| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
odin hammer
   |
Posted - 2004.06.11 12:32:00 -
[1]
Settlers is a better term for people moving out into
a 0.0 region and claiming it for them self¦s
shooting those who enter, i think people are far to
into labeling people terrorist¦s/pirates just because
they arent on their side of opinion
blocking people from a region to be able to mine in peace
and without worries is justified free-space ideals are for
peace dreaming tree hugging people the world just dont
work that way no matter how much u wish it sorry!
to everlasting vendetta u guys rock ive never had as much fun fighting u guys 
Respectfull Mermaid of Curse Alliance |
Rodnork
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 12:41:00 -
[2]
Your such a bad ass pirate odin dont deny it ;)
|
ClarCE
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 13:00:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: odin hammer
Settlers is a better term for people moving out into
a 0.0 region and claiming it for them self¦s
shooting those who enter, i think people are far to
into labeling people terrorist¦s/pirates just because
they arent on their side of opinion
blocking people from a region to be able to mine in peace
and without worries is justified free-space ideals are for
peace dreaming tree hugging people the world just dont
work that way no matter how much u wish it sorry!
dont think like bush think like me 
to everlasting vendetta u guys rock ive never had as much fun fighting u guys
How about colonists?
--'The Way is Shut'--
-----------------------
Jenny...Get to the Chopper---Stick Around
-----------------------
|
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 13:04:00 -
[4]
I'd have to say I agree with you there odin. I think things will improve when they bring in deployable defence systems and the like so that people really can "own" a bit of space and defend properly without having to camp at gates the whole time. Taking territory from other corps and having to redraw boundaries etc. will become a little more defined than it is now.
They'll still be the pirates around though 
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
Hellspawn01
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 13:13:00 -
[5]
It¦s always fun to meet u, odin. Looking forward to our next meeting 
---------------------------------------------
Eve is not game, it¦s a way of life! |
odin hammer
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 13:27:00 -
[6]
well im a little  ish but i still try to
be friendly, showing its just a game and it can be fun
even though u loose a ship or two, and though people
make bad decision now and again, smacktalk or doing a
stubid mistake. 
i guess im talking to unicor in general but i forget the
names of the small corp¦s they all fight with wit¦s
and catch on pretty quick on tactic¦s in use by me
atleast most ill be around soon again
and im not talking about me being a settler nor my corp
just saying people like to name everyone pirates 2 soon
without any pirating attribute 
Respectfull Mermaid of Curse Alliance |
Bug
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 13:41:00 -
[7]
How about Turf Huggers?
Has a nice ring to it. :)
|
Telk Behm'shai
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 13:49:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Telk Behm'shai on 11/06/2004 14:00:44
Originally by: Bug
How about Turf Huggers?
Has a nice ring to it. :)
 Nice.
But other than an Alliance being called by their region names or what they are being as a group, there isn't much to call'em.
Edit: I'd just want to add, when FA corps were claiming Fountain I was furious because I and the corp I was in (who are still loyal FA) were being kicked out. It's all how you see people claiming .0 space. I didn't realise or understand at the time, but I see now how people could see those who claim .0space are/were ****ed at them. The only ones who really have had a right to .0 space are the NPC settlers that were first there. (i.e. Serpentis for Fountian) It's simple, the players came, saw, took it for their own.
|
Kel Shek
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 14:12:00 -
[9]
all depends on their behavior, if they are "defending"/camping a choke point they are NOT "defending their territory so they can mine in peace" they are bullying and pirating, just as much if say.. in the old west a band of criminals sat and tolled, threatened or killed people trying to peacefully colonize. they aren't defending their territory, they are being criminals.
a farmer who takes out a shotgun and tells someone to get off their land, THAT is defending their territory.
though it strikes me as odd that one would leave what they are doing, or spend time patrolling so they can shoo off anyone. when I would bet 80%+ of the time, its lone people who are merely exploring, or wanting to try getting some of the good ores.
not everyone is out to get you, and not everyone who ventures into 0.0 has the means to even come close to threaten you if they wanted.
if someone cut their "defense" back to say, the territory around a moon where their station is, and an asteroid belt or two that they like, THEN I would think it reasonable to call them "colonizers" or "settlers" or whatever else nice term.
but while they are defending huge chunks of unused space, I say BS.
~~~~~
To see a World in a Grain of Sand
And Heaven in a Wild Flower
Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand
And Eternity in an hour
~~William Blake |
D2O LightWater
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 14:40:00 -
[10]
Hmm That corp name sounds familiar Odin
|
ziddie
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 14:43:00 -
[11]
its hard to look at strangers as friendly in 0.0 space
where everything goes and frankly i whont risk million¦s worth of implants named expanders in a territory
where everything is allowed without corp m8ts
patrolling the region
if anyone in 0.0 are looking for a m8t and a hard worker
im available.
|
odin hammer
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 14:47:00 -
[12]
Lol well i can say im the original goodfella
ur fresh 23day old corp is cute though
Respectfull Mermaid of Curse Alliance |
Kosan
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 14:50:00 -
[13]
um... i like being called a pirate.. when i kill someone, it isnt to defend any of my land. its to liberate his cargo.. into my cargo Settlers just isnt the right term, imho
-----------------------------------------------
I saw god the other day. By the river on a rainey afternoon. He helped a kitten that was left all alone. Its a god that only I can see. A blackened angel that came down from the heavens just for me. |
darth solo
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 14:57:00 -
[14]
IMO killing ppl that enter Alliance territory without giving a warning is piracy...
im actually now very anti Alliance now, iv been with them, and fought them, and i see nothing good in them:)...
d solo.
|
odin hammer
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 15:12:00 -
[15]
Yeah but settlers are a better term for some.
real pirates stay pirates
the fact people need to be able to indentify the
real pirates here
settlers in my opinion should be able to fight to defend
their peace of the pie and form an alliance to allow
good-people to mine with them the whole
concept is to minimise the solo pirates and opprtunity
kill¦s
pirates kill for the thrill the profit and glory
but they however do need to defend theyr place
in space if they are ever going to be able to mine in peace
not all region claimer¦s are pirates and if people stop
huggin veldspar all day they¦d realize it 
Respectfull Mermaid of Curse Alliance |
Candy
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 16:31:00 -
[16]
Anyone who kills another player without provokation is a Pirate in my opinion. 0.0 Space is for everyone to share. If you want to claim it, and you have to kill people to keep it, then you are a pirate.
-------------------------------------------
|
Bobby Wilson
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 16:53:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Candy
Anyone who kills another player without provokation is a Pirate in my opinion. 0.0 Space is for everyone to share. If you want to claim it, and you have to kill people to keep it, then you are a pirate.
Um. That kinda depends on your definition of provocation, which I can guarantee you varies immensely from person to person. In some ways violence 0.0 is the solution to the problems of empire. Ore theft? No problem. Overcrowded systems? No problem. Pirates?
Um, yeah, pirate are a huge problem. And i mean real pirates that will toll you, trick you and gank you without warning. Pirates who won't warn you to leave, who don't put up signs that say "stay out". Pirates who block key gates to and from empire space. Except in times of war most alliances don't act that way, but they will kill you if you won't leave, which IMHO is not at all the same thing.
The closed alliance issue has been done over and over again, and it comes down to this. PvP in EVE is expensive. Until some kind of decent PvP bounty hunting is put into the game, there is a net, long term cost to the "good" PvPer. Pirates get loot from indys, agent runners and blockade runners. Pirate hunters get the loot from a pirate ship the RARE time you can catch them with enough warp scramblers to kill them before they hit a safe spot, jump to secure empire or log off. Not only does that not pay enough to break even, when you remember piracy gives tons of PvP experience, you have to assume as a pirate hunter you'll lose your share of ships too.
I know a LOT of former "free space" alliance PvPers now with the PA. Their complaint from free space alliances was that they as PvPers kept areas free of piracy, and then got ignored by the scores of miners and chainers who would decend on their area, get rich and then go back to empire space. They wouldn't even make enough Isk to pay BS insurance from anti-piracy ops but the people they protected made tons of Isk while under their protection.
