is a real ball-ache though, involving plenty of yelling in the directors channel "Um? anyone here who can set -ve standings to XXXX? they just blew up Jim Lovell..."
It's not to be confused with 'free space' though. You will get evicted if ratting/mining without permission, just as it should be. 
----------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 16:35:00 -
[112]
Incidentally, am I the only one who loves being on the recieving end of NBSI awell!?
Few things are more thrilling than trying to navigate around hostile territory, ninja-ing away, dodging locals, outrunning hostiles.........
Who wants EVE to be a snoozefest, when what we have is thrilling and unique?
And to build on what Rod Blaine said a couple of posts up- in other MMOs, access to the "end game" / high reward material is metered out only to those who have jumped through the set hoops (have attained "Level X" or hoarded "300 million I'm Awesome Points", or ran a set number of quests, or are high-enough ranking to deal with the nigh-invulnerable NPCs). In EVE, thats been done away with- even a 10 day old character can make his way out to 0.0 and make a healthy living.
So what is the price? What does stop it just being identical to Empire and other opening-level areas? Simple- risk. Teamwork. Socialising. If you want to go out to 0.0, join a group to help you secure some 0.0 (or who already have done), or make friends with some locals, or hoard some isk and buy access as a resident, or go ninja-stylee to avoid the locals. Its not different to WoW or other MMOs, its just that in true EVE style, NPCs have been replaced with true player content.
-----------------------------------------------
|
Louie Scrapinetti
Minmatar
M. Corp Academy
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 17:21:00 -
[113]
Rules To Follow To Win EVE:
1. Be Nasty To Outsiders
2. Be Nice To Insiders
3. Cheat Whenever Possible
|
Krulla
Minmatar
Queens of the Stone Age
Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 17:42:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera
so youre back at "because I can". Once you boil down to it, that is the reason for NBSI. If I can I will shoot anyone I like. Now isnt that a bit low? And is that the world we want to be living in?
Hell yes that's the world I want to be "living" in.
I play this game for the PvP, the thrill of the hunt, etcetera. If you're blue, you're not a person to me, you're a potential victim. Most people think like this. Most people just don't give a damn about strangers.
I don't play EvE to promote some noble vision of justice and prosperity, I play eve for the pew pew. Most people out in 0.0 do.
Sigs are for noobs. |
Sorela
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 18:09:00 -
[115]
Open space policies will not work in EvE till corporations have proper tools to control the resources in their soverign space.
For instance right now if you were to let someone neutral into your space to shoot rats you would be losing the opportunity to shoot those rats yourself. But if you are NBSI then you can say make a deal with a corp where they pay you money at an agreed upon rate if for some reason you don't really use all your rat spawns in an area.
It works in real life specifically because real life countries do have the proper tools to control these resources. People can export minerals out of the US but they have to pay taxes and duties to do so. If too much got exported the US could easily clamp down on it with new laws. You don't have any of this in EvE.
Thus NBSI is the only way to properly control resources.
|
B0rn2KiLL
MicroFunks
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 18:52:00 -
[116]
Edited by: B0rn2KiLL on 15/01/2007 18:53:27
Originally by: Trem Sinval
Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera
But why arent there any wild bill hickock and wyatt earp in EVE?
* Human nature sucks. It is, for reasons unknown, more attractive to screw your friends over, blow up the fuel to the POS, and deactivate the shield for a couple of billion ISK than it is to continue being a responsible member of an alliance. Plus, you can quietly leave without any consequence, drop the account or sell it, and make yourself a new identity, easy as pie.
Sums it up nicely.
Moreoever, besides human nature sucking, human nature is also the reason we have "countries", those enclosed regions of land, air and water we call home, those coutnries employ services such as the Immegration Police (excuse my spelling..), aswell as local police to deal with any native scum (corp scammers etc..).
its just the need for safety, we're not enlightened enough as a race to be able to allow freedom on a large scale, atleast not on the long run. maybe someday :)
warning: Bad spelling, own opinion. flame the >monkey<
---
new sig, Hijack it and ill eat u.
*Imaran hands B0rn2KiLL a fork - Come get some!11
|
Pholocix
Digital Horizons
Unbrella Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.16 04:26:00 -
[117]
Simple facts to dwell upon:
1. If your pushing so hard to improve this alternate reality I must ask why this is so important to you?
2. Have you already fixed the main reality so much that you have the spare time to fix a game one?
3. Do you really feel that human nature will change in anyone's forseeable lifetime?
4. I must congratulate the OP, this is arguably the best disguised troll I've ever seen!
If you found yourself in a fair fight your intel sucks. |
Limitless
|
Posted - 2007.01.16 07:40:00 -
[118]
I still don't understand the advantage of not running an NBSI policy. What benefit do alliances gain for running it? Other than to feel good about being more "civilized". If there were a great benefit to doing it, it would already be done. There isn't, so they don't. QED.
|
Ceanthar Cerbera
Minmatar
Lone Gunmen
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2007.01.17 12:58:00 -
[119]
Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 17/01/2007 12:57:39
Originally by: Limitless
I still don't understand the advantage of not running an NBSI policy. What benefit do alliances gain for running it? Other than to feel good about being more "civilized". If there were a great benefit to doing it, it would already be done. There isn't, so they don't. QED.
well youre touching the real question there.. It all comes down to the definition of it all. I would find it a big achievement to be able to set up an control a piece of 0.0. Keep it safe from wrongdoers and open for those that keep in line. To accomplish that is worth more than all the minerals, iskies and eve items together.
Lets face it this is a game and all you get is numbers presented on a screen. Its not real so what worth is there in having yet another bs?
And in this thread is trolling then lets remove half the forum shall we? =)
edit: and sure I recognice the value of pvp as as something that presents value/meaning. But where is the fun and thrill and honor in killing enexpecting and unprepared travelers?
-----------------------------------------
For the liberation and safety of the Matari people! |
prsr
Gallente
JuBa Corp
|
Posted - 2007.01.17 13:32:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera
Me for one do not go by NBSI those times im in 0.0. I find it childish and stupid and against all principles I stand for as a human being. Just like the wild west there are those who like to live in peace and stand up against those who dwell on the darjker sides of humanity. But why arent there any wild bill hickock and wyatt earp in EVE?
It always *****s me up when people use metaphors from real life to describe a game. First of all, for every ignorant person that trespasses there's 10 dead hostile scouts. And even if someone that has trespassed starts claiming they are not a hostile scout, that person is knowingly putting the effort of finding out who you are and why you are there in the hands of a pvp gang looking for things to blow up... not very smart.
Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera
Its just my humble thought and question - why NBSI?
It's not so humble, you depict people in NBSI alliances as childish and without principles, and mostly because you admittedly do not understand them. I would think that ranks pretty close to being a bigot... So much for your laughable claim on the moral highground.
--
.sig apathy ftw |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |