| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Crax McGee
Contraband Inc.
   |
Posted - 2008.05.11 18:40:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Crax McGee on 11/05/2008 18:41:00
Hi, im in a 0.0 alliance - I can not only Hide in POS's now but i cam also travel through 0.0 as safe as can be under jump Bridges. Its wonderful - our alliacnes once had to keep our supply lines clear of any small pvp gangs that might want to actually attempt to make things difficult up here.
However CCP Kindly increased the corp maintence bay in my carrier and i can cyno in all my ships without having to worry. Even Frighters can avoid any unwanted attention of small gangs in the area, cause our friends at ccp kindly gave us frighters that can cyno jump also! - too kind, too very kind.
Sometimes much larger gangs are spotted trying to attempt to take on our beloved 0.0 empires.. slightly worrying at 1st but in the end its quite safe, so long as we place all our caps with drones out on the gate in a cyno jammed system with our titans also present there fleet wont even load!
We win our wars when Lag breaks moral
xx
|
Jim Pooley
Circus Fantastique
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 18:47:00 -
[2]
And next on the news, the world is ROUND!
------------------------------------------
Mines a Pint of Large
|
Dirk Magnum
Spearhead Endeavors
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 18:49:00 -
[3]
Yeah 0.0 was better when everything had to be moved stargate by stargate in a freighter, and whole corps and alliance battlegroups would have to be assembled every time POS fuel needed to be moved in bulk quantities. And what's with this "warp to zero"? I'm not very fond of electricity and penicillin either tbh.
|
Face Lifter
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 18:56:00 -
[4]
I'd hate to be a whiner, I just want to say this:
I remember a time when frieghters had to be escorted on regular basis, and they actually travelled thru 0.0 gates.
Now it seems like carriers can do half the job, jump bridges do the other half
|
000Hunter000
Gallente
Missiles 'R' Us
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 19:05:00 -
[5]
*puts on tinfoil hat*
What u expect when half of the ccp staf is in either of the big alliances, hell i wouldn't be surprised if they have an alt all the major powerblocks.
Personaly i think it's about ffing time that ccp gave some lovin to our hi sec dwellers and gave 0.0 a rest.
And yeah i lived in a part of 0.0 space and it felt as secure (mebbe even more so) as any hi sec system... pretty silly if u ask me, if eve is supposed to be a cold harsh place then mebbe ccp should nerf 0.0 a bit. 
_______________________________________________________
CCP, let us pay the online shop with Direct Debit!!!
|
Dirk Magnum
Spearhead Endeavors
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 19:23:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: 000Hunter000
And yeah i lived in a part of 0.0 space and it felt as secure (mebbe even more so) as any hi sec system... pretty silly if u ask me, if eve is supposed to be a cold harsh place then mebbe ccp should nerf 0.0 a bit.
0.0 is secure BECAUSE it's so dangerous. I mean, if people thought they'd be safe out there, they'd go out there in greater numbers, and 0.0 would become less safe because of it. It's kinda convoluted but it's true.
|
Spoon Thumb
Paladin Imperium
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 19:36:00 -
[7]
Yeah I thought jump freighters were a bit much too.
There is a lot of work still goes into all that logistics, just now it doesn't involve big freighter escort ops (which none of you pvper types liked anyway as it was "boooooring").
I think more work should be involved in gaining sov levels. Atm you just wait 5 weeks and you can magically anchor a cyno jammer and JB. Should really be that you need to invest significant amounts more in terms of isk but also especially effort to get those rewards
|
Tzar'rim
Universal Securities
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 19:44:00 -
[8]
Holding space should take more effort and give less bonuses. It should be DIFFICULT and close to impossible to hold space far away from the active core systems. Jump freighters, jump bridges and carriers that can haul stuff make it all way too easy.
Yes freighter OPs suck but that's the whole point; if the only thing that keeps you having space is the few accountant type POS fuelers then something is wrong.
shrinking the size of space an alliance can actively police and maintain means that more (smaller) groups of people get the chance to make it into 0.0, instead of having to join the few polarized powerblocks that already exist.
|
Crax McGee
Contraband Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 19:47:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Crax McGee on 11/05/2008 19:47:38
Originally by: Spoon Thumb
Yeah I thought jump freighters were a bit much too.
There is a lot of work still goes into all that logistics, just now it doesn't involve big freighter escort ops (which none of you pvper types liked anyway as it was "boooooring").
I think more work should be involved in gaining sov levels. Atm you just wait 5 weeks and you can magically anchor a cyno jammer and JB. Should really be that you need to invest significant amounts more in terms of isk but also especially effort to get those rewards
us pvpers loved that stuff, cause we could hunt the frighters - but now there near inpossible 2 kill.. :(
|
Winterblink
Body Count Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 19:50:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Jim Pooley
And next on the news, the world is ROUND!
Shhhh! That's a sekrit.
|
Dristra
Amarr
Shadows of the Dead
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 19:52:00 -
[11]
It's great out here, i fear concord more than my enemies tbqh.
Support the introduction of well thought out Amarr solutions!
I believe rats should avoid you if you have high standing with them. |
Armoured C
Gallente
Globaltech Industries
The ENTITY.
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 20:11:00 -
[12]
if your not a core 0.0 pilot you can loose ship when entering 0.0
our corp / allaince are in low sec and when i went in yesterday to do some ratting i lost my ship to a cloaked gang at the gate =(
looking for 0.0 alliance =P
|
Loomina
Gallente
Contraband Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 20:34:00 -
[13]
Loomi waves at Blinky 
*_*
|
Hanneshannes
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 20:46:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Jim Pooley
And next on the news, the world is ROUND!
No way oO
|
Pan Crastus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 20:57:00 -
[15]
In other news, you need 100+ people to actually attack an adequately protected, cyno jammed 0.0 system now and 200+ people fights do not really work (lag, bugs).
But hey, we can sit in stations and /*****slap people soon.
EVE Online: a cold, cruel world where (RL-)rich people replace their losses with GTCs sold to poor students who need to farm ISK to afford their play time ...
|
Spoon Thumb
Paladin Imperium
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 21:34:00 -
[16]
I'd have to say though I'm against this idea that you shouldn't be able to hold distant systems or that game mechanics should somehow be eskewed to make it harder than it already is.
More that the amount of effort and skill needed to maintain generally is increased, so that if you want to hold remote areas you have to invest more time or more manpower.
Big alliances should still be able to hold large amounts of space, but work harder than they are atm in terms of non-combat related stuff
For me that means making local NPC populations with needs that need time and skill and effort to manage, rather than making logistics harder (jump freighters aside) or forcing 0.0 alliances to be smaller through arbitrary new rules
|
Soporo
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 21:48:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Soporo on 11/05/2008 21:50:44
Roving FLEETS of the local NPC Rats attacking Outposts and hanging around stations occasionally and ganking peeps would be an idea.
Or them sitting on a gate with a large bubble, some tacklers and some gank ships would rock. 
Also a percentage chance of any large pc fleet blobbing causing a retaliatory fleet of npc's to show up.
But yeah, the Devs are most likely all in the biggest Alliances so it's naturall they are focused on making the current mega-alliances happy.
|
Kerfira
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 21:55:00 -
[18]
IMHO..... Resources used in 0.0 should by and large be produced there, not imported from high-sec macro-miners.
Therefore.....
1. Jump freighters should have their range cut to 1/3rd.
2. Freighters should be too large to use jump bridges.
3. Rorqual/Dread hauling of minerals/fuel should be stopped.
4. Carriers should not be able to carry haulers full of ammo.
(ref. #1, Jump Freighters should NEVER have been introduced....)
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Aria Seniste
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 22:17:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Soporo
Edited by: Soporo on 11/05/2008 21:50:44
Roving FLEETS of the local NPC Rats attacking Outposts and hanging around stations occasionally and ganking peeps would be an idea.
Or them sitting on a gate with a large bubble, some tacklers and some gank ships would rock.
Also a percentage chance of any large pc fleet blobbing causing a retaliatory fleet of npc's to show up.
But yeah, the Devs are most likely all in the biggest Alliances so it's naturall they are focused on making the current mega-alliances happy.
Better yet, we can just give every ship in 0.0 a 5% chance of exploding every 10 minutes, with no insurance rewarded.
It's not fair that an alliance can become powerful enough to provide safety to it's members. 
Without CONCORD, you should have no hope of protecting your assets!
|
Lord Zoran
House of Tempers
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 22:25:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Jim Pooley
And next on the news, the world is ROUND!
nah it's actually a cube. /emote puts tinfoil hat on
|
Sergeant Spot
Black Eclipse Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 22:33:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Dirk Magnum
Originally by: 000Hunter000
And yeah i lived in a part of 0.0 space and it felt as secure (mebbe even more so) as any hi sec system... pretty silly if u ask me, if eve is supposed to be a cold harsh place then mebbe ccp should nerf 0.0 a bit.
0.0 is secure BECAUSE it's so dangerous. I mean, if people thought they'd be safe out there, they'd go out there in greater numbers, and 0.0 would become less safe because of it. It's kinda convoluted but it's true.
QFT
Play nice while you butcher each other.
|
Dr Clock
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 22:37:00 -
[22]
Goto the in game map and take a look at GQ2S-8 and the ships destroyed in the last 24 hours. Not very safe there and plenty of sneaky shooting.
|
Crax McGee
Contraband Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 22:47:00 -
[23]
Good discusion thanks
|
Grarr Dexx
Amarr
Naval Protection Corp
Carpe Universitas
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 22:58:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Grarr Dexx on 12/05/2008 22:58:15
Secure? Try leaving the alliance and staying there ;)
Originally by: Dr Clock
Goto the in game map and take a look at GQ2S-8 and the ships destroyed in the last 24 hours. Not very safe there and plenty of sneaky shooting.
Try R-6.
|
Corwain
Gallente
DIE WITH HONOUR
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 23:13:00 -
[25]
In every arena EVE suffers from "slippery slope" where the more you win the more likelyhood that you'll continue to do so, or the harder it is for someone else to come from behind and overtake your progress/unseat you. All I can gather from CCPs pattern of game development is that this is completely intentional as every new game mechanic pushes the vets further ahead and make it harder and harder for the new players/corps to catch up.
Slippery slope is seen in games like Chess where the more pieces a player loses the more impossible it is for him to win. Reversi/othello games however are more perpetual comeback as in the final few moves a player can come from far behind to win.
--
Distortion| Distortion 2 Preview |
DubanFP
Caldari
Four Rings
Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 23:45:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Dirk Magnum
0.0 is secure BECAUSE it's so dangerous. I mean, if people thought they'd be safe out there, they'd go out there in greater numbers, and 0.0 would become less safe because of it. It's kinda convoluted but it's true.
That's sooo true. Kind of funny how things work out that way.
_______________
ReiAyanami> We bring you tidings of AARRRRRRRRR |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |