| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
544
   |
Posted - 2012.01.16 08:08:00 -
[1] - Quote
Darius III wrote: Soon you will not be able to count on having an incursion available to you 23/7. We will be killing the rest of the MS all at one time in a few days if negotiations with the BLT and TDF leaders fall apart.
We expect CCP to step in and spawn more/change the mechanic that makes them spawn.
After killing/forcing the MS to be killed, there were 700 in public incursion channel. So we made a fake logi fleet and got @15 BS killed by luring them and not repping them once aggro came in.
I am interested in hearing from a broader audience than Crime and Punishment about our actions.
Approve or disapprove and why?
Hopefully every single one involved are blacklisted to start. A bunch of burned logis wont be of much use in hisec in the future. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
544
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 08:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
Cardval Simalia wrote:Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Darius III wrote: Soon you will not be able to count on having an incursion available to you 23/7. We will be killing the rest of the MS all at one time in a few days if negotiations with the BLT and TDF leaders fall apart.
We expect CCP to step in and spawn more/change the mechanic that makes them spawn.
After killing/forcing the MS to be killed, there were 700 in public incursion channel. So we made a fake logi fleet and got @15 BS killed by luring them and not repping them once aggro came in.
I am interested in hearing from a broader audience than Crime and Punishment about our actions.
Approve or disapprove and why?
Hopefully every single one involved are blacklisted to start. A bunch of burned logis wont be of much use in hisec in the future. Banned from what? The MOM's getting taken down ASAP. Banned from twiddling your thumbs in the most elietist chats in eve. I'm sure your members will be devestated.
From the shiny fleets and any fleet who takes two minutes to check the damn list what else?
You idiots will temporally drive people back into LVL4s but I hope you don't expect people to flock to your BS gatehump or structure bash CTA because you destroyed a way for people to group in hisec. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
544
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 09:12:00 -
[3] - Quote
I have reading back on your posts OP and if it was true about the support you got in hisec than I hope that blacklist grows by leaps and bounds.
Folks people like the OP are using your so called feeling towards incursions and their runners to serve their own goals. Which is to drive people back into their CTAs. They don't give a DAMN about you in my opinion. You helped 00 overlords become more powerful and burned your characters to any good shiny fleet in the future. Congrats fools! |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
545
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 11:23:00 -
[4] - Quote
Quote:I am also quite sure there are 0.0 leaders who would want their members to actually be in 0.0 instead of jump cloning away in hi sec (few have top pimp ship high SP alts). When I lived in 0.0 sec one of the important duties was to patrol our systems and be "present" 24/7. If half players jump away to hi sec, not only they won't patrol, but they will also be unavailable in case of attacks, operations and so on.
GET Yer butt out of incursions and defend mah MOON GOOZ!!!
Removing opportunities that empower members is a big goal of multiple nullsec alliances. Members were actually daring to want more of the pie and less forced CTAS and the alliances are striking back.
Incursions were forcing them to actually offer members perks so they would actually fight. Forced to spend moon goo funds on better (Or any) Ship replacement programs. Forced to stop having multiple long running mandatory CTAs on the same day. And maybe even more interesting CTAs.
Anyone who blindly serves these alliances in hisec is a fool and deserves having his/her characters blacklisted. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
564
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 09:33:00 -
[5] - Quote
Darius III wrote: Theres a lot of misinformation in this thread. While it is true I don't mind griefing carebears  I also want people to be happy and make money. My motivation is to publicize the issues I have with incursions currently as well as have fun and get some lifesaving tears.
No you don't in my opinion. These people are not brick squad and will likely never vote for you and you want those that are alts of your corps to be forced back into CTAs. Stop trying to hide this. You've lost power and you want it back.
Darius III wrote: Incursion money is not balanced with the rest of Eve. Incursion money is not balanced within the incursions themselves. The vanguard sites need a nerf and the assault sites need a buff in payouts. I would like to see more LP's for killing the mom. Also incursions being more spread out would be in order IMO.
There was already a discussion in general about this. Explaining why only small changes are needed to vanguards without touching the payouts. Not like you care in my opinion.
Darius III wrote: Everyone seems to be saying that I want to end incursion availability for everyone.This is 100% false. We discussed finishing all sites and decided against it. We did this partly so we could grief the bears in the existing incursion because it would be so overpopulated it would be easy to sucker people in to our non-repping logi fleet. Also we left it open so people could do their thing and enjoy eve and make some money, and because I was paid 500m. If it was all about the tears, we would have finished all sites.
Bolded part is the Only thing that is even halfway true in this paragraph in my opinion.
Darius III wrote:While it is kinda cool everyone thinks it is ME ME ME really Krissada is the main guy. I just get some guys and try to act cool.
Please don't even try to hide it now. You are at risk of being voted out of the CSM you are losing members to incursions. You pulled a stunt in my opinion. Try to claim it was "for teh good of teh game" all you want but few are buying it.
Darius III wrote: I plan on running as the incursion candidate, I have demonstrated knowledge and ability, as well as a desire to help my hisec brothers out. I will vote for FAIR rebalancing of incursions and to bring risk VS Reward more into line with everything else. (for those of you who may have missed it-I like to troll too).
You sir know absolutely nothing meaningful about incursions in my opinion and do not not need to be given a chance to represent them as a member of the CSM in my opinion.
Tho thanks for pulling this crap. Now BTL and others can galvanize those that actually care that Incursions help non alliance players have a chance to group and have fun in the game of EVE galvanize them and get them to the polls to defeat you in the next election.
(Forum only allows 5 quotes so I am quoting Darius III) People have literally come out of the woodwork to help out. Special thanks to Cigarellos for donating 10 Typhoons for the fleet and T2 fittings for same including trimarks. Woot! Double thanks to Kill it With Fire and Skunkworks for making it happen and again to Krissada for being the glue and inspiration and main promulgator. Good times were had by all..well all of us anyway. Look for video/audio tomorrow D3 ENDQUOTE
I am glad to see that many that hate incursions come out of the woodwork and burn their characters out of any chance of being in a decent fleet in my opinion. This will encourage incursion running fleets and BTL to develop better methods of keeping blacklisted members out of fleets. New software and hiring of PIs to also find out who the blacklisted characters are alts of and have them blacklisted as well. Trying to wreck an entire playstyle that doesn't involve defend an alliance moon goo supply should have serious in game consequences for said characters.
Of course all of this revolves around if BTL even cares anymore. People continued to spam their fits and act as if this doesn't matter at all. And to be honest. If it weren't for your actions in my opinion obviously being about focusing you and nullsec power. I would not give a damn as well because it is shiny fleets actually perishing from your fake rep fleets. And if they do not actually DO something after this madness and work to vote you out and make better defenses against this in the future. I will vote for you myself. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
564
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 09:54:00 -
[6] - Quote
The ONLY thing that needs changing in vanguards is forcing them to be completed instead of blitzed.
Make them more dangerous = Moar advantage to shiny fleet
Lessen payout = Moar advantage to shiny fleet
It goes on and on. They don't need to be made into the "Yay now my LP is worth moar" advantage to shiny fleets. Just remove the blitz ability so that noshiny fleets have a chance to compete in terms of Isk/hr. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
564
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 10:21:00 -
[7] - Quote
Dzajic wrote:Ammzi wrote:A longish post Sorry mate. CCP and CSM had had these talks over a month ago. CCP and the voice of community (CSM) have agreed on those things and they will be implemented soon(tm)/ Changes according to what is agreed in minutes are likely already under testing. Yes it will be overall nerf to incursions income; especially if they hardcode so that you can't blitz any sites any longer. Though ti would end up being stupidly unbalanced with Legion fleets continuing to blitz NCOs and other 2 taking ages to finish. Ofc for maximum lulz these changes would affect all kinds of Incurions and not just high-sec so it will murder isk/hr income for everyone doing them, no matter where. Well at least it may bring attention seekers off our backs. Even if it ends not paying much more money than L4s, even for shiny fleets, it will of course remain 10000x more interesting than doing L4s Edit. With or without blitzing shiny fleet will do sites faster as they will have more DPS on field and also better tank.
What evidence do you have of them "testing" this? I heard of nothing on Sisi. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
564
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 10:36:00 -
[8] - Quote
Until it gets to Sisi or announced it really isn't meaningful testing.
I want to see what CCP announces. If they limit vanguard nerfing to just forcing them to be completed it would be ok. However it is obvious that folks like darius in my opinon want them nuked from orbit. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
570
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 16:18:00 -
[9] - Quote
It's EndeavoUr btw not Endeavor. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
593
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 08:36:00 -
[10] - Quote
It is Endeavour btw. The U is important as that letter was in the sailing ship to the space shuttle.
And while you despise my posting. You never went through with your incursion mothership busting because of my posts. Was it not for the lulz and watching Endeavour scream? Or do you truly fear the potential of a unified hisec to defeat you in the next election? |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
601
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 11:08:00 -
[11] - Quote
Darius III wrote:Substantia Nigra wrote:Hey, I am new round here, and op making much big talk about doing something ... And lots of more big talk by many after that.
I looking in threads and not find yet anything major happenings... Except talking.
Has op actually achieved anything big like first post suggesting, or is this one also much bleat moan hot air?
Not really. We killed two Sansha MS...well we killed one and forced destruction of another. Then when only one incursion was up we went in and killed close to 20 ships by forming fleets with logi that never repped anyone. Good times. Way more tears than I expected and we only slowed down the bears for 1 day. BUT it marked the first time in recent memory that a C&P pickup fleet was successful. Was done to show imbalance and get attention to the fact that incursions need rebalancing.
You really ought to correct that to say "I did it to try to perk up my failing chances for being reelected to the CSM and tried to say I joined late for the lols yet did not realize my actions will have just the opposite effect of galvanizing support against me in the next CSM election. And that my threats to take action against incursions because of someone's forum posting mean nothing because I know that now any further interdictions will be tied to said post." In my opinion. I suspect that would be far more accurate. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
606
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 05:21:00 -
[12] - Quote
New incursion in Ancbeu as of this post. Now here is to the hope they will remove the mom soon after it spawns. BTL and TDF leadership must be replaced. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
606
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 08:47:00 -
[13] - Quote
Mothership site spotted go get it!
Another primetime day without incursions should put nice pressure on the BS so called leadership. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
606
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 08:53:00 -
[14] - Quote
Another Incursion in Haurala going to get to pwn multiple incursion sites today. The Tears from TDF and BTL leadership will be terrific! |
| |
|