The concept of a closed alliance seems clear. Protect ourselves, reap the benefits ourselves. It sounds selfish until you've lost your 4th BS protecting people from pirates in "free space", then go to mine or chain for a new one and discover the people you've been protecting have gang-mined all the good ore from your region and never shared a cent with you. Once that's happened to you a couple of times, you start to feel like it's the freelancers and little corps that are selfish, expecting others to protect them for nothing while they go out and make a fortune mining or chaining.
The compromise in "the north", of leaving Pure Blind free for mining and chaining whilst various regions are closed by surrounding alliances seemed reasonable. When it was working (ie. before the current war) the various alliances co-operated/overlapped to suppress piracy quite nicely for the freelancers, while still keeping something for themselves.
A more recent notion has been to make refining stations the key income source for pirate suppression through refine %ages. This is a decent idea really, but would only work with an alliance wide income mechanism and/or a single corp large enough to do all security in that area. Otherwise people argue over who will hold the stations, and can't/won't trust that the corp holding the station is sharing all income from the station equally. That isn't theoretical either. Disputes over refining stations, both among allies and neighbours, is an ongoing issue. Hopefully the alliance controls of Shiva might sort the issue. I'm sure if income from capturable stations could be distributed equitably there might be less of an issue.
BW
Originally by: Selim
Cool, congrats.
Oh, stupid idea by the way.
|
Bobby Wilson
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 16:55:00 -
[18]
BTW, if 0.0 pilots are settlers, are pirates claim-jumpers or bandits?
BW
Originally by: Selim
Cool, congrats.
Oh, stupid idea by the way.
|
DarkStar251
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 16:57:00 -
[19]
Free space would be lovely, assuming there were no pirates.
Pirates like 1 sided PvP, like warping to belts to kill miners.
A group of corporations can either have each miner covered by a small fleet in case pirates attack, or they can have a small fleet at a choke point and stop the pirates getting to the miners in the first place.
They have to prevent EVERYONE coming in, as pirates will happily use alts etc to get in, maybe with the minerals/bp in the hold of their innocent indy to build a caracal or whatever. Not only this, but those that are not pirates will not obey requests not to pop high end asteroids, that is to leave some ore in them so that they regrow.
As soon as a few people come in and mine out all these (which will take MONTHS to be replaced as they wont respawn much) then the alliances economy falls apart, and it can no longer afford to replace ships etc.
|
Mon Palae
|
Posted - 2004.06.11 17:09:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Kel Shek
though it strikes me as odd that one would leave what they are doing, or spend time patrolling so they can shoo off anyone. when I would bet 80%+ of the time, its lone people who are merely exploring, or wanting to try getting some of the good ores.
No way 80% of the people flying out into deep 0.0 Alliance space are mere sightseers. Only ther terminally stupid or utter newbs venture through innocently and generally that innocence is taken away very quickly.
I'd say 99% of the people flying out there know preceisely what they are about and what it means to be there. That generally means it is Alliance members who hold that space at that time (or their recognized friends), pirates, spies and other corps possibly warring with the Alliance in that area. On balance that means in alliance space those not a member of the alliance can almost always be considered to be there to cause harm to that alliance.
Yes, some want to come up and nibble some good ore innocently enough and leave. I have been on that side of the fence too and I really wish a way could be found where such things could happen in EVE. Sadly the dynamics don't support it. Alliances expend a lot of resources, effort and time protecting their space and keeping it moderately safe. Letting people in to just harvest to their heart's content without contributing to the area's defense does not make any sense.
Imagine you owned a gold mine. You spent the money to setup an infrastructure to exploit it, hire guards to patrol the area as there are many who will gleefully come in and kill anyone they see. Are you suggesting you would honestly open your goldmine to any to come in and take what they want while you bore the burden of its defense? I doubt it...no one would. It might be ok if the freeloaders were far and few between but once word gets out they will descend like a plague of locusts and strip areas bare thus collapsing the very supports that allows it all to happen in the first place.
If you can think of a way for freer space I am all ears and would love to hear it but so far I cannot hink of a workable solution that is equitable for all involved.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |