These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Tora Bushido for CSM X - A New High-Sec (No Nerfed Disneyland)

First post First post
Author
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#481 - 2015-03-12 20:46:37 UTC
NightmareX wrote:
Yes you are. You are mad at Marmite because i'm pretty sure they are preventing some of your alts to have a steady income of isk. They are disrupting you in some ways.
Wrong. Grow up. Believe it or not, many EVE players actually care about balance in the game. that's all this is.

NightmareX wrote:
Yeah, Danalee did agree with you on one thing, so that makes everyone in here agreeing with you, amrite?
Again, not what I said. Once again you misrepresent me.

NightmareX wrote:
Again, that's according to you on how you looks at EVE.
No, that's according to what CCP themselves have said. Educate yourself before screeching on.

NightmareX wrote:
All that matters is that Tora have some good supports here and i'm pretty sure that he will get pretty high up on the list of the CSM candidates. But i'm not saying he will get through as a real CSM in the end. I'm just saying that by looking at this topic, he for sure have alot of supports.
All that matters is that Tora is a terrible idea for a candidate if you care about game balance, and his ideas are badly though out and favour his playstyle. Most of the support he has are his alliance and alliance that do what he does, simply beacuse they too support ideas that unbalance the game further in their favour.

Anyway, I'm done arguing with you. As always you are just going to repeated lie, misrepresent ideas and personally attack me. We're not going to get anywhere constructive with this as it's impossible for anyone to have a constructive discussion with you. So good day sir.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#482 - 2015-03-12 21:04:47 UTC
I have removed some replies to edited out parts of the posts they replied to.
Also please keep in mind that this is a CSM campaign thread and not a General Discussion or Crime & Punishment one.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

NightmareX
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#483 - 2015-03-12 21:09:18 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
I'm sure PvE players will do really well in their shiny new dreads against career PvP players. Lol.

Like they will do any better in battleships against career PVP players now?

There is no difference.

Lucas Kell wrote:
But objectively they favour him. You've even stated yourself that they improve the game for PvP players.

Yeah, i support to have a better PVP and war dec system in empire that reflects both sides.

Lucas Kell wrote:
I think that as usual the PvE players would be powerless to fight back against career PvP players. The only thing that saves a lot of their POSes right now is that you can't be bothered to grind them down. Reads would change that.

And you think it's any different now with battleships?

Again, what differences does it make when career PVPers still have an edge over the PVEers today with battleships anyways?

Lucas Kell wrote:
That's not at all what I said, I'm just pointing out that when you keep saying that everyone's disagreeing that you're obviously wrong.

Show me how many peoples that does agree with you in here and then shows us on how many that does agree with Tora here. There is a huge difference here.

Lucas Kell wrote:
Wrong. Grow up. Believe it or not, many EVE players actually care about balance in the game. that's all this is.

I do that aswell, but we still have to take one thing at a time. You can't expect Tora to just put out a complete list of things that will rebalance everything with empire PVP and war decs in one go.

Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:

1: Asteroid Madness

2: Clash of the Empires

3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama

NightmareX
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#484 - 2015-03-12 21:16:42 UTC  |  Edited by: NightmareX
Lucas Kell wrote:
Again, not what I said. Once again you misrepresent me.

Well, it's how it soulds like when you claim someone agrees with you. It sounds like you nailed it and that you are right about all of your ideas when some few peoples agrees with some few things with your ideas.

Lucas Kell wrote:
No, that's according to what CCP themselves have said. Educate yourself before screeching on.

I kinda want to see the source of what they have said about that. Infact, CCP are open to most ideas as long as it gives some balances and improves the games.

Lucas Kell wrote:
All that matters is that Tora is a terrible idea for a candidate if you care about game balance, and his ideas are badly though out and favour his playstyle. Most of the support he has are his alliance and alliance that do what he does, simply beacuse they too support ideas that unbalance the game further in their favour.

Anyway, I'm done arguing with you. As always you are just going to repeated lie, misrepresent ideas and personally attack me. We're not going to get anywhere constructive with this as it's impossible for anyone to have a constructive discussion with you. So good day sir.

Tora is a bad candidate to you, fine. But do we care?

The only thing we cares about is to let empire PVP and war decs in general to be better than it currently is. Yes, when i say that, this applies both to the aggressor and the defenders.

Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:

1: Asteroid Madness

2: Clash of the Empires

3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama

Jenshae Chiroptera
#485 - 2015-03-13 00:27:53 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
NightmareX wrote:
So why are you so mad at Marmite?
I'm not, I have no more a feeling toward Marmite than I do Deadly Fingertips or PoH. It just so happens that out of all the wardeccer groups it;s Marmite's leader that has launched a CSM campaign based on making the game even more unbalanced in their favour.
Why are we typing?
The votes are in. It probably doesn't matter if Tora won or not. SOV changes coming shows that CCP probably won't listen to him or the player base. P
Actually, it would be hilarious if Tora goes in talking about all this woes and CCP are like, "Erm ... those are easily solved. Hang on, station games ... ganking all of this is really broken. Oh well, we don't have a solution, guess we just make all 0.8 to 1.0 areas where you can't take any hostile action against another player."

Twisted

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Valkin Mordirc
#486 - 2015-03-13 06:49:27 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:


So if your war decs are 30b/week, that works out to 4.3b/day, so for the 12 days of march so far that's 51.6b. That means if the loot fairy drops at least 16.6%, you're in profit, and that's not even including how much you are paid by clients for those wardecs.

If you aren't making isk, you are doing something very wrong.

And of course my ideas sound horrible to you. You want easy risk-free kills against noobs. You already can't go after the rich incursion players, since they can disband and reform their single player corp with ease.



Again I'm not reading everything said, just nit pick tid bits I see,

Just because somebody KILLS 51.6 bill does not mean they got 51.6 bill.


I can kill a 2.5 bill Vargur. It doesn't mean I get the 2.5 bill shown from the killmail. Hull cost is a thing. That plays are large factor.

#DeleteTheWeak
Tora Bushido
The Marmite Mercenaries
BLACKFLAG.
#487 - 2015-03-13 07:51:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Tora Bushido
Lucas Kell wrote:
CCP are not going to make the types of changes Tora wants. They want to reduce wardecs as they are currently keeping people from forming corps in highsec that aren't purely PvP based which in turn damages player retention. Mass farming of war targets the way current highsec mers do is simply bad for business.
Whats the source of your claim ? I read and listen to almost everything in Eve and cant remember seeing it. But maybe there is another good source I didnt know about yet.

Lucas Kell wrote:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. So yes, you honestly believe that a Marmite leader having other Marmite players agreeing with him makes him automatically right? That is AMAZING. What's even funnier is in your previous post you even agree with me that the game is unbalanced in favour of wardeccers.
I agree, having just corp mates agree with this isnt the most reliable feedback, so I do want opinions from others about it. But that's also true for your replies Lucas. So far, I havent seen anyone agreeing with you too. Maybe less HAHAHA and more short to the point replies ?

@everyone : This isnt a Marmites is so terrible or fantastic post. Lets keep focus on the war mechanism. I seriously want to know other opinions then the people who always reply. Any industrial alliances with an opinion here ? How do you handle wars ?

DELETE THE WEAK, ADAPT OR DIE !

Meta Gaming Level VII, Psycho Warfare Level X, Smack Talk Level VII.

Valkin Mordirc
#488 - 2015-03-13 08:24:43 UTC
I'm not with Marmite. Most of the group I roam are rather Gr Marmite. But I still voted for Tora.
#DeleteTheWeak
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#489 - 2015-03-13 08:36:16 UTC
Tora Bushido wrote:
Whats the source of your claim ? I read and listen to almost everything in Eve and cant remember seeing it. But maybe there is another good source I didnt know about yet.
Honestly, I don't remember where CCP put it, but it prompted several bloggers to post about it, not least of which Sugar writing 3 blog posts on wardecs. Above and beyond that though, just look at how wardecs work, and what they cause. They make it impossible to run a decently sized non-PvP corp in highsec, and they are a bigger barrier to corporation membership than awoxing was. Do you honestly believe they are going to keep the ability to farm war target corps in the hundreds once time comes to look at the wardec system?

Tora Bushido wrote:
I agree, having just corp mates agree with this isnt the most reliable feedback, so I do want opinions from others about it. But that's also true for your replies Lucas. So far, I havent seen anyone agreeing with you too. Maybe less HAHAHA and more short to the point replies ?
Unfortunately I think that most people with opinions about subjects that are as polarising as this will keep them to themselves, since when you voice an opinion about subjects like this, it's minutes before you've got the usual trolls attacking you and shiptoasting.

To be clear though, my problems with wardecs boil down to the following core issues.
- Wars prevent large scale non-PvP corporations from being viable. The moment you grow to a substantial size you become a target for wardeccers. Having a force to fight back still doesn't protect your non-PvPers, you pretty much have to switch the whole corp to PvP mode for wardecs, which defeats to object of being a PvE corp. This means the most viable option for a PVE players is to remain in NPC corps or solo corps - This is the biggest issue. NPC corps should never be the best choice.

- They don't promote fighting with groups capable of fighting back, in fact quite the opposite. You are better off farming a lot of players with no desire and no skill to fight back than taking on a challenging war.

- Tied in with the above, there's too little to actually fight over. Wars are relatively aimless. There's more than enough moons for people to split up and POCOs are generally owned buy larger groups who occasionally fight over them. This means the general aim of a ward is to destroy a group, get loot or simply buff killboard stats.

- Wars are aggressor driven. The defender has the options of fight back or evade. Once an aggressor chooses to attack there's no other ways to attempt to deal with it without it being the aggressors decision. Any attempts to negotiate a surrender have to be agreed by the aggressor, so effectively this means that the aggressor is paying to opt you in for content you don't want to play at all. Allies were put in to try to affect this, but for the most part mercs for hire there are either outright scams run by the aggressor or far more expensive than simply disbanding your corp and playing in NPC land.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#490 - 2015-03-13 08:39:16 UTC
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:


So if your war decs are 30b/week, that works out to 4.3b/day, so for the 12 days of march so far that's 51.6b. That means if the loot fairy drops at least 16.6%, you're in profit, and that's not even including how much you are paid by clients for those wardecs.

If you aren't making isk, you are doing something very wrong.

And of course my ideas sound horrible to you. You want easy risk-free kills against noobs. You already can't go after the rich incursion players, since they can disband and reform their single player corp with ease.



Again I'm not reading everything said, just nit pick tid bits I see,

Just because somebody KILLS 51.6 bill does not mean they got 51.6 bill.


I can kill a 2.5 bill Vargur. It doesn't mean I get the 2.5 bill shown from the killmail. Hull cost is a thing. That plays are large factor.

True, but then on average ships will drop more than 16% of their value, especially when your primary targets are industrial corps and haulers. Like I said then, it's a quick and dirty calculation rather than actual statistics. I truly don't believe that between loot and client fees that Marmite operate at a loss. I don't think I've met a half-decent merc group that operates at a loss.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Danalee
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#491 - 2015-03-13 08:44:08 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
1- Wars prevent large scale non-PvP corporations from being viable. The moment you grow to a substantial size you become a target for wardeccers. Having a force to fight back still doesn't protect your non-PvPers, you pretty much have to switch the whole corp to PvP mode for wardecs, which defeats to object of being a PvE corp. This means the most viable option for a PVE players is to remain in NPC corps or solo corps - This is the biggest issue. NPC corps should never be the best choice.

2- They don't promote fighting with groups capable of fighting back, in fact quite the opposite. You are better off farming a lot of players with no desire and no skill to fight back than taking on a challenging war.

3- Tied in with the above, there's too little to actually fight over. Wars are relatively aimless. There's more than enough moons for people to split up and POCOs are generally owned buy larger groups who occasionally fight over them. This means the general aim of a ward is to destroy a group, get loot or simply buff killboard stats.

4- Wars are aggressor driven. The defender has the options of fight back or evade. Once an aggressor chooses to attack there's no other ways to attempt to deal with it without it being the aggressors decision. Any attempts to negotiate a surrender have to be agreed by the aggressor, so effectively this means that the aggressor is paying to opt you in for content you don't want to play at all.
4b- Allies were put in to try to affect this, but for the most part mercs for hire there are either outright scams run by the aggressor or far more expensive than simply disbanding your corp and playing in NPC land.


1- 100% false premise. No facts presented. Discarded.
2- 100% false premise. No facts presented. Discarded.
3- Agreed. Wars need more meaning.
4-Agreed. Don't know if that's an issue but the premise holds water.
4b- 100% false premise. No facts presented. Discarded.

D.

Bear

Proud member of the Somalian Coast Guard Authority

Member and Juror of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#492 - 2015-03-13 08:57:09 UTC
Danalee wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
1- Wars prevent large scale non-PvP corporations from being viable. The moment you grow to a substantial size you become a target for wardeccers. Having a force to fight back still doesn't protect your non-PvPers, you pretty much have to switch the whole corp to PvP mode for wardecs, which defeats to object of being a PvE corp. This means the most viable option for a PVE players is to remain in NPC corps or solo corps - This is the biggest issue. NPC corps should never be the best choice.

2- They don't promote fighting with groups capable of fighting back, in fact quite the opposite. You are better off farming a lot of players with no desire and no skill to fight back than taking on a challenging war.

3- Tied in with the above, there's too little to actually fight over. Wars are relatively aimless. There's more than enough moons for people to split up and POCOs are generally owned buy larger groups who occasionally fight over them. This means the general aim of a ward is to destroy a group, get loot or simply buff killboard stats.

4- Wars are aggressor driven. The defender has the options of fight back or evade. Once an aggressor chooses to attack there's no other ways to attempt to deal with it without it being the aggressors decision. Any attempts to negotiate a surrender have to be agreed by the aggressor, so effectively this means that the aggressor is paying to opt you in for content you don't want to play at all.
4b- Allies were put in to try to affect this, but for the most part mercs for hire there are either outright scams run by the aggressor or far more expensive than simply disbanding your corp and playing in NPC land.


1- 100% false premise. No facts presented. Discarded.
2- 100% false premise. No facts presented. Discarded.
3- Agreed. Wars need more meaning.
4-Agreed. Don't know if that's an issue but the premise holds water.
4b- 100% false premise. No facts presented. Discarded.

D.

Bear
Ok, So to address the ones you disagree one:
1. Prove that large scale non-PvP corps are viable then. Explain why groups like red-frog and pro synergy are forced to operate with NPC alts to do everything besides accepting the contracts.

2. Explain what benefits a group has for fighting competent PvPers over easily farmed industrials and haulers. Explain why marmite decs countless industrial corps and even pays a high price to dec null groups - who primarily only run haulers in high sec - and why they don't permadec the likes of PoH, DEAF, etc to benefit from fighting other PvPers.

4b. For the part about scamming, this is done a fair bit. I've even done this myself. For the part about them being priced too high, with the alternative of dropping into an NPC corp being quite cheap (just tax and reduction in ease of tranferring between characters), it's obviously true that paying a merc corp will be more. Out of curiosity, if a group got wardecced by a group like PoH, how much would Mamite charge to join as an ally and see them off?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Danalee
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#493 - 2015-03-13 09:00:46 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
True, but then on average ships will drop more than 16% of their value, especially when your primary targets are industrial corps and haulers. Like I said then, it's a quick and dirty calculation rather than actual statistics. I truly don't believe that between loot and client fees that Marmite operate at a loss. I don't think I've met a half-decent merc group that operates at a loss.


False.
Ships, like pods and pocos drop 0% of their value.
Chance based loot drop is a lottery on itself and that's excluding people stealing or shooting your loot.
Added to that their is a thing like loosing ships which is 100% a cost.
A large percentage of the wars yield no 'result'. Only cost much isk.
As a merc corp in EVE, you have to be very attentive and shrewd to be able to break even.

D.

Bear

Proud member of the Somalian Coast Guard Authority

Member and Juror of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#494 - 2015-03-13 09:04:46 UTC
Danalee wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
True, but then on average ships will drop more than 16% of their value, especially when your primary targets are industrial corps and haulers. Like I said then, it's a quick and dirty calculation rather than actual statistics. I truly don't believe that between loot and client fees that Marmite operate at a loss. I don't think I've met a half-decent merc group that operates at a loss.


False.
Ships, like pods and pocos drop 0% of their value.
Chance based loot drop is a lottery on itself and that's excluding people stealing or shooting your loot.
Added to that their is a thing like loosing ships which is 100% a cost.
A large percentage of the wars yield no 'result'. Only cost much isk.
As a merc corp in EVE, you have to be very attentive and shrewd to be able to break even.

D.

Bear
On average. Do you know what that means?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Tora Bushido
The Marmite Mercenaries
BLACKFLAG.
#495 - 2015-03-13 09:05:54 UTC
You can't just refer to people's blogs who agree with you and tell us its CCP's direction. That's just as bad as me claiming I am right, as Marmite members tell me so.

No worries about trolls here, this isnt C&P and the ISD's kill first and then ask questions later in the CSM section. Or use alts. And if thats still not acceptable, mail me. I cant know how people think about Eve issues if they don't tell me first.

"Wars prevent large scale non-PvP corporations from being viable" If this is possible in any other part of Eve, why cant you do so in an even more safer part of Eve like high-sec ? So, I don't agree with you here. During a war, only a small part of high-sec can shoot you. In any other space, they can all shoot you. What is more dangerous to be in ? I think the biggest problem is, that high-sec has more newbies in it, that do not know yet how to counter it. When we are at war with non high-sec industrials, for example mining in high-sec, they are very hard to kill. They watch local, are often aligned, use the watch lists, run locater's from time to time and more. Smart playing keeps you alive, not nerfing the game.

I don't agree with you that wars are aimless. Like I told you before, wars are also being used to kill the (industrial) competition, deny wh alliances to move through space during wh evictions, deny trade hub use, prevent (ice) miners to clear out entire belts alone and I can give you many more examples. And of course there are also wars for no reasons at all. We sometimes war dec people for flying a Drake.

Do you think people in any other part of Eve, kill people because they've good reasons ? Or is Eve always about power, isks, I want yours, I dont like you, die mofo!, etc....


"Wars are aggressor driven". Yes, just as in any part of Eve. So ? Haven't wars always been that way for centuries ?

DELETE THE WEAK, ADAPT OR DIE !

Meta Gaming Level VII, Psycho Warfare Level X, Smack Talk Level VII.

Danalee
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#496 - 2015-03-13 09:13:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Danalee
Lucas Kell wrote:
Ok, So to address the ones you disagree one:
1. Prove that large scale non-PvP corps are viable then. Explain why groups like red-frog and pro synergy are forced to operate with NPC alts to do everything besides accepting the contracts.

2. Explain what benefits a group has for fighting competent PvPers over easily farmed industrials and haulers. Explain why marmite decs countless industrial corps and even pays a high price to dec null groups - who primarily only run haulers in high sec - and why they don't permadec the likes of PoH, DEAF, etc to benefit from fighting other PvPers.

4b. For the part about scamming, this is done a fair bit. I've even done this myself. For the part about them being priced too high, with the alternative of dropping into an NPC corp being quite cheap (just tax and reduction in ease of tranferring between characters), it's obviously true that paying a merc corp will be more. Out of curiosity, if a group got wardecced by a group like PoH, how much would Mamite charge to join as an ally and see them off?


I won't make your argument for you. That's not how it works. but I can say the following:
1- red-frog et all aren't forced to anything. They have options and choose the path of least resistance. Increasing NPC corp penalties will solve this.
- I don't feel there should be 100% PVE groups, certainly no big ones. They don't enrich the game at all, in fact they kill it.

2-We like fighting.
- Nullsec power blocs hire us to fight their competition. Also gevlon goblin... Darn, I said it.
- We are hired by industrial/pve centric groups to kill of their competition.
- deccing other mercs is counter productive and makes no sense.
- being hired against other mercs is in fact a thing, some groups specialise in that. (It has in fact the largest chance of nice loot drops but the highest risk with it)

4b- Scams are a part of eve, your annecdotal 'evidence' isn't evidence. It's annecdotes.
- If not otherwise occupied we sometimes do it for free.
- when potential costs are high, naturally clients need to pay to cover those risks. That's commen bussines sense.
- paying a merc can be more expensive short term but it helps you establish a name for yourself and built out your empire allowing for more safety at later stages equalling more profit, members and fun in the long run.
You know; Content.

D.

Bear

Proud member of the Somalian Coast Guard Authority

Member and Juror of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Tora Bushido
The Marmite Mercenaries
BLACKFLAG.
#497 - 2015-03-13 09:16:26 UTC
Tora Bushido wrote:
"Wars prevent large scale non-PvP corporations from being viable" If this is possible in any other part of Eve, why cant you do so in an even more safer part of Eve like high-sec ? So, I don't agree with you here. During a war, only a small part of high-sec can shoot you. In any other space, they can all shoot you. What is more dangerous to be in ? I think the biggest problem is, that high-sec has more newbies in it, that do not know yet how to counter it. When we are at war with non high-sec industrials, for example mining in high-sec, they are very hard to kill. They watch local, are often aligned, use the watch lists, run locater's from time to time and more. Smart playing keeps you alive, not nerfing the game.
Lol for quoting myself Big smile Maybe this is something we can add to the NPE ? Missions where an evil villain appears in their local window and they have to warp off in time. Teach them to counter in stead of nerfing the game.

DELETE THE WEAK, ADAPT OR DIE !

Meta Gaming Level VII, Psycho Warfare Level X, Smack Talk Level VII.

Danalee
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#498 - 2015-03-13 09:17:29 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Danalee wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
True, but then on average ships will drop more than 16% of their value, especially when your primary targets are industrial corps and haulers. Like I said then, it's a quick and dirty calculation rather than actual statistics. I truly don't believe that between loot and client fees that Marmite operate at a loss. I don't think I've met a half-decent merc group that operates at a loss.


False.
Ships, like pods and pocos drop 0% of their value.
Chance based loot drop is a lottery on itself and that's excluding people stealing or shooting your loot.
Added to that their is a thing like loosing ships which is 100% a cost.
A large percentage of the wars yield no 'result'. Only cost much isk.
As a merc corp in EVE, you have to be very attentive and shrewd to be able to break even.
On average. Do you know what that means?


I believe you mean It's pulling a number out of your behind. It isn't.
Ships drop 0% of their value. <- This isn't average. This is fact.
Now, do your math or don't bleat about numbers you don't understand nor have experience with.

D.

Bear

Proud member of the Somalian Coast Guard Authority

Member and Juror of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Noragen Neirfallas
Emotional Net Loss
#499 - 2015-03-13 10:46:40 UTC
I actually feel dreads in highsec is creating more barriers for new players and forming corps then it would remove due to how easy it would be to wipe out the med and small towers. I honestly believe limiting tower sizes to med and small would make high sec Post's more competitive without placing every Indy pos in high sec at the mercy of those of us who would take advantage of them. I gotta tell ya I'd be the first guy to start ransoming all the Indy Post's in the hek and rens region ;-) .

Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Noragens basically the Chribba of C&P - Zimmy Zeta

Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop

ISD Buldath favorite ISD

'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King Griffin

Danalee
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#500 - 2015-03-13 11:14:54 UTC
Noragen Neirfallas wrote:
I actually feel dreads in highsec is creating more barriers for new players and forming corps then it would remove due to how easy it would be to wipe out the med and small towers. I honestly believe limiting tower sizes to med and small would make high sec Post's more competitive without placing every Indy pos in high sec at the mercy of those of us who would take advantage of them. I gotta tell ya I'd be the first guy to start ransoming all the Indy Post's in the hek and rens region ;-) .


What makes it so you don't do that now, Noragen?
Do you realise how much at risk you'll be in your lonely dread shooting POS?
How funny the lossmail will be if some venture or skiff gets you.... eventually Lol

D.

Bear

Proud member of the Somalian Coast Guard Authority

Member and Juror of the Court of Crime and Punishment