These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Millions to attack, Trillions to defend?

Author
Mortimer Civeri
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2012-06-16 21:59:44 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Stensson
sabre906 wrote:
Goon alt hates warSad

Goon alt, throwing out accusations of someone other than him, being a Goon.

See I can make baseless accusations too.P

I grow weary of the same tired "ARGG! Goonies are ebil blobbers, who have CCP in their back pocket, and wouldn't last a second in a 'real' fight." meme like Jessie-A Tassik, posts. Really try something more original people.

Edit: Pyramid quoting removed - ISD Stensson

"I don't know which is worse, ...that everyone has his price, or that the price is always so low." Calvin

Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2012-06-16 22:01:19 UTC
sabre906 wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:
It is banning by other means. That breaks the entire purpose of having allies. I rather go back to the old system then, this is feature is useless if one cannot play with it and push its limits.n.
Nothing's stopping you from bringing your "allies" into a mutual alliance. Or having your allies pony up the cash and wardec the aggressors themselves. Or any number of methods that involve actual allies, and not just highsec ganker corps who merely want cost-effective workarounds around having to pay a wardec fee themselves (which I imagine is what you actually want).


Nothing prevents you from just fighting the abovementioned people and force them into submission.Lol

Indeed. But this isn't about what I can or cannot do, but about the balance of the wardec system.
Cutter Isaacson
DEDSEC SAN FRANCISCO
#23 - 2012-06-16 22:10:34 UTC
sabre906 wrote:
Aiwha wrote:
Implying any nullsec group gives a damn about a bunch of highsec "pvpers".


If goons like the Jita camp, they wouldn't be crying to nerf it.Big smile


Just because I can't be bothered to type out a fresh reply, here's one I made earlier.


Perhaps you haven't been around very long, or perhaps you don't frequent many other parts of the forum than GD, but you are terribly mistaken. There are certainly members of GS that behave less than prudently on the forums, but that is not to say that all of them behave in such a fashion.

If you had bothered to do even the tiniest bit of research you would realise that, for the most part, the GS have made invaluable contributions to this game. Granted there have been some rather major and well publicised negative events involving GS members, but that should in no way over shadow the positive aspects of having GS around.

Back in 2004-right through until the arrival of GS we were lumbered with an Alliance that was of the same relative size and power as GS, but who did little to bring about changes that would be of benefit to the masses. GS have, to the annoyance of some, brought about some very good changes to the game, prominent amongst those being the nerfing of Titans, and more recently their requests for Technetium to be redistributed more fairly.

The majority of people crying on these forums are not members of GS, but rather those who have little to no understanding of GS, nor of their intentions, even though these intentions should be clear to most by now. Most of the GS members I see "crying" on the forums are actually being ironic, sarcastic or just plain in your face trolling, the laughable thing is that people seem to believe that they really are crying.

What is actually happening is that people like you are jumping on the "hate them cos they're bigger than us, wah wah wah" bandwagon, while taking absolutely no time or effort to take a look at things for yourselves. I suggest you go and educate yourself on the "facts" lest you appear more foolish than you already do.

"The truth is usually just an excuse for a lack of imagination." Elim Garak.

sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2012-06-16 22:12:09 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Stensson
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Indeed. But this isn't about what I can or cannot do, but about the balance of the wardec system.


Balance is achieved when you're on the right side of the blob? Is that why the defender having allies brings forth butthurt?Roll

Edit: Pyramid quoting removed - ISD Stensson
sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2012-06-16 22:15:12 UTC
Cutter Isaacson wrote:
sabre906 wrote:
Aiwha wrote:
Implying any nullsec group gives a damn about a bunch of highsec "pvpers".


If goons like the Jita camp, they wouldn't be crying to nerf it.Big smile


Just because I can't be bothered to type out a fresh reply, here's one I made earlier.


Perhaps you haven't been around very long, or perhaps you don't frequent many other parts of the forum than GD, but you are terribly mistaken. There are certainly members of GS that behave less than prudently on the forums, but that is not to say that all of them behave in such a fashion.

If you had bothered to do even the tiniest bit of research you would realise that, for the most part, the GS have made invaluable contributions to this game. Granted there have been some rather major and well publicised negative events involving GS members, but that should in no way over shadow the positive aspects of having GS around.

Back in 2004-right through until the arrival of GS we were lumbered with an Alliance that was of the same relative size and power as GS, but who did little to bring about changes that would be of benefit to the masses. GS have, to the annoyance of some, brought about some very good changes to the game, prominent amongst those being the nerfing of Titans, and more recently their requests for Technetium to be redistributed more fairly.

The majority of people crying on these forums are not members of GS, but rather those who have little to no understanding of GS, nor of their intentions, even though these intentions should be clear to most by now. Most of the GS members I see "crying" on the forums are actually being ironic, sarcastic or just plain in your face trolling, the laughable thing is that people seem to believe that they really are crying.

What is actually happening is that people like you are jumping on the "hate them cos they're bigger than us, wah wah wah" bandwagon, while taking absolutely no time or effort to take a look at things for yourselves. I suggest you go and educate yourself on the "facts" lest you appear more foolish than you already do.


tl;dr:

GS -> "Goon" is like a bad word, so unspeakable it cannot be spelled out.Big smile
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#26 - 2012-06-16 22:20:11 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Stensson
sabre906 wrote:

Balance is achieved when you're on the right side of the blob? Is that why the defender having allies brings forth butthurt?Roll

What's stopping a 2-3000 man alliance being brought in as a defenders' ally for 10M a week, by the way?
Oh wait, it's that the defender would actually have to have an ally to do so.

Edit: Personal attack removed - ISD Stensson
Crunchie Attuxors
Always Another Corporate Venture
#27 - 2012-06-16 22:22:37 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
balance


That word should be banned.

CCP does many things badly, but they are 8/10 or even 9/10 in balance. When they mess up, the usually fix it right.

My issue - again - is not balance.

Its the defacto ban on accessing a tool's full potential to derive entertainment value of said tool in a toolbox.


Lets say the cost of bringing an ally were twice the cost of the attacking

The problem I see with both sides of the "OMG BALANCE" tears is that they are both speaking out of their ass. There is real pew pew pew in highsec. There are people who want to do things like bait and switch.

Its not about poor carebears being able to hit back (which quite frankly they can even with this system). Or poor old Jade getting permawarred for overdoing the tinfoil headresses.

Its about the possibilities of the sandbox. Essentially a trillion isk to mount a massive battle ground means banning massive battles in highsec.

Also, the so-called problem of the "free loaders" gets solved by charging the same amount for an ally that a war would have charged them had they had the same amount of members. Make being an ally the same as declaring war.

But the maximum for declaring war is not a trillion isk or more, its half a billion, which is affordable to any corp that actually needs help at that massive scale.

Also, I wouldn't mind attackers being able to bring allies too. But I can live without it too. I am just saying, give us tools, not directions. Specially trillion isk directions.
Eve forums official anthem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pudOFG5X6uA Real men tank hull. Fake women shield-tank Gallente.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#28 - 2012-06-16 22:28:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:

Its about the possibilities of the sandbox. Essentially a trillion isk to mount a massive battle ground means banning massive battles in highsec.
Where exactly are you getting this figure of "a trillion isk".
It costs 10M + 10M*n^2 per ally.
Which means you could bring on the 9000 pilot "Anti-Goonswarm Alliance" as an ally for 20M isk a week, or whatever.

So what 'possibilities' are being restricted?
sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2012-06-16 22:31:59 UTC  |  Edited by: sabre906
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:

Its about the possibilities of the sandbox. Essentially a trillion isk to mount a massive battle ground means banning massive battles in highsec.
Where exactly are you getting this figure of "a trillion isk".
It costs 10M + 10M*n^2 per ally.
Which means you could bring on the 9000 pilot "Anti-Goonswarm Alliance" as an ally for 20M isk a week, or whatever.

So what 'possibilities' are being restricted?


How much would that 10+10M*n^2 work out for 100 90 pilot "Anti-Goonswarm Alliances?" Or do you mean little guys should dock up?Lol
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#30 - 2012-06-16 22:37:33 UTC
sabre906 wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:

Its about the possibilities of the sandbox. Essentially a trillion isk to mount a massive battle ground means banning massive battles in highsec.
Where exactly are you getting this figure of "a trillion isk".
It costs 10M + 10M*n^2 per ally.
Which means you could bring on the 9000 pilot "Anti-Goonswarm Alliance" as an ally for 20M isk a week, or whatever.

So what 'possibilities' are being restricted?


How much would that 10+10M*n^2 work out for 100 90 pilot "Anti-Goonswarm Alliances?" Or do you mean little guys should dock up?Lol

Lots, so they should merge up if they're serious about their anti-Goon goal and not just indiscriminately looking for cost-effective workarounds to wardecs.
Jayrendo Karr
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#31 - 2012-06-16 22:41:42 UTC
Attacking corps should just pay 1 million x member count for a wardec. Problem solved.
Crunchie Attuxors
Always Another Corporate Venture
#32 - 2012-06-16 22:48:29 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:

Its about the possibilities of the sandbox. Essentially a trillion isk to mount a massive battle ground means banning massive battles in highsec.
Where exactly are you getting this figure of "a trillion isk".
It costs 10M + 10M*n^2 per ally.
Which means you could bring on the 9000 pilot "Anti-Goonswarm Alliance" as an ally for 20M isk a week, or whatever.

So what 'possibilities' are being restricted?




It is my understanding of the formula is (at least in SiSi):

10m+(n*2) where n is the previous amount.

So first ally is free. Second ally is 10m [10m+(0*2)=10m]. Third ally is 30m [10m+(10*2)=30m], and so on.

Or for your perusal:

http://d35dgn2pdc8wsn.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Infernoallies.jpg

Am I getting the formula wrong?

Also, please read what I wrote. I take the goons at their word that highsec wardecing is of zero interest to them.

I think it is more possible for Eve Forum posters to stay on topic than for an Anti-Goonswarm Alliance being possible or necessary in Highsec. I am thinking more in the 20 corp range, hence trillion.

It is however of interest to merc/pvp and to "carebears with teeth" corps.

RvB vs E-UNI is the exception, not the rule, in highsec. The only way to have massive pew pew in hisec is wardec a shitload of corps with one of the few large hisec corps. Lets not make that impossible...

Eve forums official anthem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pudOFG5X6uA Real men tank hull. Fake women shield-tank Gallente.
Crunchie Attuxors
Always Another Corporate Venture
#33 - 2012-06-16 22:51:34 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:

Lots, so they should merge up if they're serious about their anti-Goon goal and not just indiscriminately looking for cost-effective workarounds to wardecs.


Can you read?

Many of us give as much as a **** about goons as goons give a **** about us. We play different games that only intersect in interesting and creative ways like Burn Jita.

This is not about "balance" and this is not about "goons".

Read what it is about above in my several posts, including the OP.
Eve forums official anthem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pudOFG5X6uA Real men tank hull. Fake women shield-tank Gallente.
Jessie-A Tassik
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#34 - 2012-06-16 23:28:01 UTC
sabre906 wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:

Its about the possibilities of the sandbox. Essentially a trillion isk to mount a massive battle ground means banning massive battles in highsec.
Where exactly are you getting this figure of "a trillion isk".
It costs 10M + 10M*n^2 per ally.
Which means you could bring on the 9000 pilot "Anti-Goonswarm Alliance" as an ally for 20M isk a week, or whatever.

So what 'possibilities' are being restricted?


How much would that 10+10M*n^2 work out for 100 90 pilot "Anti-Goonswarm Alliances?" Or do you mean little guys should dock up?Lol


That is exactly what he means.
Crunchie Attuxors
Always Another Corporate Venture
#35 - 2012-06-16 23:36:49 UTC
Jessie-A Tassik wrote:

That is exactly what he means.


Yeah of course. I take all this time making a coherent argument that explicitly places itself outside of the Dramabelisk, but I am part of the collective carebear butthurt and the tinfoil hat set.

Yeah...Roll
Eve forums official anthem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pudOFG5X6uA Real men tank hull. Fake women shield-tank Gallente.
sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2012-06-16 23:40:04 UTC
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:
Jessie-A Tassik wrote:

That is exactly what he means.


Yeah of course. I take all this time making a coherent argument that explicitly places itself outside of the Dramabelisk, but I am part of the collective carebear butthurt and the tinfoil hat set.

Yeah...Roll


The butthurt over Jita-camp is strong in this one.Big smile
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
#37 - 2012-06-16 23:55:29 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
also, a real sandbox would be all about removing CONCORD
anything else is a compromise


It ceases to be a sandbox if there are toys in there ?
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#38 - 2012-06-17 00:12:55 UTC
sabre906 wrote:
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:
Jessie-A Tassik wrote:

That is exactly what he means.

Yeah of course. I take all this time making a coherent argument that explicitly places itself outside of the Dramabelisk, but I am part of the collective carebear butthurt and the tinfoil hat set.

Yeah...Roll


The butthurt over Jita-camp is strong in this one.Big smile

Camped in Jita, huh.

At least yu can amuse yourself browsing the market there.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#39 - 2012-06-17 00:24:05 UTC
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:
Yeah of course. I take all this time making a coherent argument that explicitly places itself outside of the Dramabelisk, but I am part of the collective carebear butthurt and the tinfoil hat set.

Yeah...Roll


I hate to say it but this is GD. Coherent arguments and coherent responses are kind of left at the door. It is unfortunate but is the way of things.

What I might suggest is perhaps abandoning this thread and have another go of it in the Warfare and Tactics forum. That forum is all about PvP including Empire Wars.

Alternatively, if you have ideas that you think would make the game more fun or viable you might try posting this in Features and Ideas.

To post in GD and expect civil discourse is like throwing steak in a pit of tigers and then telling them to go hungry.

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#40 - 2012-06-17 00:30:16 UTC
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:
Yeah of course. I take all this time making a coherent argument that explicitly places itself outside of the Dramabelisk, but I am part of the collective carebear butthurt and the tinfoil hat set.

Since we're discussing the wardec thing, I thought the "butthurt" was from the goons, not carebears?

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?