EVE Search - The wisdom of NBSI

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

The wisdom of NBSI

» 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)
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 16:47:00 - [1] Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 12/01/2007 16:46:30 How is it that this well practised policy of NBSI came to be? Theres long since been a very much unstable and hostile reality being in 0.0 and much of it due to one policy enactded - (If) Not Blue Shoot It. In all sence it means if you havent talked to me before and made friends with me I will shoot you on site. No matter who you are, what ever your intentions may be, youre going to get shot. Is it something that you who resides in 0.0 really want? There seem to be little will in building something greater than that. Some have tried there was this one region called Blue Space where anyone with friendly intentions could come and mine, belt hunt etc. But others could not stand for it had to destroy it and now its gone. Other examples are ISS that let anyone use their stations and travel into their territory. They also have lots of trouble with other alliances, pirates if you like who just dont stand for it, wishing to destroy just because they can. NBSI ftw. 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? If id have to guess NBSI came to be out of fear and lazyness. Its easy to just say "Ok shoot all you see and youll be safe". There is no thought involved, no higher purpose. Just pure self preservation without humanity. Eve is what WE make of it. Do we really want a dark place where higher values like charity and compassion are worthless? Its just my humble thought and question - why NBSI? ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Herculite Hunters Agency Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.01.12 16:52:00 - [2] Edited by: Herculite on 12/01/2007 16:48:23 Hell there are times I wish it was IIIBSI.
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.01.12 16:52:00 - [3] Heard of CFS? They proved to EVE that a non-NBSI policy does not work for a large territory-holding alliance. -[23] Member- Listen to EVE-Trance Radio! (DSTrance channel ingame)
Paddlefoot Aeon Neogen Industries Serenity Fallen	Posted - 2007.01.12 16:53:00 - [4] 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 Now, the list of your friends in 0.0 is considerably shorter than the list of your enemies. While I admit that more than one of #3 has been shot and killed, the risks associated with #1 and #2 more than make up for the risk of killing a #3. Sorry mate, if you are in my space and we don't have blue standings, I will pop you. Only safe thing to do. Edit: Damnit! I thought I beat DS! -----------------------------------------------
Alexi Borizkova Caldari New Age Solutions	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:03:00 - [5] NBSI is just a way of life after a while. When you see a group of strangers outnumbering you, you run, when you see strangers you equal or outnumber, you engage. there are two types of animals in eve, I have come to see. Those that relish in the kill, and those that are killed. For the former, NBSI is the best thing EVER, and more often than not, new blues are a discouragement that hampers their lifestyle. For the latter... really,that's what empire is for. NBSI isn't a standard war dec you know, there are self places to go. What you really have to ask yourself is this: what can I offer you above the shattered remains of my ship and thrill of killing me to make you not do so. Come up with a good enough answer, and you might end up blue with some of the NBSI groups. Remember, when you enterthe territory of others, you're either passing through or sticking around as competition, and frankly, why should the entities that fight and die for their space let you enter it without paying the same toll of blood and tears they did.
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:08:00 - [6] 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. Well I havent heard of them but I have thought about this. It seem to me that the only case in wich you need NBSI is if you got a much bigger area of space "claimed" than you can patrol actively. Face it most big alliances have so much wich they cant possible control constantly so they need a very agressive policy to be able to lay claim to so much space. But isnt there something quite bizarre and megalomanic about having more systems than you can keep track of? ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Soumk	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:09:00 - [7] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera If id have to guess NBSI came to be out of fear and lazyness. Its easy to just say "Ok shoot all you see and youll be safe". There is no thought involved, no higher purpose. Just pure self preservation without humanity. Eve is what WE make of it. Do we really want a dark place where higher values like charity and compassion are worthless? Its just my humble thought and question - why NBSI? null Because we're lazy, lack charity, compassion and like the dark?
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:12:00 - [8] Originally by: Alexi Borizkova NBSI is just a way of life after a while. When you see a group of strangers outnumbering you, you run, when you see strangers you equal or outnumber, you engage. there are two types of animals in eve, I have come to see. Those that relish in the kill, and those that are killed. For the former, NBSI is the best thing EVER, and more often than not, new blues are a discouragement that hampers their lifestyle. For the latter... really,that's what empire is for. NBSI isn't a standard war dec you know, there are self places to go. What you really have to ask yourself is this: what can I offer you above the shattered remains of my ship and thrill of killing me to make you not do so. Come up with a good enough answer, and you might end up blue with some of the NBSI groups. Remember, when you enterthe territory of others, you're either passing through or sticking around as competition, and frankly, why should the entities that fight and die for their space let you enter it without paying the same toll of blood and tears they did. 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. ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Beef Hardslab The 5 Amigo's LLC.	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:13:00 - [9] The problem with not running NBSI is it is too easy for your enemies to exploit the fact that you do not annhilate unknowns. Need intel? Make a fresh alt and fly in, no worries. As the game works now, a covops alt with no standings can sit in your system, all day every day, and there isn't a whole lot you can do about it. This makes doing anything a security risk, as intel can constantly be fed to those who desire it. What's the fix to this? I don't know, but running NBSI is the one way alliances can at least attempt to prevent this scenario. My suggestion would be to give more power to sovereignty, perhaps something that can locate someone in a system, cloaked or not, if you have sovereignty - but make it take a while and cost something. Doubt it will ever happen, of course, but it'd be nice if there were SOME way alliances could better secure their sovereign space. Hopefully with Kali 2 and the deployable gate sentrys, but we all know sentries aren't that hard to get around. Why there should be a breathalyzer to login to Eve: Originally by: Alliaanna Dalaii Podding my own alt in a gatecamp while drunk, he was carrying a hauler full of tech II goods, Oops.
Trem Sinval Sinval Enterprises	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:18:00 - [10] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera But why arent there any wild bill hickock and wyatt earp in EVE? Because: * Bounty hunting is broken. If the bounty system worked well, and players that engaged in such activities could be made profitable targets for their crimes, EVE would see a lot more people on the "right" side of the law. * Space is a big place. To operate an open space requires hundreds, if not thousands of players to police conduct. And you have to be able to trust, absolutely, each and every one of them. In short, the ability to grief, cause mayhem, and destroy without consequence is much, much, MUCH greater than the tools to control such behavior or discourage it. Without the ability to control or monitor exterior communication between members (even within the context of the game, to say nothing of actual exterior communication) means that human nature and corruption run rampant while the concept of "law" is an unemplaceable joke. * 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. The controls or capabilities to track down such players? The legal (within the game) incentives to continue being a good citizen? None. It is famously said that "law keeps honest men honest". Without it, everyone just keeps screwing each other over, and so paranoia, and it's inevitable conclusion, NBSI, arises. - Trem
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:18:00 - [11] Originally by: Beef Hardslab The problem with not running NBSI is it is too easy for your enemies to exploit the fact that you do not annhilate unknowns. Need intel? Make a fresh alt and fly in, no worries. As the game works now, a covops alt with no standings can sit in your system, all day every day, and there isn't a whole lot you can do about it. This makes doing anything a security risk, as intel can constantly be fed to those who desire it. What's the fix to this? I don't know, but running NBSI is the one way alliances can at least attempt to prevent this scenario. My suggestion would be to give more power to sovereignty, perhaps something that can locate someone in a system, cloaked or not, if you have sovereignty - but make it take a while and cost something. Doubt it will ever happen, of course, but it'd be nice if there were SOME way alliances could better secure their sovereign space. Hopefully with Kali 2 and the deployable gate sentrys, but we all know sentries aren't that hard to get around. Yes I agree. But Blue Space could do it. WHY? They only laid claim on a select few systems. If you dont have the manpower to patrol 300 systems why should to claim to own them? Youre hardly using them anyway. It would seem to me that NBSI work in everyones disadvantage in the end. Do upon others what you would have them do to you, seem familiar? What goes around comes around is more used but has the same meaning. NBSI is what makes 0.0 so hostile in the end. In produces paranoia and alienation. ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Jowen Datloran Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:18:00 - [12] Originally by: Alexi Borizkova NBSI is just a way of life after a while. When you see a group of strangers outnumbering you, you run, when you see strangers you equal or outnumber, you engage. there are two types of animals in eve, I have come to see. Those that relish in the kill, and those that are killed. For the former, NBSI is the best thing EVER, and more often than not, new blues are a discouragement that hampers their lifestyle. For the latter... really,that's what empire is for. NBSI isn't a standard war dec you know, there are self places to go. What you really have to ask yourself is this: what can I offer you above the shattered remains of my ship and thrill of killing me to make you not do so. Come up with a good enough answer, and you might end up blue with some of the NBSI groups. Remember, when you enterthe territory of others, you're either passing through or sticking around as competition, and frankly, why should the entities that fight and die for their space let you enter it without paying the same toll of blood and tears they did. Wow, there is alot of animals you haven't seen in EVE. Maybe go on a safari? ---------------- Mr. Science & Trade Institute
Xelios Minmatar Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:20:00 - [13] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera 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. Well I havent heard of them but I have thought about this. It seem to me that the only case in wich you need NBSI is if you got a much bigger area of space "claimed" than you can patrol actively. Face it most big alliances have so much wich they cant possible control constantly so they need a very agressive policy to be able to lay claim to so much space. But isnt there something quite bizarre and megalomanic about having more systems than you can keep track of? The open space thing has been tried before, it used to be common back in early release. But then you get all kinds of problems. Enemy alt scouts, pirates, people who just want to mine your ore or kill your npc's, and worst of all people constantly asking in alliance chat whether Jim Noob the neutral should be shot down or not... just to name a few. It's way too hard to keep track of who you can trust in your space and who you can't, so instead you set all your friends/trusted people to blue and assume anyone else has no business being in your space. The reason nearly everyone has an NBSI policy is because it's the only thing that works.
Ozzie Asrail FATAL REVELATIONS FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:20:00 - [14] nbsi = targets = fun I'm glad iu could illuminate the whole point of nbsi to you -----
Kovid Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:20:00 - [15] 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
Alexi Borizkova Caldari New Age Solutions	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:20:00 - [16] 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. Ask before you enter. At this point in time, it's hard to not know what heavily claimed regions belong to who, there is even a frequently updated map. Send a letter, a fax, talk to their diplomat... But really it boils down to: why are you worth more to me alive than dead? You should always gave a very good answer for this question that can easily convince the people with the guns. Personally, I despise the mindless napfest, and prefer to nap only those that would offer my corporation something in the process. Whether that's open borders both ways for easier movements to both sides, trade, or military alliance. "Because then you don't have to waste all of those expensive bullets on us!" is not an adequate reason, not at all.
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:22:00 - [17] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 12/01/2007 17:19:39 Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera 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. Well I havent heard of them but I have thought about this. It seem to me that the only case in wich you need NBSI is if you got a much bigger area of space "claimed" than you can patrol actively. Face it most big alliances have so much wich they cant possible control constantly so they need a very agressive policy to be able to lay claim to so much space. But isnt there something quite bizarre and megalomanic about having more systems than you can keep track of? Perhaps I will have to explain this further. This is what happens if you run a relatively large alliance and do not have an NBSI policy. 1. Tons of neutrals come in and start mining your belts, killing your rats, etc. However, as they are not part of your alliance, they do not help you defend the space--they merely leech. This might not seem like a problem if you have enough space to give them what they want, but... 2. Your own members get annoyed. They're spending a lot of their time defending the space... only so that other people can take advantage of their hard work while doing nothing. 3. Alliance eventually collapses due to internal disputes. In other words, the only valid reason for a neutral to be in alliance space is mining/ratting/etc, in which case they might as well join the alliance anyways if they're going to do that. And its not as if its not public knowledge what areas are claimed by who--there's both an in-game and out-of-game map, and often signs before you jump in stating who claims the region and who to contact for diplomatic purposes. -[23] Member- Listen to EVE-Trance Radio! (DSTrance channel ingame)
Alexi Borizkova Caldari New Age Solutions	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:23:00 - [18] 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 SO we add competition for resources to the list, kill worthy in my book, and two almost reasonable answers. Couriers serving the interests of the nbsi group should issue blue day-passes for one time couriers, and people "just passing through" can damn well phone ahead and offer to pay a reasonable toll. That, or bring the force to ignore the claim of ownership by the agressor.
Eddie Gordo Minmatar Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:24:00 - [19] 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. Where do all the countless NBSI alliances that have fallen appart fit into this? The fact that CFS was a free space alliance was not the only contributing factor to its demise. More or less the whole providence region is free space, and until the south recently errupted in conflict has more or less been an extension of empire, much safer than many low security regions. Now Recruiting
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:32:00 - [20] Yeah some how I cant buy this NBSI is the only way talk. It worked in reality why cant it work in EVE? People cant be trying. But im sure it would look quite differently if people did it some other way. You cant lay claim to so much space as BoB for instance unsless you invoce such agressive methods. Its the only way you can claim more space than you can actively patrol. But if you dont have the men to patrol the area you have more resources than you can make use of anyway. Gluttony. And for having neutrals swarm in.. Blue Space could handle it. They said "OK these systems are ours, saty out!" And people did! So they took the best areas for them selfs and made the rest up for grabs. ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Xelios Minmatar Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:32:00 - [21] Quote: 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. And if he just ignores you and continues on into your space? Then you've let go the chance to destroy him, and now for the next x hours/days you have to constantly answer questions about him in alliance chat. "Should I kill Jim Noob?" 1 minute passes "Yes he's an enemy scout" "Oh too late he already left". "Hey what about this guy is he supposed to be here?" "I dunno... anyone know him?" 5 minutes pass "Oh well he's gone anyway" 10 minutes later... "OMG Jim Noob just blew up 3 cans full of ore I've been mining" and so on. It takes 1 person to disrupt mining operations in an entire region. 1 person picking off haulers who are travelling through YOUR space, space that's supposed to be safe for your alliance. Dispite what you might think it doesn't matter how many people you have to defend your space, catching 1 person who doesn't want to be caught is HARD. Now imagine you let dozens of them into your space, just so a few actual noobs can do some sightseeing or mine a little ark. That's why alliances have NBSI policies, and that's why CFS failed.
Azrael Bierce Cult of Lemen	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:33:00 - [22] NBSI in space your corp/alliance claims makes sense. No need to justify anything with "resource competition" or anything else for that matter. It like some dude just broke into your house. Don't need any more excuse than that to do what is needed to kick them out. NBSI everywhere on the other hand... that's just you not wanting to admit to being a pirate by giving some four character acronym to justify your actions. "Oh, we're not gankers.. we're NBSI". IMSI seems the way to go. It moves, shoot it.
Kovid Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:33:00 - [23] Originally by: Alexi Borizkova SO we add competition for resources to the list, kill worthy in my book, and two almost reasonable answers. In every alliance that holds more than a few systems there are places farther away from stations or general traffic that are never mined or ratted because people are too lazy to go far away from a stion often. Besides the fact minerals and rats respawn. Claim over something no one uses is not competition.
Beef Hardslab The 5 Amigo's LLC.	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:34:00 - [24] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera Yes I agree. But Blue Space could do it. WHY? They only laid claim on a select few systems. If you dont have the manpower to patrol 300 systems why should to claim to own them? Youre hardly using them anyway. I know we certainly don't have 300 systems, nowhere near actually. Even so, alliances may or may not have the manpower to constantly patrol their space, but for the most part they have bigger things to worry about than constantly patrolling for people trying to ninjamine, like wars. As to "hardly using them", do you understand how sovereignty works? If you have sovereignty, you are using the space. Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera It would seem to me that NBSI work in everyones disadvantage in the end. Do upon others what you would have them do to you, seem familiar? What goes around comes around is more used but has the same meaning. NBSI is what makes 0.0 so hostile in the end. In produces paranoia and alienation. On the other hand, what's so hard about actually making an effort, trying to befriend the person who claims the space you want to be in, and getting set blue? Sure there are a LOT of alliances that just aren't going to let others in, but if you use some diplomacy, I'm sure there are some that would be happy to have another person keeping an eye on things, if you can offer something in return for having access as well. My advice, if you seriously want to befriend an alliance/corp and use their sovereign space (without actually joining)? Get good at exploration. Set it up so you are allowed to rat/mine/whatever it is you want to do, and in exchange, you scan for explorables for them and give them the bookmarks. I'm not saying anyone would take you up on this offer, but it would be a pretty good offer, as tbh scanning for explorables is damn dull. Why there should be a breathalyzer to login to Eve: Originally by: Alliaanna Dalaii Podding my own alt in a gatecamp while drunk, he was carrying a hauler full of tech II goods, Oops.
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:35:00 - [25] Originally by: Xelios Quote: 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. And if he just ignores you and continues on into your space? Then you've let go the chance to destroy him, and now for the next x hours/days you have to constantly answer questions about him in alliance chat. "Should I kill Jim Noob?" 1 minute passes "Yes he's an enemy scout" "Oh too late he already left". "Hey what about this guy is he supposed to be here?" "I dunno... anyone know him?" 5 minutes pass "Oh well he's gone anyway" 10 minutes later... "OMG Jim Noob just blew up 3 cans full of ore I've been mining" and so on. It takes 1 person to disrupt mining operations in an entire region. 1 person picking off haulers who are travelling through YOUR space, space that's supposed to be safe for your alliance. Dispite what you might think it doesn't matter how many people you have to defend your space, catching 1 person who doesn't want to be caught is HARD. Now imagine you let dozens of them into your space, just so a few actual noobs can do some sightseeing or mine a little ark. That's why alliances have NBSI policies, and that's why CFS failed. Yes you always have griefers but how is this different from low sec space? 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? ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Sean Dillon Caldari FM Corp	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:36:00 - [26] NBSI= better safe then sorry You never know what the dude is up too.
Alz Shado Ever Flow ORION FEDERATION	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:44:00 - [27] NBSI = No Tresspassing. He might be there to plant flowers, but more likely than not he's in ur haus, steelin ur stuph.
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:45:00 - [28] Originally by: Culmen Its really simple really From a quick glance in local it is impossible to tell if those 5 neutrals are A) 4 hulks and a Hauler or B)4 Sniper-pests and a dictor now try piloting a hauler full of high ends through a region, with 5 neutrals in evrey other system with this kind of uncertainty, you'll eighter take a heck of a long time figuring out which is which or loose a hauler so Without NBSI "Is jim neutral here a good neutral or a bad neutral?" "dunno" "warping" (sound of a hauler getting shot by 2 dozen 1400mm) With NBSI "OMFG NEUTRALS! NBSI!" (sound of combatships being rigged up) (sound of security) Yes but there are ways around this. Its what we all do when hauling or what ever. Convoy. I live in low sec, pirates are my everyday reality yet I dont go around all paraoind shooting first asking later. I recon, move in groups, stay smart. Friends with most, shooting those who want me harm. ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Beef Hardslab The 5 Amigo's LLC.	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:47:00 - [29] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerber 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. Who says everyone is like this? Unless I am pretty sure the neutral in local is an alt spy or otherwise up to no good, I always warn them in local before engaging, and you know what? Most of the time, that's all it takes. Why there should be a breathalyzer to login to Eve: Originally by: Alliaanna Dalaii Podding my own alt in a gatecamp while drunk, he was carrying a hauler full of tech II goods, Oops.
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:52:00 - [30] Originally by: Beef Hardslab Originally by: Ceanthar Cerber 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. Who says everyone is like this? Unless I am pretty sure the neutral in local is an alt spy or otherwise up to no good, I always warn them in local before engaging, and you know what? Most of the time, that's all it takes. well good. and no Im not saying everyone is like that. In fact I very much believe there are alot of people who arent. But not many seem to have the stamina to follow their beliefs trough. What is it they say, great evil is not made possible by the few who perform it, but by the silence of those who dont. But why are so few willing to try? We all play eve for the challenge, then why do people shy from the biggest one? There must be more courge in this game than that surely? ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Keshi Linegod Amarr Space Turtle Services	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:56:00 - [31] 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. -------------------------------------------------- EvE is a sand box. Build a sand castle and beg someone to come destroy it just so you can have the fun of building it up again.
Xelios Minmatar Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.01.12 17:58:00 - [32] What's the point of owning space if you need an escort fleet every time you want to move a hauler around in it?
Alan Tappan	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:01:00 - [33] I belonged to a alliance down south with my old character. I had a few times where someone would come into our space and immediatly contact one of use to let us know what they are doing. Its all part of the way things run out there. If you know your in someone elses space and you see them in local. Send a convo or shout in local and let them know what your doing. If you dont then it only makes sense that your considered hostile. Hell I had a guy show up at one of our outpost, sit outside, and convo me asking politely for access to the outpost and gave me his references. It seems to me like a good policy, especially for large alliances. Quote: null
Able Citizen Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:01:00 - [34] 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. Regressive doggerel! Space cannot be "owned".
