Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Zirashi
Cyclical Destruction
58
|
Posted - 2017.03.21 04:29:03 -
[451] - Quote
This is a troll right? I mean, c'mon, he's been unironically telling people to HTFU while simultaneously whining about the "unjust" cynos in low sec and "unfair" mechanics on a forum alt for over 5 pages now. |

Alaric Faelen
Sabotage Incorporated Executive Outcomes
449
|
Posted - 2017.03.21 05:48:12 -
[452] - Quote
I've always thought that it's sort of backwards that Low Sec is less dangerous than Null Sec.
Using the Age of Sail as a blueprint, I see High Sec as the old big empires of Europe where the markets were. Null Sec is the New World or India where the exotic resources were harvested, but under fairly strong local control by semi-freelance corporations (like the East India company which had it's own military/mercenary arm). Low Sec is that long, dangerous space in between the two.
Thus, it should be Low Sec which is truly lawless, has warp bubbles, etc. Not claimable- anyone there is a 'pirate' by default. Soldiers on opposing sides use that space to interdict their enemy's goods and pirates try to interdict it all. The real difference between piracy and legitimate warfare just a little fuzzy. 
If more resources were being harvested in Low Sec, and transported thru Low Sec (as opposed to jump bridging right past it), then it would matter much more to the whole game. Make FW ownership of space matter more to the free flow of goods and it becomes part of everyone's interests to keep it stable. Null Sec, as well as the NPC empires.
|

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3241
|
Posted - 2017.03.21 12:43:43 -
[453] - Quote
Zirashi wrote:This is a troll right? I mean, c'mon, he's been unironically telling people to HTFU while simultaneously whining about the "unjust" cynos in low sec and "unfair" mechanics on a forum alt for over 5 pages now.
Well his forum alt got dropped some time ago and it cost him a cynabal and the crystal pod so maybe he is just salty... |

Verlyn
Minmatar Secret Service Ushra'Khan
74
|
Posted - 2017.03.21 16:01:39 -
[454] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Orakkus wrote:So, does everyone have their own idea about how to make low-sec good, I don't know about everyone, but I do. Get rid of it. All you need is lawful space and lawless space. No need for some in between space that makes no one happy. Mr Epeen 
Speak for yourself. |

Maximillian Bonaparte
Interstellar Booty Hunters
139
|
Posted - 2017.03.21 18:16:47 -
[455] - Quote
Alaric Faelen wrote:I've always thought that it's sort of backwards that Low Sec is less dangerous than Null Sec. Using the Age of Sail as a blueprint, I see High Sec as the old big empires of Europe where the markets were. Null Sec is the New World or India where the exotic resources were harvested, but under fairly strong local control by semi-freelance corporations (like the East India company which had it's own military/mercenary arm). Low Sec is that long, dangerous space in between the two. Thus, it should be Low Sec which is truly lawless, has warp bubbles, etc. Not claimable- anyone there is a 'pirate' by default. Soldiers on opposing sides use that space to interdict their enemy's goods and pirates try to interdict it all. The real difference between piracy and legitimate warfare just a little fuzzy.  If more resources were being harvested in Low Sec, and transported thru Low Sec (as opposed to jump bridging right past it), then it would matter much more to the whole game. Make FW ownership of space matter more to the free flow of goods and it becomes part of everyone's interests to keep it stable. Null Sec, as well as the NPC empires.
Astute observations.
I think that the problem with factional warfare though is the LP system. You can farm, farm, farm in a cheap stabbed frig with very little risk, and running away repeatedly. I HATE stabbed FW farmers and still kill them with double scrams when I can.
Instead of LP, if there was a tangible object, tag, loot, or somehting that they have to 'sell' or convert to lp with some value, this would make FW far more benificial and interesting for all parties: militia, pirates, privateers. Ofc you would have to increase the reward just a little bit.
Another intersting factoid about RL pirate history, is that it was often secretly sponsored, encouraged, or tolerated by 'legitimate' entrepeneurs who were corrupt.
But yeah I think there would need to be a new system or essential supply in lowsec that you can get.
Also I think lately there is a problem about PvP training. Eve-Uni is jsut not cutting it, RvB is restarting but not what it was, but if people learned how to solo or small gang PvP they would be more inclined to try lowsec. OR AGAIN, mission agent incentive to PvP in lwosec that is NOT faction warfare LP farming. We need more pirate agents or constable agents or something like that.
Nullsec PvP is different. Its groupthink PvP...which is why they all lost to Lowsec pvp-ers during World War Bee. :)
|

Salvos Rhoska
2524
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 04:17:54 -
[456] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Zirashi wrote:This is a troll right? I mean, c'mon, he's been unironically telling people to HTFU while simultaneously whining about the "unjust" cynos in low sec and "unfair" mechanics on a forum alt for over 5 pages now. Well his forum alt got dropped some time ago and it cost him a cynabal and the crystal pod so maybe he is just salty...
Pfft..
There are 3400+ NS systems for cynos/caps. The narrow 800 system LS buffer between HS and NS would be better served as a non-cyno sub-cap sector.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|

Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
56
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 05:10:27 -
[457] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Zirashi wrote:This is a troll right? I mean, c'mon, he's been unironically telling people to HTFU while simultaneously whining about the "unjust" cynos in low sec and "unfair" mechanics on a forum alt for over 5 pages now. Well his forum alt got dropped some time ago and it cost him a cynabal and the crystal pod so maybe he is just salty... Pfft.. There are 3400+ NS systems for cynos/caps. (Both NPC and Player) The narrow 800 system LS buffer between HS and NS would be better served as a non-cyno sub-cap sector.
That would have the effect of building a cyno proof trench around all the nullsec that doesn't border large swathes of NPC null, and that would thus make great swathes of nullsec much closer to invasion proof. I did live in Vale of the Silent as a renter for some time, and it was invaded by capitals staged from lowsec, despite being blue on one side and "strategically" neutral on the other.
Also currently nullsec ratters get dropped on all the time (so common even a terrible renter alliance will publish known drop scouts as such on their intel channels), and this change would reduce the neutral space locations that can reach into null for such, dramatically - ie ratting would be a simple case of analysing reach on the map.
Never mind what a pain in the ass JF piloting would become. |

Lan Wang
Knights of the Posing Meat Snuffed Out
4053
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 07:43:16 -
[458] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Zirashi wrote:This is a troll right? I mean, c'mon, he's been unironically telling people to HTFU while simultaneously whining about the "unjust" cynos in low sec and "unfair" mechanics on a forum alt for over 5 pages now. Well his forum alt got dropped some time ago and it cost him a cynabal and the crystal pod so maybe he is just salty... Pfft.. There are 3400+ NS systems for cynos/caps. (Both NPC and Player) The narrow 800 system LS buffer between HS and NS would be better served as a non-cyno sub-cap sector.
what does the amount of systems have to do with it? if anything traveling around 800 hostile systems is reason enough to allow capitals and cynos
Alliance Logo Design Service
--
Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel
--
"Okay. So that was a pile of word salad..." - Bjorn Tyrson
|

sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
333
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 07:52:07 -
[459] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:
what does the amount of systems have to do with it? if anything traveling around 800 hostile systems is reason enough to allow capitals and cynos
Like I said before, he is confusing arguments and statements. But I am sure that in his head the number of systems are the answer to why cyno should not be there. He has repeated it so much now, that I don't think he would be able to understand why it is not an argument anymore.
"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker
|

Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
475
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 08:06:48 -
[460] - Quote
You know, making it harder to invade null from outside would drive up local conflict. Why have so many blues if you aren't worried about being jumped on from the centre of the wheel that is the eve map. Of course, null players only claim to love dangerous lawless space so they won't like any changes to cynos.
A case for more AoE in EvE
|
|

Salvos Rhoska
2525
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 14:44:26 -
[461] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:if anything traveling around 800 hostile systems is reason enough to allow capitals and cynos
Explain. Do you feel you would be unable to survive in LS without cynos/caps?
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|

Salvos Rhoska
2525
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 14:49:34 -
[462] - Quote
Coralas wrote:That would have the effect of building a cyno proof trench.
More like a cyno proof WALL around LS. Entry/exit only through gates.
Furthermore, I submit no caps in LS either. LS is empire space, with security restrictions, NS, is not. LS makes more sense as a non-cyno, sub-cap region on the security scale, in the few 800 systems it comprises as stretched in a thin border wedged between NS and HS.
Many players want LS to be a sub-cap, non-CONCORD PvP zone. Especially if (without caps/cynos) it means they can pirate the sub-cap transports passing through their space between NS/HS.
Furthermore, LS locals dont need cynos or caps to run the local PvE content. The anomalies/DEDs etc are all eminently manageable with sub-caps.
LS, thin and restricted as it is, needs less permeability. Lets be real. NS is exploiting the hell out of it, as is now.
I understand your point on invading NS from LS. Its valid.
But there is plenty of NS space from which to stage those.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|

Orakkus
Imperium Technologies DARKNESS.
334
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:24:19 -
[463] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote: But there is plenty of NS space from which to stage those.
Salvos Rhoska wrote:There are 3400+ NS systems for cynos/caps. (Both NPC and Player) The narrow 800 system LS buffer between HS and NS would be better served as a non-cyno sub-cap sector.
You keep using these numbers as if it were relevant. They are not.
They aren't relevant because the moment you limit access of ships though any space you start to develop corridors and chokepoints. Those areas would allow larger alliances to control access into vast areas of null-sec. Smaller alliances would not have the ability to expand into those areas and large tracts of null-sec would go unused because people simply cannot get to them and operate in them effectively. On that point alone, your idea of removing capitals and cyno access through low-sec would be highly detrimental to the game.
It doesn't matter if null-sec had a billion systems and low-sec had five. The moment you implement your idea there would be major, but short, battles over the chokepoints and access to the games content for large swaths of players would be removed, without any legitimate way to get back into there effectively. It would result in the worst "N+1" dynamic ever in the game.
He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
|

Lan Wang
Knights of the Posing Meat Snuffed Out
4055
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:26:55 -
[464] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Lan Wang wrote:if anything traveling around 800 hostile systems is reason enough to allow capitals and cynos
Explain. Do you feel you would be unable to survive in LS without cynos/caps?
this is the thing, you have 800 systems that you keep harping on about, i dont find spending 3 hours every fleet traveling by gates in armour battleships for a 30minute fight engaging gameplay, and i doubt a majority of lowsec residents would either.
eliminate small entities from lowsec who survive in remote lowsec systems away from large pirate corps by crippling freighter logistics and forcing loaded freighters to take gates through pirate infested chokepoints...because you know the large pirate corps will hellcamp every chokepoint to gank freighters with immunity, because i certainly will.
i would survive but id be burned out after 3 days because traveling by gates in anything bigger than a cruiser is worse than mining, i could also unsub like all my alts i pay irl money for and gate camp tama 24/7 with immunity.
Alliance Logo Design Service
--
Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel
--
"Okay. So that was a pile of word salad..." - Bjorn Tyrson
|

Salvos Rhoska
2525
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:48:29 -
[465] - Quote
Orakkus wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote: But there is plenty of NS space from which to stage those.
Salvos Rhoska wrote:There are 3400+ NS systems for cynos/caps. (Both NPC and Player) The narrow 800 system LS buffer between HS and NS would be better served as a non-cyno sub-cap sector. You keep using these numbers as if it were relevant. They are not. They aren't relevant because the moment you limit access of ships though any space you start to develop corridors and chokepoints. Those areas would allow larger alliances to control access into vast areas of null-sec. Smaller alliances would not have the ability to expand into those areas and large tracts of null-sec would go unused because people simply cannot get to them and operate in them effectively. On that point alone, your idea of removing capitals and cyno access through low-sec would be highly detrimental to the game. It doesn't matter if null-sec had a billion systems and low-sec had five. The moment you implement your idea there would be major, but short, battles over the chokepoints and access to the games content for large swaths of players would be removed, without any legitimate way to get back into there effectively. It would result in the worst "N+1" dynamic ever in the game.
1) That there is 4x more NS systems that LS systems, is relevant. It means LS is a thin line stretched between HS and NS. It also means there are 4x more systems to run cynos/caps in (where there is no security and no restrictions), whereas LS is overshadowed, penetrated and overrun by its NS neighbors.
LS players want a non-cyno, sub-cap zone to PvP in and intercept NS/HS material transport in.
2) Lol at chokepoints. Are you trying to claim there arent gatecamps in NS and HS? Cynos currently serve as a means to pass through LS WITHOUT interception. Its ridiculous.
3) Smaller entities can expand into Player Sov through the far wider web of connections in NS itself. Yes, invading NS with cynos/caps from LS will no longer be possible. You can however operate in LS instead with sub-caps to cripple that bordering NS entities access to HS markets, and back.
4) To run material through LS between HS/NS, you will either have to escort it, or risk it. No more lol-cyno skipping.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3250
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:55:15 -
[466] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote: LS players want a non-cyno, sub-cap zone to PvP in and intercept NS/HS material transport in.
Got stats or anything to support that opinion of yours? |

