EVE General Discussion

If I tell you to HTFU about those change happening, do it means a counter +13?

I think its becoming a de-facto second shard, if not physical

But yep, will update the Prospect notes.

F

Seriously, just wtf. Links are all the same. How can one kind of link not go through a pos shield but another link can? Its either they all can or they all cant.

Good job.

How does warfare link projection factor in to hisec HTFU, at all? It affects mission and incursion runners just as much, and actually puts MORE ships in the line of potential ganks (or targets in the case of wardecs).

Where's the +1 that is tags for sec status?

Also the +1 that was CCP affirming hyperdunking is legal and overturning the ban?

Likewise missing the +1 for freighters becoming slower in warp and requiring a reduction to their EHP and/or agility in order to maintain the same amount of cargo space.

If -5 was a HTFU nerf then we need a +1 for positive combat/damage changes added by the T3 BC line and destroyer balance changes (go thunder cats!).

-13 is speculative, so I'm sorely tempted to add a bunch of speculative +1's to get us back up to +25 or so.

Hmm... it's almost like you have a biased agenda of some kind.

OK, done feeding the trolls for today.

No. You don't put your links alt in a player run Corp.

Links alts are better left in NPC Corps and sit on station in highsec. But you are right. If they aren't providing mining links, they need to be at least at risk.

If they are providing mining links, then they can safely be in a player run Corp no problem and provide links from inside a POS shield.

The Rorqual has been so marginalised now as to be almost pointless, so there's really no need for the mining links to be usable in a POS (not a highsec issue).


Highsec gankers don't bother with sec status too much to my knowledge.

For me, as a low/null pvper it costs a heap that I'd rather spend on ships and I only maintain sec status >-5 in order to fly logistics (because being instantly engageable for logistics sucks. I prefer the few seconds I have to pull range before gaining a suspect flag for repping someone in fleet).


Silly argument. Opinions aren't trolls and different opinions aren't frightening. Reducing every opinion that doesn't agree with your's to being a troll is idiotic.

Good suggestion. Adding the dates (and expansion names) of each of these changes would be great!

Also:

* CCP declaring boomerang technique illegal
* CCP declaring that dropping corp to avoid wardec is not an exploit
* Allowing Kill Rights to be accessed by other characters/corps, beyond the one who was initially attacked

Ganking has never been cheaper thanks to the introduction of t2 BCs and the changes to destroyers.


They are at risk just get a couple buddies and gank them with catas.. Most have no real tank and thus are easily ganked for cheap.


Oh wait you don't want to HTFU you want it handed to you...


I love how global suspect for can flipping is considered a nerf. I thought you wanted pvp? Well that mechanic provides for another avenue...


The links aspect is actually the opposite from theme park direction. Instead of hiding in your POS boosting your pvp ships in null/wh/lowsec you're actually forced to move the booster out where it can be attacked. That's the direct opposite of what you're trying to claim.


ALso as a ganker I don't give a crap about sec status. Why do you? Can't be bothered to buy a few tags? Kill a few rats? too tempted by all them pods?

Half of the stuff listed isn't even contributing to pushing eve towards "hello kittyland";...

How are you boosting from inside a POS bubble?

That has no relevance to the graphic or the discussion at hand.