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:07:00 - [35] Originally by: Xelios Edited by: Xelios on 12/01/2007 17:59:33 What's the point of owning space if you need an escort fleet every time you want to move a hauler around in it? whats the point of owning a car when someone might steal it tonight? I live in a quite safe town but I can never be sure I wont be robbed or worse. Still that dont make me runa around treating everyone with suspicion. ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Able Citizen Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:08:00 - [36] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 12/01/2007 16:46:30 How is it that this well practised policy of NBSI came to be? snip If id have to guess NBSI came to be out of fear and lazyness. Its easy to just say "Ok shoot all you see and youll be safe". There is no thought involved, no higher purpose. Just pure self preservation without humanity. You said a mouthful, my brother. There is no fully successful policy for maintaining a large, territorialist alliance. Until we, as a species, are able to transcend the fear and paranoia that pervades the cluster, NBSI will be common practice. Those of us that eschew this mindset endeavor to change minds one at a time. I applaud your evolved thinking.
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:12:00 - [37] Originally by: Alan Tappan I belonged to a alliance down south with my old character. I had a few times where someone would come into our space and immediatly contact one of use to let us know what they are doing. Its all part of the way things run out there. If you know your in someone elses space and you see them in local. Send a convo or shout in local and let them know what your doing. If you dont then it only makes sense that your considered hostile. Hell I had a guy show up at one of our outpost, sit outside, and convo me asking politely for access to the outpost and gave me his references. It seems to me like a good policy, especially for large alliances. yes but this require them to not shoot you at first sight. and many do that. theres no time to tell your buisness, and even so they arent interested. thats my experience in most cases and the experience of a lot of others. ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:13:00 - [38] Originally by: Able Citizen Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 12/01/2007 16:46:30 How is it that this well practised policy of NBSI came to be? snip If id have to guess NBSI came to be out of fear and lazyness. Its easy to just say "Ok shoot all you see and youll be safe". There is no thought involved, no higher purpose. Just pure self preservation without humanity. You said a mouthful, my brother. There is no fully successful policy for maintaining a large, territorialist alliance. Until we, as a species, are able to transcend the fear and paranoia that pervades the cluster, NBSI will be common practice. Those of us that eschew this mindset endeavor to change minds one at a time. I applaud your evolved thinking. well thank you. I may come forth as an idealist but everyone here knows what Im saying is right. ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Malcanis	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:15:00 - [39] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 12/01/2007 16:46:30 How is it that this well practised policy of NBSI came to be? Theres long since been a very much unstable and hostile reality being in 0.0 and much of it due to one policy enactded - (If) Not Blue Shoot It. In all sence it means if you havent talked to me before and made friends with me I will shoot you on site. No matter who you are, what ever your intentions may be, youre going to get shot. Is it something that you who resides in 0.0 really want? There seem to be little will in building something greater than that. Some have tried there was this one region called Blue Space where anyone with friendly intentions could come and mine, belt hunt etc. But others could not stand for it had to destroy it and now its gone. Other examples are ISS that let anyone use their stations and travel into their territory. They also have lots of trouble with other alliances, pirates if you like who just dont stand for it, wishing to destroy just because they can. NBSI ftw. 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? If id have to guess NBSI came to be out of fear and lazyness. Its easy to just say "Ok shoot all you see and youll be safe". There is no thought involved, no higher purpose. Just pure self preservation without humanity. Eve is what WE make of it. Do we really want a dark place where higher values like charity and compassion are worthless? Its just my humble thought and question - why NBSI? Because the huge majority of non-blue capsuleers try to kill me.
Culmen Caldari Gekidoku	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:15:00 - [40] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera Originally by: Culmen Its really simple really From a quick glance in local it is impossible to tell if those 5 neutrals are A) 4 hulks and a Hauler or B)4 Sniper-pests and a dictor snip Yes but there are ways around this. Its what we all do when hauling or what ever. Convoy. I live in low sec, pirates are my everyday reality yet I dont go around all paraoind shooting first asking later. I recon, move in groups, stay smart. Friends with most, shooting those who want me harm. sometimes you just got to move alot of bulky cheap stuff its so much easier and much more efficent to get your friends together just to remove some nuetrals rather then every single time you have a badger load of trit to move better to have a consistantly safe route then to be bugging your friends twice a day just because you got a load of veld _____________________________________________________ Why do i even need a sig?
Ozzie Asrail FATAL REVELATIONS FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:15:00 - [41] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera Originally by: Sean Dillon [<snip> <snip> 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? It's a game. It's really not much more complicated than that. When you play a game of football do you refuse to tackle or score and jsut decide to pass the ball around in fair equal timed sessions to amke sure noone feels sad? -----
DubanFP Caldari Four Rings Myriad Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:19:00 - [42] Originally by: Kovid Mine asteroids Kill NPCs Missions Use agents Do a complex Passing through to another area. Deliver goods to a member of your alliance the first 5 are wasting YOUR alliance's resources anyways, so why would you even want that? Look truth is we have our own problems, and since we dont really care if we shoot you or not we're better off just shooting you. You could be a threat and there's no reason not to shoot you. It's a game, you entered 0.0 knowing you could get shot, what's the problem? __________________________ Why babelfish is bad mmm k "which the night do not expect that it calls the primary education before becoming deformed inside"
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:22:00 - [43] Originally by: Ozzie Asrail Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera Originally by: Sean Dillon [<snip> <snip> 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? It's a game. It's really not much more complicated than that. When you play a game of football do you refuse to tackle or score and jsut decide to pass the ball around in fair equal timed sessions to amke sure noone feels sad? yes that is a point of view. I know many see EVE as a game. Others see it as a project, an alternative reality. Eve dont have any set rules, we all make the rules up just like real life. So why should I abide by your laws if I feel they are wrong? The Geneva convention came to be out of fear that someone would do harm to you. No one likes that and so we all agreed that lets not do it to each others. Now we still dont live in such a world. Some even claim to live by the convention and still break it but Id like to think were all trying to get there. Why? Because deep down in ourself we feel that that is the only way we can be safe. ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:25:00 - [44] Originally by: DubanFP Originally by: Kovid Mine asteroids Kill NPCs Missions Use agents Do a complex Passing through to another area. Deliver goods to a member of your alliance the first 5 are wasting YOUR alliance's resources anyways, so why would you even want that? Look truth is we have our own problems, and since we dont really care if we shoot you or not we're better off just shooting you. You could be a threat and there's no reason not to shoot you. It's a game, you entered 0.0 knowing you could get shot, what's the problem? Sure but what about the 80% of space you claim that you dont mine or rat actively? You can only use so much resources. Also they are infinite so how I can I be using them up? ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
DubanFP Caldari Four Rings Myriad Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:30:00 - [45] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera So why should I abide by your laws if I feel they are wrong? Because we'll shoot you? You have every right to come into our territory, and we have every right to shoot you for it. Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera The Geneva convention came to be out of fear that someone would do harm to you. No one likes that and so we all agreed that lets not do it to each others. Now we still dont live in such a world. Some even claim to live by the convention and still break it but Id like to think were all trying to get there. Why? Because deep down in ourself we feel that that is the only way we can be safe. It's been said time and time again. It's a game, fun > safe. Always had been always will be. If fun wasn't > safe then everyone would always stay in empire. Nobody dies in a video game, i dont' see why you can't understand this. Sure nobody likes losing ships but why? Cause then they have to do un-fun stuff to get back into a ship so they can risk losing it again. __________________________ Why babelfish is bad mmm k "which the night do not expect that it calls the primary education before becoming deformed inside"
SSgt Sniper Gallente Zekarus Ltd.	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:31:00 - [46] Originally by: DubanFP Originally by: Kovid Mine asteroids Kill NPCs Missions Use agents Do a complex Passing through to another area. Deliver goods to a member of your alliance the first 5 are wasting YOUR alliance's resources anyways, so why would you even want that? Look truth is we have our own problems, and since we dont really care if we shoot you or not we're better off just shooting you. You could be a threat and there's no reason not to shoot you. It's a game, you entered 0.0 knowing you could get shot, what's the problem? Just because you can do a thing, does not follow that you must do that thing. NBSI policy (which I don't enjoy) drove me out of my 0.0 corp and alliance and made my experience, taste bad. I did not agree with folks shooting folks just because they can then, I still don't now. --------- Representing all the casual gamers happily living in Empire, that want NO PART of your 0.0 annoyances. However, I do not represent my corp. We vote first.
Elmicker Unscoped Myriad Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:40:00 - [47] Main reasons for NBSI. It's fun; people enjoy PvP and by entering 0.0 you are consenting to any and all PvP thrown your way. 99% of people in 0.0 are out looking for PvP, so you might as well get the message out that neutrals will be mercilessly slaughtered, so that your carebears can fund your PvP habits in peace. It's your space, you worked for it, you sat sieging poses/outposts for it, why should they leech off it for free? It saves confusion. Without NBSI, every time someone who wasn't blue turned up, we'd get 30 "FoF?" calls, all the while said neutral is probably in a nanophoon mauling some miners. You'll find almost all NBSI alliances will welcome you to their space provided you can provide something in return for them. You're using their space, its only fair they get something in return, and alliances tend to get a bit vexed when people don't give things in return...
DubanFP Caldari Four Rings Myriad Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:45:00 - [48] Edited by: DubanFP on 12/01/2007 18:44:52 I've lost hundreds of millions of isk to gate camps for reasons that vary from a couple ravens at the camp itself when i was a newb, to losing a small PoS while shields were down "with 200 mil fitted raven inside, no insurance collected" because i was unable to fuel it due to the constant camps at HED-GP. Finals limited my time during the PoS loss. But you can't hold them responsible for your own losses. You bought the ship, you risked it in .4 and lower, you lost it. You don't have to be happy about it, but they're just playing the game in thier own way, within game rules. You do not seem to get it. What you should do when someone blows up your ship is congratulate them, and ask them how you can do better next time. Anything else is immature. I've said it 100 times before and i'll say it again "It's a game". Although i will probebly keep reading on, this will be my final response. Please understand this. __________________________ Why babelfish is bad mmm k "which the night do not expect that it calls the primary education before becoming deformed inside"
Malicia Skirj	Posted - 2007.01.12 19:03:00 - [49] What do you do if you get up at 3 am and see some well armed guy creeping around your backyard? Call Concord? Sure...maybe...but let's suppose they take a little while to respond to "I think I see someone creeping around" calls. It's been known to happen. Frequently. Ok. You didn't shoot him...but maybe you'll watch him a bit. But wait..he just faded into the darkness somewhere. Now what? Go back to a peaceful sleep with Mr Well-Armed right outside? Ok..so you went back to sleep due to being non-NBSI...now he's waddling around in your kitchen eating the left over pizza you were going to have for breakfast tomorrow morning. Still well-armed. Now that you realize his intent is bad, it's a bit late. He's knee deep in your ****. You can factor in a slightly better knowledge of the area in your favor, but also consider...not only does he have access to his resources, he now has access to yours. Oh...and he phoned his friends earlier (while you slept peacefully) to join the party. So no...we're not back to "because I can"...we're back to "because it's not too bright to let an unknown wander around our territory. It's been said that more battles are lost by quartermasters than by generals. Suppose Mr Neut is simply gathering intel on your fuel supply chain, figuring out how you're working it and where to hit it? Not that you'd know that. He could give tons of reasonable excuses. Ok..move forward a bit to the future. He has enough info. Now he and a few buddies are nailing your haulers and anything else you might be using for capitol ships/POS/whatever. Switching alts every day or so to stay 'neutral'. Move a little farther into the future. You're now pretty desperate for supplies. What do you do? Say, "But we didn't shoot you even though we could have!!!"? Well, you can try...maybe in some vain hope that they'll say they were just kidding and go away. Odds are, though, they'll hop back onto their mains finally, and fly in with their corp/alliance and brand "NBSI would have prevented this" on the one remaining unkicked portion of your corp/alliances' ass. Let's look at this another way. A more realistic way. Two arbitrary countries...let's say a very small pack of US warplanes suddenly enters Russian airspace...what do you think is going to happen to those planes? And this is in reality with real consequences, so it should be perfectly understandable that unknown people in an area held by another group are going to be shot down first and interrogated later. If you think that's an unreasonable example, feel free to look up some info on Gary Powers. Personally, I'd prefer not having to shoot neuts, and I'd follow the policy of whatever corp/alliance I was in regardless of which way it went. However, my preference doesn't dictate the 'reality' of the game. Unknowns have proven to be dangerous too often in the past, so treating them all as dangerous is the most practical route to take.
RC Denton	Posted - 2007.01.12 19:10:00 - [50] I think the major point against NBSI has already been stated. You can put someone in a cov ops ship with a cov ops cloak in a system and even with the entire alliance in the system with you there's NOTHING you can do about it. So there's really no point to NBSI if your competition can roam your systems at will gathering Intel. All it is is a way for people who get their rocks off shooting others at random to justify their behaviour.
Nicocat Caldari New Age Solutions	Posted - 2007.01.12 19:12:00 - [51] I've recently become colorblind due to the policies of those around me. They're just lucky I can see the + sign. Blue, red, no color, they all pop the same to me. I just get in trouble if I shoot someone with that dastardly +... ;.; ---------------------------- Originally by: Splagada SEED ME DADDY WTB: Friggin' portrait
Astarte Nosferatu Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2007.01.12 19:22:00 - [52] 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. In my opinion, it didn't prove anything. It's like people saying communism or fascisme/****sme doesn't work cause Russia and Germany didn't implement it the best possible way.
Beef Hardslab The 5 Amigo's LLC.	Posted - 2007.01.12 19:23:00 - [53] 2 things need to happen before the popularity of NBSI has even a chance of diminishing: POS guns need to fire on pods Sovereignty needs more security benefits Fix these major issues, and I can see NBSI loosening up a bit. Why there should be a breathalyzer to login to Eve: Originally by: Alliaanna Dalaii Podding my own alt in a gatecamp while drunk, he was carrying a hauler full of tech II goods, Oops.
Cipher7	Posted - 2007.01.12 19:35:00 - [54] NBSI is taking the game less seriously. NRDS is applying RL values to Eve.
Harry Manback Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2007.01.12 19:41:00 - [55] To the OP. I can see the frustration in this if you are a new player in the game, or have lived in High sec space with 0.0 as your dream or goal. I was this pilot too once, and many others in this game. When I lived in highsec I couldn't understand how alliances or corps that used an NBSI policy could be so mean and hateful. I considered these pilots griefers at one point, and figured them to be cowards and without honor and etc. Since I've lived in low sec/0.0 for over a year now, It changes your outlook and views on NBSI. My corp/alliance tried the Non-NBSI approach for quite some time. We protected neutral corps, and let them have their way in our "claimed" space. We had to put a stop to this because of the neutral scouts, neutral gank gangs, and spending so much time figuring out who was friendly/kos. So in the end...yes their are some wide-eyed neutral explorers/NPCers/Miners that are looking for some 0.0 action, but there are too many pilots looking to abuse the freedom of non-NBSI controlled space. So, please try to look at the situation from different points of view. Too many alliances/corps have put in the effort to claim and control space, and they don't like crows in their fields.
Morden Nok Cohortes Vigilum Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.12 19:44:00 - [56] CVA operates NRDSI. What I can say, it does lead to very, very long KOS lists. And also makes us hate CCP for giving us only 300 standing slots and not allowing to set standings toward another alliance. Yes, I know you can set overview + / - in alliance, but members of alliance marked as enemy are able to dock at outposts, unless the corp owning that outpost sets them to negative status (if you allow those with no standins to dock). It means lots of our enemies do use noob-corp alts to scout, but those numbers dropped massively after revelations. All local inhabitants are not just freeloaders, there are quite many that take part in defense of the region. Its also very good way to know who of the local inhabitants might be good recruitment material.
Liu Kaskakka PAK Shroud Of Darkness	Posted - 2007.01.12 19:53:00 - [57] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera But why arent there any wild bill hickock and wyatt earp in EVE? Liez, check my title ingame! King Liu is RIGHT!!
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 19:55:00 - [58] Originally by: Malicia Skirj Let's look at this another way. A more realistic way. Two arbitrary countries...let's say a very small pack of US warplanes suddenly enters Russian airspace...what do you think is going to happen to those planes? And this is in reality with real consequences, so it should be perfectly understandable that unknown people in an area held by another group are going to be shot down first and interrogated later. If you think that's an unreasonable example, feel free to look up some info on Gary Powers. Well this is not realistic. Because thats not what happens. What happens is they get escorted out, diplomacy arises and the incident is resolved. Either in peace with apologies or with agression if the US dont back down. If real life applied NBSI the cold war would have led to a world war. It didnt happen. ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Ralara Caldari Reunited O X I D E	Posted - 2007.01.12 19:55:00 - [59] 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? -- Yeah, so Caldari suck at close range. Pity you'll never get there. These posts represent those of my corp or alliance. These do reflect official alliance or corp views This is not a dis
Xelios Minmatar Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:00:00 - [60] Edited by: Xelios on 12/01/2007 20:01:42 Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 12/01/2007 18:05:24 Originally by: Xelios Edited by: Xelios on 12/01/2007 17:59:33 What's the point of owning space if you need an escort fleet every time you want to move a hauler around in it? whats the point of owning a car when someone might steal it tonight? I live in a quite safe town but I can never be sure I wont be robbed or worse. Still that dont make me runa around treating everyone with suspicion. edit: well ok maybe I to view people with a little suspicion but I dont go araound beating them up just to be sure they wont do it to me. I think a better analogy would be leaving the front door of your house wide open all the time with a little sign above saying "Please don't take my stuff". Inside you have tons of expensive electronics and all kinds of nice things that a lot of people would like to have but don't. Now when some complete stranger walks into your house without saying hello are you suspicious? NBSI is a lot like leaving the door locked. It means "stay out of our space". But because we can't lock the gates the only way is to pod people out, asking nicely may work 1 time out of 10, the other 9 while you're asking nicely he's moving on about his business. Maybe he gives a little "lol yea right" in local before he jumps out too. But as for the car analogy, if stealing that care wasn't against the law and the only person standing between the theif and a free $10,000 automobile was you, maybe you'd feel a little differently when you see people looking into the windows? In 0.0 anything goes, you have to assume the worst because more often than not that's exactly what you get. That's what makes it different from empire in the first place.
Araviel Gallente Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:09:00 - [61] 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. Sorry dark, I think it worked very well for a very long time, and i dont think it was our non NBSI policy that brought CFS down ;) But this was long before we had the user base that we got today. Today its a diffrent mather, its just simply to many groups and individuals in space to administrate in a convenient way, specially whit a standing limit of 300 corps. (Or have they changed that? I just got back and havent updated myself fully on kali yet) I still think it works tho, but in a completly diffrent scale. We got plenty of corps and smaller alliances that issue this policy today, But I agree that if your a large tarritory holding alliance it wouldnt be recommeded, atleast its nothing i would like to try again ---------- signature under construction
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:15:00 - [62] Originally by: Xelios But as for the car analogy, if stealing that care wasn't against the law and the only person standing between the theif and a free $10,000 automobile was you, maybe you'd feel a little differently when you see people looking into the windows? In 0.0 anything goes, you have to assume the worst because more often than not that's exactly what you get. That's what makes it different from empire in the first place. No I wouldnt take your car even if that was the case. And In the wild west that wasnt the case for many people either. For some yes but not for most people. Why do we have the laws we have? If it werent any reason behind them they wouldnt exist. Nothing just happens. ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Venkhar Krard	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:18:00 - [63] Oh please.. Its only a game.. dont compare it to real life. Please dont speak about kindness or humanity.. we dont kill you in RL when we destroy your ship.. Its A GAME. If you want to make utopia out of 0.0, claim some land and try it. Oh and dont call people "childish and stupid" only beacause they play the game other way than you..
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:24:00 - [64] Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 12/01/2007 20:21:24 Originally by: Venkhar Krard Oh please.. Its only a game.. dont compare it to real life. Please dont speak about kindness or humanity.. we dont kill you in RL when we destroy your ship.. Its A GAME. If you want to make utopia out of 0.0, claim some land and try it. Oh and dont call people "childish and stupid" only beacause they play the game other way than you.. so I have to accept your style of playing when you dont accept mine? Circular argument my friend ;) edit: but no I realize that people play it differently. just like.. oh yes real life! ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Malicia Skirj	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:25:00 - [65] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera Originally by: Malicia Skirj Let's look at this another way. A more realistic way. Two arbitrary countries...let's say a very small pack of US warplanes suddenly enters Russian airspace...what do you think is going to happen to those planes? And this is in reality with real consequences, so it should be perfectly understandable that unknown people in an area held by another group are going to be shot down first and interrogated later. If you think that's an unreasonable example, feel free to look up some info on Gary Powers. Well this is not realistic. Because thats not what happens. What happens is they get escorted out, diplomacy arises and the incident is resolved. Either in peace with apologies or with agression if the US dont back down. If real life applied NBSI the cold war would have led to a world war. It didnt happen. Evidentally, you didn't read that bit at the bottom. Not only is it realistic, it's proven itself. Powers wasn't escorted out. He was shot down. Real life applied NBSI...and you're right...it nearly lead to a war and lead us to the cuban missile crisis, which also nearly lead to war. But not quite. Another incident of NBSI in reality would be the USS Vincennes shooting down that Iranian airbus in 1988. They didn't ask or crank up the diplomacy. They said, "Hey...could be an enemy. Kill it." Now let's take a look at non-NBSI in reality. When the two flights that were flown into the WTC left their designated flight paths, they were asked why. When they didn't respond and continued along with their new flight plan, they should have been shot down. As it was, when they finally decided to get some jets in the air, the passenger planes' transponders had been shut off making them harder to find. We already know the results of that non-NBSI action. So. Three examples of reality. Two NBSI actions that nearly led to war. Nearly. And one non that did actually lead to war, just because people hesitated when they were unsure of the intentions of the people piloting those aircraft.
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:28:00 - [66] Originally by: Malicia Skirj Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera Originally by: Malicia Skirj Well this is not realistic. Because thats not what happens. What happens is they get escorted out, diplomacy arises and the incident is resolved. Either in peace with apologies or with agression if the US dont back down. If real life applied NBSI the cold war would have led to a world war. It didnt happen. Evidentally, you didn't read that bit at the bottom. Not only is it realistic, it's proven itself. Powers wasn't escorted out. He was shot down. Real life applied NBSI...and you're right...it nearly lead to a war and lead us to the cuban missile crisis, which also nearly lead to war. But not quite. Another incident of NBSI in reality would be the USS Vincennes shooting down that Iranian airbus in 1988. They didn't ask or crank up the diplomacy. They said, "Hey...could be an enemy. Kill it." Now let's take a look at non-NBSI in reality. When the two flights that were flown into the WTC left their designated flight paths, they were asked why. When they didn't respond and continued along with their new flight plan, they should have been shot down. As it was, when they finally decided to get some jets in the air, the passenger planes' transponders had been shut off making them harder to find. We already know the results of that non-NBSI action. So. Three examples of reality. Two NBSI actions that nearly led to war. Nearly. And one non that did actually lead to war, just because people hesitated when they were unsure of the intentions of the people piloting those aircraft. Let's look at this another way. A more realistic way. Two arbitrary countries...let's say a very small pack of US warplanes suddenly enters Russian airspace...what do you think is going to happen to those planes? And this is in reality with real consequences, so it should be perfectly understandable that unknown people in an area held by another group are going to be shot down first and interrogated later. If you think that's an unreasonable example, feel free to look up some info on Gary Powers. why is it that people always use exceptions as examples on how something doesnt work. the world as a whole arent in chaos like 0.0 how is that possible if the NBSI logic is what drives us? ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Hakera Freelance Unincorporated Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:30:00 - [67] neutrals will only abuse what you fight to protect, the friends you have will watch your back for you when needed. That is the difference. If you dont use NBSI, you will be used and you must accept that. Under NBSI, you know who your friends are, and if the rest arnt with you, they are against you.
Malicia Skirj	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:31:00 - [68] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 12/01/2007 20:21:24 Originally by: Venkhar Krard Oh please.. Its only a game.. dont compare it to real life. Please dont speak about kindness or humanity.. we dont kill you in RL when we destroy your ship.. Its A GAME. If you want to make utopia out of 0.0, claim some land and try it. Oh and dont call people "childish and stupid" only beacause they play the game other way than you.. so I have to accept your style of playing when you dont accept mine? Circular argument my friend ;) edit: but no I realize that people play it differently. just like.. oh yes real life! He never said yours was rejected. Simply that it's just a game. In fact, in his second to last line he's welcoming you to try your style of play. And yes, when you go into another country, you have to accept their laws just as they have to accept yours (if you're strong enough to enforce them) or concord's when they're in your 'country'.
Venkhar Krard	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:33:00 - [69] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera so I have to accept your style of playing when you dont accept mine? Circular argument my friend ;) edit: but no I realize that people play it differently. just like.. oh yes real life! Oh I accept your style of playing and understand it. You can do whatever you think is right. Claim your own space, play the game like you like, create your own rules.. But dont come to our space and wonder, why we play it the other way around and pls dont try to change it, accept it.
Malicia Skirj	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:40:00 - [70] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera why is it that people always use exceptions as examples on how something doesnt work. the world as a whole arent in chaos like 0.0 how is that possible if the NBSI logic is what drives us? Those weren't the exceptions. Those were the rules. The US wanted an 'open skies' treaty. Russia didn't. In other words, if it isn't russian they'll attempt to shoot it down. The fact that their anti-aircraft capabilities sucked didn't change their NBSI policy. In our military we're taught not to fire warning shots like you see in the movies all the time. Granted, the recognition systems the navy was using at the time weren't so great, but that doesn't change the fact that they'll shoot down an aircraft that appears hostile, whether it is or not. Pre 9/11 protocols for aircraft in the US deviating from flight plans more than marginally required the FAA and NORAD talking to each other and getting jets in the air to evaluate the flight plan of the hijacked plane and if necessary, shoot it. That's not an exception. That's standard procedure. It simply wasn't followed.
Neon Genesis Gallente Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:41:00 - [71] It's far more efficient that trying to discern which targets are friendly that don't have standings, and it's fun. That's all.
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:42:00 - [72] Originally by: Malicia Skirj Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 12/01/2007 20:21:24 Originally by: Venkhar Krard Oh please.. Its only a game.. dont compare it to real life. Please dont speak about kindness or humanity.. we dont kill you in RL when we destroy your ship.. Its A GAME. If you want to make utopia out of 0.0, claim some land and try it. Oh and dont call people "childish and stupid" only beacause they play the game other way than you.. so I have to accept your style of playing when you dont accept mine? Circular argument my friend ;) edit: but no I realize that people play it differently. just like.. oh yes real life! He never said yours was rejected. Simply that it's just a game. In fact, in his second to last line he's welcoming you to try your style of play. And yes, when you go into another country, you have to accept their laws just as they have to accept yours (if you're strong enough to enforce them) or concord's when they're in your 'country'. yes but for most countrys in real life and systems with concord you dont go in suspecting everyone wants you harm and will shoot you on sight. Well actually there is one place they do that and its a small island with "natives" (people that have had no contact with modern man) where they attack anyone on sight. There even was an incident where survivors from an helicopter crash was killed when the reached the island. But its an extreme example for sure =) Still we hail from those people and have made sure to establish UN and Geneva and such. How is that if theres no will for "non-NBSI"? ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Ozzie Asrail FATAL REVELATIONS FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:43:00 - [73] People who equate RL to a computer game worry me that Jack Thomson might actually be right... -----
Pham Sirge VersaTech Interstellar Ltd. SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:43:00 - [74] Hi all, Unless you have lived in 0.0 for an extended period of time you have no right to question it. If you canÆt even be bother joining/teaming up with the alliance who is actively defending the space you deserve to get blasted into meaty bite sized chunks. NBSI is there to allow the alliance to defend their space. They are paying the POS fuel costs, they are killing the pirates/enemies and finally they live there. You are leeching off them, you provide in most cases nothing to them and in turn cost them money by running their complex's, mining their ore or killing their rats that others could use. Its on your own back to get friendly with an alliance, it isnÆt their job to baby sit you. , Pham Sirge
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:44:00 - [75] This turned out a quite interesting thread. Shows theres quite a few who recognize this as being a bit faulty, or so it would seem to me. ----------------------------------------- For the liberation and safety of the Matari people!
Rod Blaine Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:45:00 - [76] You're all being far too nerdy about it. NBSI is FUN, that's all that there's to it for most of us. Sure it can be fun to build a web of standings using gradations up the waazoo and trying to keep up wioth all the altcorps, who has joined/left privateers this week and whatever else you'd have to do in order to make sure everyone that needs to be at negative standing actually is at negative standing. Or, you just set those to postitive that matter and shoot the rest, easy. Additional benefit: you get to shoot more people, which, whatever way you twist it, is the endgame of Eve for most of us. Another nice benefit: your alliance gets to keep pvp members, which you need to survive. So, if you know a way in which a large group of people that like spending two hours a day in meetings over who should be shot and who not, who should be reimbursed for being shot unneccesarily and what you all should do to combat the bleeding of combatants from your alliance once everyone is bored of hunting the same old two dozen npc station hugging logoffgankers, then by all means do it. As you said, iss tried an approach, blue tried an approach, and cfs tried one, they all failed. Eve is a game, people will not behave rationally in it, espcially seeign how we're all post-human immortals flying spaceships with lots of guns in it. In eve, you leave your morals at the loginscreen, and choose yourself a role to play. Old blog Originally by: Vriezuh Naz: John is a realist
Xaintrix The Shadow Order Storm Armada	Posted - 2007.01.12 20:52:00 - [77] Originally by: Malicia Skirj Another incident of NBSI in reality would be the USS Vincennes shooting down that Iranian airbus in 1988. They didn't ask or crank up the diplomacy. They said, "Hey...could be an enemy. Kill it." +10 Standing for you. My father was on the Vincennes when that occured, just as an Engineer, but still. That was some freaking scary stuff. Tiger Cruise was fun, I got a shell from the deck cannon and some dummy phalanx rounds. :) That's fatherly affection for you... cough
Kovid Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.01.12 21:09:00 - [78] 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.
Malicia Skirj	Posted - 2007.01.12 21:16:00 - [79] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera yes but for most countrys in real life and systems with concord you dont go in suspecting everyone wants you harm and will shoot you on sight. Well actually there is one place they do that and its a small island with "natives" (people that have had no contact with modern man) where they attack anyone on sight. There even was an incident where survivors from an helicopter crash was killed when the reached the island. But its an extreme example for sure =) Still we hail from those people and have made sure to establish UN and Geneva and such. How is that if theres no will for "non-NBSI"? Since we're in a game world, let's consider a game world scenario. If someone were flying some type of fighter and entered another country's airspace without notifying them in advance...I think they'd be pretty silly not to expect to be shot down. Most countries would, or might give you some kind of warning if they're not feeling so twitchy. Either way amounts to the same thing, though. You don't get to fly through their airspace. Lots of corps have this policy in Eve from what I've seen, and lots of countries do, too, despite this odd view you seem to have of things. Hell, even when you do say you're going into another country, they still act suspicious....and yes..Customs Agents can shoot you if they feel you're a threat.
Rod Blaine Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.12 21:19:00 - [80] Edited by: Rod Blaine on 12/01/2007 21:20:12 I really don't get where people get the assumtpion from that NBSI means that only the territorial alliance gets to use the space. What it comes down to, for those that actually play with their eyes open and know what they're talking about, is that instead of simply doing whatever the **** you like in 0.0 claimed by someone else, you now have the option to negotiate so that the territorial alliance gives you that positive standing that results in a somewhat safer environment for you, and allows docking, offices, whatever. NBSI doesn't mean noone but the alliance operates in that space. People that think that need to actually go out there and look really. Wastelands are so 2004, player empires are 2006 and 2007, just watch and see. Also, neutrality is simply a fiction. Since your presence in someone else space either helps them or does not help them, there's no way in which your presence does nothing. So there's no such thing as neutrality since anyone choses sides in 0.0 space merely by the fact which part of it they ply their trade in. Theoretically neutralisty might bge an option, but then you place too much value in the Eve backstory section and too little in the accumualted player experience we like to also call reality. Adn even if neutrality would be practically feasible in Eve0.0 space, it would just not be funto most of the people that affect your safety in that part of space. Neutrality has always been made possible only by convenience and by overlapping interests of nations. It is nothing different in Eve, except that here gameplay fun is an interest people too often neglect in these discussions. Old blog Originally by: Vriezuh Naz: John is a realist
Erik Pathfinder Caldari	Posted - 2007.01.12 21:28:00 - [81] Please stop trying to say that the Iranian airliner shot down is an example of NBSI in real life, it's not. It's an example of a*****y commander, un-trained officers and confusion leading to something happening that simply does not happen. Read the wikipedia article on it for more information. Iran Air Flight 655 --------------- "Run free little vermin, the city is yours!" - Quimby Creator of The Correct Dread(tm) sig
Xaintrix The Shadow Order Storm Armada	Posted - 2007.01.12 21:34:00 - [82] Originally by: Erik Pathfinder Please stop trying to say that the Iranian airliner shot down is an example of NBSI in real life, it's not. It's an example of a*****y commander, un-trained officers and confusion leading to something happening that simply does not happen. Read the wikipedia article on it for more information. Iran Air Flight 655 Which is a good point. It was more of a good example of NBSI FAILING in real life. Basically they screwed up the standings, or rather the person at the keyboard was colorblind and unloaded. But even then, to really compare and contrast with real life tragedies leaves a lot to be desired. Still, it's nice to know someone knows that ship, infamous as it may be. I have to say one thing, the food actually wasn't half bad.
Mog Carns Gallente Iron Hammer Academy The SUdden Death Squad	Posted - 2007.01.12 22:00:00 - [83] It's fun, it's practical, and it works. What other reasons exist? Given that the only possible downside is, occasionally, someone gets their toes bruised, is not a great deal of concern. We concern ourselves in real life because they have real life consequenses. People who die do not come back. We would very much like to keep as many of our people alive as we can, and we therefore show some restraint in our tactics and policies. Please note, this allows others to do a great deal of harm, but with a very small loss of life on either side. This does not apply only to contries, but in our personal lives. I do not have a howitzer on my jeep, so I cannot blow up the guy doing 28 in a 55. It takes me over an hour to get home instead of 30 minutes. I am harmed, it is not fun, but the loss of actual life is less (zero). Having more loss of life would be fun, at first, but then going to prison, or the gas chamber, would not be. Thus, restraint. I have some bratz who have been egging my cars and house at night going on 4 years. I go out in the cold and dark and wash things off. This is not fun, it is wet and cold and miserable. I could landmine my yard, set up cameras for survielance, and then invade the home of the delequint and slaughter the whole family. However, that would have undesirable consequences, as above. So we go with the unfun restraint. We play EVE for fun. People here do, in fact, come back from the dead. There are no real world consequenses. The reasons for restraint are removed. Guess which option everyone chooses. And the only people who would complain about it are the car going 28 mph and the egg throwing brats. Not a lot of concern if I bruise your toes, I have to say... Clueless Noob
x racer	Posted - 2007.01.12 22:56:00 - [84] Originally by: Erik Pathfinder Please stop trying to say that the Iranian airliner shot down is an example of NBSI in real life, it's not. It's an example of a*****y commander, un-trained officers and confusion leading to something happening that simply does not happen. Read the wikipedia article on it for more information. Iran Air Flight 655 The interdiction of the EP3-C in Hinan, China is a much better example x
Culmen Caldari Gekidoku	Posted - 2007.01.13 07:33:00 - [85] Edited by: Culmen on 13/01/2007 07:35:12 Edited by: Culmen on 13/01/2007 07:31:00 Originally by: x racer Originally by: Erik Pathfinder Please stop trying to say that the Iranian airliner shot down is an example of NBSI in real life, it's not. It's an example of a*****y commander, un-trained officers and confusion leading to something happening that simply does not happen. Read the wikipedia article on it for more information. Iran Air Flight 655 The interdiction of the EP3-C in Hinan, China is a much better example x A) Nobody shot anything, that was a mid air collision B) the incident started over international waters, not chinese territory, so china didnt have POSs up in those waters C) its an EP3-E not an EP3-C overall i still think NBSI is a good idea over time it leads to less neutrals less neutrals means less n00bs less n00bs means less pirates hunting n00bs less pirates hunting n00bs is less pirates _____________________________________________________ Why do i even need a sig?
Shakuul Caldari The Imperial Commonwealth The Sundering	Posted - 2007.01.13 09:36:00 - [86] Like others have pointed out, alliances really don't have much to gain by allowing neutrals into their territory. Again, as others have pointed out, the mistake you are making in saying it is "childish and stupid" to have a policy of NBSI is that you are comparing EVE to the real world. In EVE, when you pod someone or whatever, you aren't seriously harming them. Sure, they might get annoyed/discouraged, but thats part of the game. You are just sending a strong message of "stay out of my territory." NBSI is the result of people responding rationally to incentives. CCP has a system where standings are limited in number and complexity (for example you can't set all noob chars to negative standings, etc). So, even if I wanted to make an alliance that issued hunting passes that would be visible next to your name in local, I couldn't. It just isn't worth the risk letting a bunch of "neutrals" through if a few are actually hostiles. If alliances with sovereignty could charge (limited) gate fees, or get a % of every bounty regardless of member corp, or something like that, it might provide further incentive to choose a policy other than NBSI. When you are looking for a "higher purpose" in EVE, you again confuse life and EVE. Life may have a "higher purpose," EVE certainly does not. Its a game, its about fun. Everything else (mining, hunting, pvp, whatever) is all done directly or indirectly to have fun. I guess if you really want to hunt for values in EVE you might be able to argue that brotherhood/camaraderie/unity are values, since they are necessary for functional corporations and alliances.
Tom Gunn Caldari North Eastern Swat	Posted - 2007.01.13 11:53:00 - [87] I think people are trying to make comparisons to how they treat people in the real world as a defense for NBSI. Personally I see PvP as a competition, much like a sport or boxing match - when you cross over the border into 0.0, you are conseting to take part in a no-holds barred contest and risk of pvp at any time, by anyone. The reason you are there is the only reason they need to engage with you in a fight, they don't need nothing more. I don't hate the person who blows up my ship in pvp, I knew the risks when i went there.
Plutoinum German Cyberdome Corp Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2007.01.13 12:11:00 - [88] Edited by: Plutoinum on 13/01/2007 12:16:31 If you don't practise strict roleplay and think of 0.0 as a place, where everyone accepts being shot for whatever or for even no reason, and that already by entering 0.0, then the argument 'humanity' you mentioned against NBSI disappears. What's left is a policy that pvp players can easily get used to. And it's quite effective. Neutrals usually bring no real benefit, are just potential risks and shooting something is fun, so you follow standard procedure and shoot. Nice, a target boom. That's not bad behaviour, that's normal behaviour to welcome neutrals. Some say Hi, NBSI people shoot. In contrast to that, not shooting someone means either 'I like you.' or 'Damn it, I'm not allowed to shoot.' But like I said, a strictly roleplaying pilot needs to consider, if killing civilians fits to his role. But for most alliances it just an efficient policy that gives pilots also something to do. CTD/con-loss vs. log-out. A proposal for a fix.
Noriath	Posted - 2007.01.13 12:21:00 - [89] Well, let's see what the future brings, CCP does want to improve out options for sovreignty and so on, so maybe we will finally see the tools implemented that allow alliances to have neutral people enter their space. Right now that's total madness, if you don't shoot anything neutral on sight you'll have pirates roaming your space unchecked, people mining and ratting in systems you fought hard to controll, and enemies anchoring POS in your core systems at a whim. You just can't have that...
Hardin Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.13 12:24:00 - [90] Originally by: Hakera neutrals will only abuse what you fight to protect, the friends you have will watch your back for you when needed. That is the difference. If you dont use NBSI, you will be used and you must accept that. Under NBSI, you know who your friends are, and if the rest arnt with you, they are against you. You are wrong... Originally by: Morden Nok CVA operates NRDSI. What I can say, it does lead to very, very long KOS lists. And also makes us hate CCP for giving us only 300 standing slots and not allowing to set standings toward another alliance. Yes, I know you can set overview + / - in alliance, but members of alliance marked as enemy are able to dock at outposts, unless the corp owning that outpost sets them to negative status (if you allow those with no standins to dock). It means lots of our enemies do use noob-corp alts to scout, but those numbers dropped massively after revelations. All local inhabitants are not just freeloaders, there are quite many that take part in defense of the region. Its also very good way to know who of the local inhabitants might be good recruitment material. And this man is right. NRDSI is harder to manage and need discipline - it is not for the lazy. But it has its own benefits in terms of stimulating trade (and if you are the people supplying the markets then that's a very nice benefit - and in providing a nice pool of potential recruits - it doesn't take long to identify those neutrals who contribute and those who leach... ------------------------------ AMARR VICTOR
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
Ian Novarider Eve Defence Force	Posted - 2007.01.17 13:48:00 - [121] Why do you try to shoot every non-blue in 0.0 ? Because every humble frigate that may escape your patrols and gate camps may carry a cyno generator and serve as a jump in point for an invasion fleet of two dozen capital ships. Because every interceptor slipping through the net can gank your haulers that move around ore worth dozens of million ISK and/or refuel your POS defense network and/or transports faction items worth billions. Because every battleship running lose in your territory may sniper gank and terrorize a whole player outpost station system and/or runs through 0.0 ratting systems only hunting for officers spawns that you force to appear through spending hours killing off the low level spawns. Because every HAC team you let through may farm your complexes and kick out the home team, costing you billions in regular income. Because every humble pod may just be here to scout out your POS network and moon mining data. Because every tiny shuttle might be there to deplete the ammo in your POS guns. 0.0 is not a pretty place, because its the place where people are in it for the money. And money making and compassion traditionally rarely go together. Have fun Ian Quote: Know thy enemy and know thyself and thou will be victorious in all thy battles.
DarkFenix Caldari Pilots From Honour	Posted - 2007.01.17 14:01:00 - [122] Why NBSI? 1. It's fun. 2. It stops alt spies (which will be the vast majority of neutrals trying to enter your space). 3. It stops leeches draining the resources of your hard earned space. Is it what the residents of 0.0 want? Yes. The residents of 0.0 are generally alliances who fought long and hard to take that space, and they don't want a bunch of neutrals coming in and leeching resources they haven't earned. I think you're reading into NBSI way too seriously. It's a game. Get out more.
arutha Infinite Improbability Inc Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.01.17 15:36:00 - [123] why do some people have to write posts that are clearly inflammatory on a subject that isent going to change because in there small mindedness they think it should . ccp gave players the freedom to decide what ever policey suites them in 0.0 . live with it .
Everbane Underworld Enterprises	Posted - 2007.01.17 15:43:00 - [124] Edited by: Everbane on 17/01/2007 15:44:11 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. CFS was actually an interesting place to live as a 0.0 noob. Pirate incursions were guaranteed at all times. You ran the gauntlet of M0o, Burn Eden and such like along with a multitude of other miscellaneous pirates whenever you jumped. You never knew who or what you might run into at the next gate. You made large amounts of ISK but lost some once in a while and learnt alot at the same time. Most alliances these days field their impenetrable gate blobs shooting shuttles, noobships and randoms to raise their killboard profiles, as if anyone cares. The excuse being "it could be a deadly solo pirate or ebil solo spy" (they're not -10 already?). Yet they happily wave past their NAPed "friends" because they have nasty looking ships. A large proportion of alliance players sit alone in systems hoovering up roids and ISK without risk or even interacting with others except through the markets because the whole region is locked down by some half-baked NBSI gate blob. CFS fell more because of the greed / egos of certain individuals / corps / alliances than a lack of NBSI. Where are they now I wonder?
Selim Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.01.23 23:13:00 - [125] Edited by: Selim on 23/01/2007 23:11:16 Originally by: Allen Deckard Which of your reasons there are ones that benifit me? I fight die, spend time defending area, loose countless ships and pods, supply pos's with fuel for sole purpose of keeping soverenty, spend tens of billions putting up outposts. So you want me to defend area and all so you can Mine asteroids Kill NPCs Missions Use agents Do a complex Passing through to another area. With the benifit of supplying me? or do you mean buying the cheep stuff on the market and reselling at higher prices. Are you spending the time doing logistics to bring things in to just buying what I supplied. 30k people online right now. I need to set standings for each and every one of them? or maybe you become friends first before comming in my home. Personally my rl house has a nbsi policy. You better make friends with me before you decide to come in my house and grab a soda. (note this isnt directed right at you just your idea) Stop branding yourself as a valiant defender of 'your' space. Nobody is asking for your protection. People have and will continue to get into claimed space without silly passes and do just fine defending themselves against these fabled "roaming ganksquads" that are so talked about and feared. Nobody needs your protection except the weak and helpless. I have zero respect for people that pay to gain access to space when they can easily get in with some ingenuity. If people are mining in a belt or killing some nice npcs that YOU wanted, its your own damn fault for not taking the initiative and getting there first. Hide behind "its MY space, I defend it!" all you want but obviously people that dont join large alliances dont need your protection and are willing to take the risk of dodging large gangs of brigands like your own. Whats the point of killing mission runners? You cant even play the "they are mining my ore!!1" card there, and the bit about them freeloading off your defense? Who are they being defended against? Why, yes... other NBSI entities! Interesting, isn't it? NBSIers claiming moral superiority over other NBSIers. Anyway, until you can control the stargates to not let anyone in except your friends, well, it isnt truly yours, sorry. And to be honest, most of you guys should look at your own alliance for the REAL freeloaders. Those who sit in the outpost systems and mine and hunt rats all day and then whine to the rest of the alliance when they get blown up, instead of being responsible and looking after their own defense. Its not the random neutrals you should be worried about. But no... this is all pointless. None of your reasons are the real reasons why NBSI is prevalent. Ultimately, Rod Blaine is right. NBSI is more popular because its easier and simpler to just kill everything, and can be fun. And thats entirely understandable... but NRDS is workable and in many cases beneficial. NRDS isn't necessarily devoid of targets, either. Don't close your eyes to the idea at first glance.
Selim Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.01.23 23:23:00 - [126] Edited by: Selim on 23/01/2007 23:21:24 Originally by: DarkFenix Why NBSI? 1. It's fun. 2. It stops alt spies (which will be the vast majority of neutrals trying to enter your space). 3. It stops leeches draining the resources of your hard earned space. Is it what the residents of 0.0 want? Yes. The residents of 0.0 are generally alliances who fought long and hard to take that space, and they don't want a bunch of neutrals coming in and leeching resources they haven't earned. I think you're reading into NBSI way too seriously. It's a game. Get out more. Wait... you talk about space being "hard-earned", and you fight against those who "dont deserve to leech resources" and then you go on to tell people its just a game and its not that serious? Its one or the other. Anyway... what are alliances really fighting over anyway? Its not about resources. People can easily get into the best 0.0 systems and make billions of isk if they're smart about it, so its not about that. Its about control and power and prestige, not about resources. Nothing wrong with that of course. But you haven't "fought hard" over resources, you've fought hard for prestige. Big difference, there. So saying that people don't deserve resources which they can easily get despite alliance claims is a bit odd, don't you think? I think that if you are able to access something, you deserve it. If you are unable to, you dont. Thats my core belief. If you are willing to fight the powers that be and you overcome that and achieve your goal, you deserve the prize. I'm sure you'll agree.
Kraven Kor Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2007.01.23 23:37:00 - [127] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera Originally by: Alexi Borizkova NBSI is just a way of life after a while. When you see a group of strangers outnumbering you, you run, when you see strangers you equal or outnumber, you engage. 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. There is no time for questions. Look at it this way: You are in Corp X and claim Region Y. There are 4 entrances to your territory, which your corp "camps" as much as they can to keep out the riff-raff. So, a neutral jumps into your camp. Two scenarios for you: 1. Neutral is not a spy / hostile / resource-vamp. He really wants to be friends. Your gang says "state your business!" while holding the ship webbed and scrammed. The neutral convinces you he is just here to mine some veldspar in peace. He flies on to his rendezvous with rock, and all live happily ever after. 2. Neutral IS a spy / hostile / resource-vamp. Your gang asks "state your business!" while he is webbed / scrammed. He states he is here to mine veldspar, and then in another channel states your ship types, who is the tackler, etc. You are hemming and hawing over whether to allow access, checking corp mates to see if anyone knows if this guy is a hostile alt or what, when suddenly the "neutral" has called in the 17-man gank squad of doom who now know exactly who to pick off for optimal corpse abuse. So, if you can explain how a "Happy Friendly We Don't Shoot Until You Shoot Us" (HFWDSUYSU) Policy could have prevented the above situation, maybe some corps will switch to non-NBSI. So long as there are NPC corps where players can create anonymous spies at will, there will be NBSI policy. Nobody wants a leech in their systems -- ie someone sucking roids or chaining NPC's who is not contributing to the "landlords" pocketbook. Spies suck -- whether it is someone who has infiltrated your Teamspeak, or just a random neutral alt shuttle spy giving away ship-types and tactical info to your enemies. ----- You're not what you are, you're just what you do! So it ends with their butts and it starts with your shoe! - Awesome Car Fun Maker
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.01.23 23:51:00 - [128] Edited by: Thor Xian on 23/01/2007 23:48:32 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. All they proved is that they didn't know how to do it. EDIT: Tho at the time the tools to facilitate that type of alliance were not available. People don't realize they have tons of potential taxable income when they have an outpost. ~Thor Xian, Material Defender "For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One." Corp/Alliance Services
Lord Frost Minmatar The Crystal Method	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:05:00 - [129] I think the op doesn't kno wmuch. There are 0.0 spaces where neautrals are always asked in security channels before shot apon. If its red... yes they shoot... but if a neutral is in a viable corp, and has reason to be there, sometimes they are allowed. Don't paint all of 0.0 as NBSI, especially when we go OUT of OUR way to check if a person is KOS or not. Lets not forget, if you are in an NPC corp mulling around, you're prolly an alt scout. So... whatever happens in 0.0 I think you just deal with it pal. People do make the effort to communicate with neutrals. I don't know what planet you are from.
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:06:00 - [130] What gets me is that all sorts of people have sounded off in here about how NBSI is unnecessary, wastes money making opportunities, and is generally completely stupid on all accounts. So here's a suggestion: quit talking about it, and go do it. Prove everyone wrong. build a corp, build an alliance, fight for some space, defend the space, set up an infrastructure, then liberally practice a NRDS (not red, don't shoot) policy, or whatever you like. Make untold billions, and if NBSI truly is a waste of time and a strangling weed on economy, your alliance should be one of the strongest EVE have ever seen. Until this point, I'm going to assume that my assumptions about NBSI are quite right, and continue to do as pretty much every single successful alliance around does. -----------------------------------------------
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:07:00 - [131] Originally by: Patch86 What gets me is that all sorts of people have sounded off in here about how NBSI is unnecessary, wastes money making opportunities, and is generally completely stupid on all accounts. So here's a suggestion: quit talking about it, and go do it. Prove everyone wrong. build a corp, build an alliance, fight for some space, defend the space, set up an infrastructure, then liberally practice a NRDS (not red, don't shoot) policy, or whatever you like. Make untold billions, and if NBSI truly is a waste of time and a strangling weed on economy, your alliance should be one of the strongest EVE have ever seen. Until this point, I'm going to assume that my assumptions about NBSI are quite right, and continue to do as pretty much every single successful alliance around does. I am doing it, just takes time and a number of setbacks have occured. ~Thor Xian, Material Defender "For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One." Corp/Alliance Services
Discodude Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:24:00 - [132] Now I haven't taken the time to read all the posts and I'm sure it may have been said already. But most allliance not only like the NBSI policy because it provides safty and helps stop potential spys/scouts but also stops regular joes from entering your space. Who want's a million regular joes in you space sucking up all the valuable minerals, killing all the valuable spawns while giving nothing back in retun (maybe a bit in station taxes) and if a hostile comes along...wheres those regular joes to defend the space?....Off in empire hiding.
Amaron Ghant Caldari	Posted - 2007.01.26 12:18:00 - [133] NBSI, NRDS. NBSI. If it¦s not a friend shoot it NRDS. If it¦s an enemy shoot it. NBSI is all about closing off your territory to anyone but your own. It¦s about paranoia (which tbh IS a valid survival trait in eve) and fear of outsiders. Fear that they want what you have. Alliances operating under NBSI close off thier space to outsiders, letting only thier members and in some cases "slave" corps feast at the table. Vast areas closed off, natural resources put off limits and only enjoyed by a few. NBSI is the policy of "Guilty as charged. No right of appeal" NRDS however is all about sharing. For someone to make the red list they have to shoot you first. Everyone else is more than welcome to share in what you have. Alliances operating under NRDS and owning stations and outposts make a lot of isk from those "guests" who exploit the regions natural resources. NRDS is the policy of "Innocent till proven guilty" Which do you choose? It¦s like the arguments raging about nuclear disarmament. No one is wiling to totally remove thier capability first. To do so would put them at a disadvantage to those still possessing the weapons and launch systems. An EVE where NRDS ruled supreme would be utopia. Unfortunately most alliances are not willing to take the risk of allowing neutrals into thier space for fear of mining operations/POS/Mission runners/Ratters getting disrupted by pirates of opportunity and bored PvP corporations looking for a bit of action and another kill for the epeen board. To adopt NRDS an alliance has to be very very strong and sure of that strength, or it has to be delusional to the point of insanity. It¦s far easier for an alliance with no territory to protect to choose NRDS and look down on those who chose NBSI, than it is for those alliances to run the risks to thier members imposed with NRDS. NBSI has been with us since the dawn of time, when man first crawled out of the protoplasmic ooze, looked to the night sky and said "WTF?" NBSI then was a survival trait as more and more cave dwellers began to compete for limited resources. If you let someone else hunt your prey, abscond with your women, eat your crops, your group would be heading towards extinction in pretty short order. NBSI made sense; it was the only logical course of action. In a galaxy where resources are for all intents and purposes limitless, NRDS is the next step forward in social evolution. Unfortunately a lot of corps and independant pilots are still clinging to far lower branches of the evolutionary tree with one hand, and trying to drag down those who have climbed higher with the free hand. In a perfect universe, everyone would choose NRDS. It¦s not a perfect universe.
Infinity Ziona Privateers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.26 14:14:00 - [134] NBSI was my primary motivation for making a certain corp. I was in this lovely argument here on the forums with some alliance moron about the NBSI gankage and those gankers not receiving kill rights against them and he dared me to declare war on him. So the next time a wartarget ganks you in empire under NB(OW)SI policy yee can thank yourselves for the idea. Consequences consequences. My personal opinion. I dont relish the thought of killing everyone, mostly if people dont annoy me and I could kill them I usually wont, unless they look rich. The argument about spies and enemies is bullcrap and just a lame excuse to gank people for no reason. I believe you should always have a reason, even if that reason is just to be a ****. Making excuses with NBSI... its a game, grow a virtual backbone and admit your a wnker eh? The Privateering Life*
Stud Longcock	Posted - 2007.01.26 16:49:00 - [135] I LOL at all the people denouncing NBSI. These people don't hold territory or build infrastructure. They either depend on others to provide them with the security to access 0.0 resources, or they wander about in ganksquads only accomplishing the fattening of their killboards. It's easy to roll around and gank others when you have no assets to be ganked. You want to denounce NBSI? Go out to 0.0, build a POS network, get sovereignty, hell build a station, then run NRDS and see how long you last. Until you have a decent stretch of NRDS territory you hold, stfu about NBSI.
Red Reaver	Posted - 2007.01.26 17:57:00 - [136] Quote: So here's a suggestion: quit talking about it, and go do it. Prove everyone wrong. build a corp, build an alliance, fight for some space, defend the space, set up an infrastructure, then liberally practice a NRDS (not red, don't shoot) policy, or whatever you like. Make untold billions, and if NBSI truly is a waste of time and a strangling weed on economy, your alliance should be one of the strongest EVE have ever seen. Until this point, I'm going to assume that my assumptions about NBSI are quite right, and continue to do as pretty much every single successful alliance around does. Yeah, that.
SpaceSlag Dark-Rising	Posted - 2007.03.01 22:37:00 - [137] OK: Everyone raise there hands who has spent nearly their entire Eve life living in 0.0. Keep your hands up if once you see a nuetral in 0.1 or above space next to a gate/station you have been OMGWTF PWND by continuing with your daily way of life rules governing 0.0 space. Look around you folks. It's quite a large club. Fact of the matter is NBSI is here to stay just because it is the ONLY policy that holds up in times of war. Eve is a PvP game (period!). Even in devblogs do the devs consider everything PvP, wether it being outbidding people in the market, contracts, etc. Or wether it be killing officer spawns in a belt so that the next passer by cant, or directly shooting another player. Everything is PvP. The only way to be 100% sure that the people around you in local are friend or foe is the NBSI policy. Lets be true to ourselves and our cruel habits. If you're not blue, you just ain't gettin through.
chillz Minmatar	Posted - 2007.03.01 22:50:00 - [138] Edited by: chillz on 01/03/2007 22:47:33 NBSI is here because we all have 2 alts. You can't be held responsible for your actions because half of the time you don't even have to be you. Spys and undesireables coexist on the same account as your main. Hence if the character isn't known it's better to kill it, just incase. Now if we all had only one character per account, you would be held responsible for all of your actions and so the need to kill everything you haven't given a positive standing to, would be reduced. It's never going to change, get used to the 0.0 closed shop. ----------------------------------- A gun and a packet of sandwiches. "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - Hunter S Thompson
Wreckless Recluse	Posted - 2007.03.02 00:42:00 - [139] NBSI is just the way it has to be because of security and because, well, you can't shoot blues and you gotta shoot someone or why play. There are many borders in this real world that follow the same policy. Try getting a tank(BS) or even a Jeep with a machine gun on the back(frigate) across the border into Israel (or any country with a small enough border to actually defend). I'm pretty sure you will see the NBSI policy in full effect. The only reason any country will let you through in a car or by getting off a plane is because they are fairly certain you don't have a tank waiting for you to jump in it. Something you can never know for sure in EVE.
Freelanc3r Caldari Xoth Inc Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.03.02 01:33:00 - [140] Think about it this way, I wouldnt let just anyone walk into my house and let them steal my things. In this case (roids/rats/complexes) which alliance's defend on a daily basis. Ships in EVE are armed and any could potentially be used to destroy your alliance mates, in another real life analogy when was the last time you were allowed to take a Nuclear Torpedo through border control ? I apologise for the linking of EVE with real life however when you are talking about ethics in an online context one must draw comparisons between the real world. There are constantly "noobs" hanging around in 0.0 but you could go months killing noobcorpers without killing a real noob, most are just scouts for hostile alliances. On the surface NBSI may appear a harsh even unfair policy however spending time in a 0.0 alliance often gives you a new outlook on EVE. What you call "fear and laziness" I would call being sensible, If haulers one day trundled into your space and you let them unnaposed would you then let them start putting up POS's in your territory ? Then when they use it as a capital staging point you will probably wish you hadnt been so naive. P.S. - Its fun to shoot people too.. Disclaimer - These views are not representitive of my Alliance + Corp etc bla bla its just my take on why NBSI is a sensible policy. -----------------------------------
Maglorre	Posted - 2007.03.02 03:52:00 - [141] Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera But why arent there any wild bill hickock and wyatt earp in EVE? Dude, seriously, didn't you watch Deadwood??? If Wild Bill had run an NBSI policy then he would have killed Jack McCall before that sucka had a chance to pop a cap in his head and he'd still be alive today!!
Gift Amarr Loot Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.02 04:13:00 - [142] Edited by: Gift on 02/03/2007 04:12:46 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. I don't agree. All they proved to me was the consequence for a failed uprising is oblivion. I still think the "peaceful" alliance could have a place in eve. Pirates of Eve, Join channel "Pirate" Today!
aeti Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.03.02 04:21:00 - [143] as one of the first corps that probably switched over to it in a big way oh so long ago there was really just one reason the standings limit put in place by ccp when you ran out of standings it was easier to drop all the negative standings you had set and add new friendlies as blue, and just shoot everything else, rather that just shoot the stuff you had negative, if that all makes sense...
Revolution Rising Minmatar	Posted - 2007.03.02 04:49:00 - [144] Originally by: Trem Sinval Originally by: Ceanthar Cerbera But why arent there any wild bill hickock and wyatt earp in EVE? Because: * Bounty hunting is broken. If the bounty system worked well, and players that engaged in such activities could be made profitable targets for their crimes, EVE would see a lot more people on the "right" side of the law. * Space is a big place. To operate an open space requires hundreds, if not thousands of players to police conduct. And you have to be able to trust, absolutely, each and every one of them. In short, the ability to grief, cause mayhem, and destroy without consequence is much, much, MUCH greater than the tools to control such behavior or discourage it. Without the ability to control or monitor exterior communication between members (even within the context of the game, to say nothing of actual exterior communication) means that human nature and corruption run rampant while the concept of "law" is an unemplaceable joke. * 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. The controls or capabilities to track down such players? The legal (within the game) incentives to continue being a good citizen? None. It is famously said that "law keeps honest men honest". Without it, everyone just keeps screwing each other over, and so paranoia, and it's inevitable conclusion, NBSI, arises. As much as I hate to agree, I completely agree with this poster. The law in non-concord areas is HARSH and people should know where they are off to and have a little responsibility. Don't just autopilot through 20 0.0 jumps and expect to be ok at the other end. However, I think NBSI corps/regions do have a problem with market and such. Noone can trade there, so the markets are under-stimulated and such. It would be nice if CCP really started to get on the ball with some of this stuff. Add an ability for corp CEO's to actually write some comments about a member who left their corp. That way, you can't just get away with unruley behaviour. When I think of EVE online, I think adam and eve. This game is a *****. RR. "I'm mostly a miner, but in your case, I'll make an exception... F1, F2, F3..."
AKULA UrQuan Caldari STK Scientific INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.03.02 05:45:00 - [145] In 0.0 a "Innocent bystander" isn't.
Hon Kovell Gallente Intaki Peace	Posted - 2007.03.02 06:30:00 - [146] The main problem I've seen with NRDSI is that many people have trouble understanding that 'neutrals' is a group made up of unrelated people. They get shot by a neutral and then assume that all neutrals are out to get them. It can be easier to set up as NBSI than to explain the flaws of stereotyping or the workings of simple logic. NRDS is more rewarding but also involves more work. NBSI is also an obvious fit for those that want to shoot everyone else.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [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.