Salvos Rhoska
2525
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:00:32 -
[467] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Lan Wang wrote:if anything traveling around 800 hostile systems is reason enough to allow capitals and cynos
Explain. Do you feel you would be unable to survive in LS without cynos/caps? this is the thing, you have 800 systems that you keep harping on about, i dont find spending 3 hours every fleet traveling by gates in armour battleships for a 30minute fight engaging gameplay, and i doubt a majority of lowsec residents would either. eliminate small entities from lowsec who survive in remote lowsec systems away from large pirate corps by crippling freighter logistics and forcing loaded freighters to take gates through pirate infested chokepoints...because you know the large pirate corps will hellcamp every chokepoint to gank freighters with immunity, because i certainly will. i would survive but id be burned out after 3 days because traveling by gates in anything bigger than a cruiser is worse than mining, i could also unsub like all my alts i pay irl money for and gate camp tama 24/7 with immunity.
1) LS is 800 systems, stretched all the way around HS. At its deepest, its like 10 gatejumps wide.
2) As long as its sub-caps and non-cynos, both HS and NS can break through gatecamps from either end. Freighters can arrange escort and/or fly safer. There are no bubbles in LS, so really its not that hard.
3) People travel through gates in slower ships than cruisers all the time. BCs, BS. If you dont like it, fly something faster.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|

Lan Wang
Knights of the Posing Meat Snuffed Out
4055
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:09:32 -
[468] - Quote
so just remove battleships from lowsec too then and make people fly interceptors, thats your solution?
Alliance Logo Design Service
--
Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel
--
"Okay. So that was a pile of word salad..." - Bjorn Tyrson
|

Salvos Rhoska
2525
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:11:15 -
[469] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote: LS players want a non-cyno, sub-cap zone to PvP in and intercept NS/HS material transport in.
Got stats or anything to support that opinion of yours?
The insane volume of material transport between HS and NS, passing/cynoing through LS with impunity (under a cap umbrella), is support enough.
Or do you really think LS doesnt want to pirate the hell out of that enormous bounty?
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|

Lan Wang
Knights of the Posing Meat Snuffed Out
4055
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:11:49 -
[470] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote: LS players want a non-cyno, sub-cap zone to PvP in and intercept NS/HS material transport in.
Got stats or anything to support that opinion of yours?
ofcourse he doesnt, he has been asked for this sort of thing dozens of time now and cant produce anything but the same half-baked opinions
Alliance Logo Design Service
--
Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel
--
"Okay. So that was a pile of word salad..." - Bjorn Tyrson
|
|

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
63
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:15:45 -
[471] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Lan Wang wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Lan Wang wrote:if anything traveling around 800 hostile systems is reason enough to allow capitals and cynos
Explain. Do you feel you would be unable to survive in LS without cynos/caps? this is the thing, you have 800 systems that you keep harping on about, i dont find spending 3 hours every fleet traveling by gates in armour battleships for a 30minute fight engaging gameplay, and i doubt a majority of lowsec residents would either. eliminate small entities from lowsec who survive in remote lowsec systems away from large pirate corps by crippling freighter logistics and forcing loaded freighters to take gates through pirate infested chokepoints...because you know the large pirate corps will hellcamp every chokepoint to gank freighters with immunity, because i certainly will. i would survive but id be burned out after 3 days because traveling by gates in anything bigger than a cruiser is worse than mining, i could also unsub like all my alts i pay irl money for and gate camp tama 24/7 with immunity. 1) LS is 800 systems, stretched all the way around HS. At its deepest, its like 10 gatejumps wide. 2) As long as its sub-caps and non-cynos, both HS and NS can break through gatecamps from either end. Freighters can arrange escort and/or fly safer. There are no bubbles in LS, so really its not that hard. 3) People travel through gates in slower ships than cruisers all the time. BCs, BS. If you dont like it, fly something faster.
You don't really address the points he raised about it making gameplay in lowsec more annoying for many and that it would hurt lowsec logistics quite a bit by forcing them to go through lowsec chokepoints just like those traveling from null would.
Your idea would definitely present more targets to lowsec gatecampers. But does that really help lowsec residents overall? Does it draw more people to lowsec? I'm not so sure. |

Salvos Rhoska
2525
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:17:01 -
[472] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:so just remove battleships from lowsec too then and make people fly interceptors, thats your solution? Wat?
Mr. Meat-puppet. Please. I understand you are afraid, but this is unreasonable shilling.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3250
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:25:02 -
[473] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote: LS players want a non-cyno, sub-cap zone to PvP in and intercept NS/HS material transport in.
Got stats or anything to support that opinion of yours? The insane volume of material transport between HS and NS, passing/cynoing through LS with impunity (under a cap umbrella), is support enough. Or do you really think LS doesnt want to pirate the hell out of that enormous bounty?
With their life style being reliant on those same JF, I doubt they all want them to be interdictable at every gate camp. |

Salvos Rhoska
2525
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:26:25 -
[474] - Quote
Scialt wrote:Your idea would definitely present more targets to lowsec gatecampers. But does that really help lowsec residents overall? Does it draw more people to lowsec? I'm not so sure.
1) HS-NS material transport has no option than to travel through LS, unless they use WHs. They MUST pass through LS.
2) Will it draw more people to LS? HELL YES.
3) Pirates/alt corps galore to get a piece of the cake. NS entities galore to escort their shipments. Mercs galore to offer their services.
4) LS PI/PvE Corps may suffer attrition, but tbh, nobody will bother them much, as the HS-NS transitioning ships are FAR more lucrative.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|

Salvos Rhoska
2525
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:40:07 -
[475] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:With their life style being reliant on those same JF, I doubt they all want them to be interdictable at every gate camp. LS isnt reliant on JFs.
NS-HS trade networks are (currently conveniently cynoing their way through LS past gatecamps).
LS can run its own goods out with existing sub-caps and gatecamp avoidance precautions (easier to HS however, than NS, due to bubbles in NS).
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|

Lan Wang
Knights of the Posing Meat Snuffed Out
4055
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:40:09 -
[476] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Lan Wang wrote:so just remove battleships from lowsec too then and make people fly interceptors, thats your solution? Wat? Mr. Meat-puppet. Please. I understand you are afraid, but this is unreasonable shilling.
so is "use something faster" as an answer to traveling in 800 lowsec systems, get something else man instead of the crappy half-baked answers you keep giving, provide some evidence that freighters dont die and the other stuff people have asked for. this is getting tedious you really are proving to be a total noodle brain.
you clearly have no idea how low, null and high sec works, give it a rest
Alliance Logo Design Service
--
Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel
--
"Okay. So that was a pile of word salad..." - Bjorn Tyrson
|

Salvos Rhoska
2525
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:45:33 -
[477] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:so is "use something faster" as an answer to traveling in 800 lowsec systemst
Wtf are you doing traveling through 800 LS systems? Is this some roleplay thing?
LS is like 10ish gates deep at its deepest point.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|

Lan Wang
Knights of the Posing Meat Snuffed Out
4055
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:47:29 -
[478] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Lan Wang wrote:so is "use something faster" as an answer to traveling in 800 lowsec systemst Wtf are you doing traveling through 800 LS systems? Is this some roleplay thing? LS is like 10ish gates deep at its deepest point.
are you fcking ********?
Alliance Logo Design Service
--
Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel
--
"Okay. So that was a pile of word salad..." - Bjorn Tyrson
|

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
63
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:52:01 -
[479] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Scialt wrote:Your idea would definitely present more targets to lowsec gatecampers. But does that really help lowsec residents overall? Does it draw more people to lowsec? I'm not so sure. 1) HS-NS material transport has no option than to travel through LS, unless they use WHs. They MUST pass through LS. 2) Will it draw more people to LS? HELL YES. 3) Pirates/alt corps galore to get a piece of the cake. NS entities galore to escort their shipments. Mercs galore to offer their services. 4) LS PI/PvE Corps may suffer attrition, but tbh, nobody will bother them much, as the HS-NS transitioning ships are FAR more lucrative.
1. Not technically true. There are high-sec to null transitions (like Dital to Providence).
2. Why? I mean the people pirating are already there. Null and wormhole corps are already hot-dropping in null. It might focus the pirates on certain systems but I'm not sure why this would increase the number.
3. Gah... I'd hate to be forced to escort trade runs. I can't imagine many who'd like that sort of job. It might end up happening if the change were made but it doesn't seem like a positive development... having to protective fleet-blob your freighters to scare away pirates.
4. Gatecamps in my experience shoot everyone who's not allied. Don't think they'll let a missioning battleship pass and only gank freighters.
Again... the only group that this would seem to be a positive for is gatecampers. Everyone else... from low-sec indy/PI groups to low-sec missioners to FW participants who look for solo PvP instead of camping gates would all seem to not like this idea... because dealing with more gatecamps pretty much hurts all of their play styles. |

Salvos Rhoska
2525
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:54:34 -
[480] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Lan Wang wrote:so is "use something faster" as an answer to traveling in 800 lowsec systemst Wtf are you doing traveling through 800 LS systems? Is this some roleplay thing? LS is like 10ish gates deep at its deepest point. are you fcking ********?
Are you fking kidding me that you are cynoing through 800 LS systems on some kind of roleplaying crusade per play session?
Wtf is even your point?
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |