These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The end of Corpmate Awoxxing?

First post First post
Author
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#201 - 2014-10-30 18:18:38 UTC
Paynus Maiassus wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
Persifonne wrote:
When will hisec become pvp free (except for duels and wardecs). Anyone activating weapons on player ship that you arent wardecced to, isnt flashy red or in a duel with will get concorded. Only pvp in lowsec null and wh. This day is coming. It is closer than we think.


I'm ready to unsub my accounts basically any time at this point.

No point in staying subbed... once EVE goes themepark it'll go the way of all the other themepark MMOs.

In it's place some other small, niche, dark game will pop up to satisfy people who actually enjoy hard games without having their hands held.


AWOXING has nothing to do with Eve being hard or player skill. It's an exploit. Doesn't make sense from a lore perspective that the police will come to stop crime in a highly policed area except when the crime is a betrayal of a friend.

AWOXERs need to get a real job. Do something hard in Eve. There's plenty to do. Eve is a hard game. AWOXING isn't one of them.


Dec dodging has nothing do with EVE being hard, or player skill. It's an exploit. It doesn't make sense from a lore perspective that a declared war suddenly goes away by paying 2 million isk if they reform under the same name as five minutes ago.

Dec dodgers need to go to NPC corps with the rest of the cowards. There's plenty to do in a player corp, dec dodging isn't one of them.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Paynus Maiassus
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#202 - 2014-10-30 18:20:59 UTC
Rhivre wrote:
So if these changes come in, when doing PvP practice with newbies, corps should take them to lowsec.....right?


Or they can just duel. Or they can set up a separate corp and war dec each other.

Shooting corpmates is 99.9% done by AWOXERs who are totally unrealistic. It's nothing but an exploit. They call Titan bumping an exploit but not AWOXING? Please. If you're in a high security area and you do not have a legal war going or are not in a voluntary duel and you kill someone, the cops should take you away, whether that someone is in your corp or not.

Carte blanche killing corp mates is just contrary to reason. It's also bad for PR and discourages new players. There's no talent involved. There's no skill involved. There are secondary exploits involved such as using out of corp logi, another thing that doesn't make sense. If I am in a high security area and someone tries to kill me, the cops will come unless the killer is my friend, yet the cops WILL come to kill me for shooting his accomplice because his accomplice is NOT my friend.

AWOXING is not only bad for the game but just utterly absurd.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#203 - 2014-10-30 18:23:27 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:

I'll even cut your job a bit and grant you that if it does not hurt subs, there is absolutely no reasons to change this so you only really have to think about what you might do if it did.

Both option might be true in reality but we don't know which scenario is actually being played right now.


It doesn't cost subs.

But apparently we are so devoid of ways to actually create incentives to play the game that we are chasing after imaginary deterents.

Each and every reason given for why "it hurts new players" is handily debunked, starting with the "it makes people afraid to recruit" horseshit.

It does nothing of the sort. The fact that awoxing happens at all shows that clearly, people are getting into corps. I got into nine last month, without a problem.

So clearly, people are recruiting. It is not even hard to get into a corp.

There is zero impediment to social interaction caused by awoxing.

Furthermore, CCP should not be concerned with the kind of people who "level their Raven and then quit", because they'd be quitting anyway. This game will never attract AND keep such people, they treat it like it's a Facebook game. Getting them into player corps or not will not save their subs, they are intrinsically playing the game wrong and that is not going to change.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Gaan Cathal
Angry Mustellid
#204 - 2014-10-30 18:24:25 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
As far as I'm aware awoxing in its original form was used to do precisely what the proposed changes are removing, make corpmates explode without NPC intervention (Sources TMC, Jester's Trek and Eve-Search). Now it includes any activities such as spying and corp theft.


It involved the infiltration of corps with the goal of making ships explode, not necessarily via the direct application of the AWOXer's guns. The main way certainly used to be via the AWOXer providing a warpin to a fleet hostile to the AWOXee. Ship-exploding AWOXing currently has two forms:

A) Warping in a hostile fleet
B) Shooting someone without Concord intervention

Post change it has two forms:

A) Warping in a hostile fleet
B) Shooting someone with Concord intervention


Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Quote:
One thing that I do think might be worth tagging onto the change when it does land, is extension of Concord arrival timers in mission pockets. Call it a simulation of Concord having to get to the gate then through it rather than making a direct warp if you need an ingame justification. What it does in practice is extend the time-before-ship-loss for someone ganking a missioner.


I don't have a problem with this, and missioning is my primary income source. It introduces something new to compensate for losing something old. I doubt you'll find many supporters amongst the carebear crowd though.

Quote:
Freighter/hauler/miner ganking seems to me to be in a reasonable place right now and would be unaffected by this.


Agreed, but once again you'll get dissent from the carebear crowd about any form of highsec shenanigans being in a reasonable place.



This is exactly why I think it should come in with the Concordokken fix. If the two things are parceled as one update there will but much less kickback. The Concordokken delay is just a "part of the package" as opposed to a standalone nerf to suvivability, in terms of perception.
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#205 - 2014-10-30 18:24:52 UTC
Paynus Maiassus wrote:
Rhivre wrote:
So if these changes come in, when doing PvP practice with newbies, corps should take them to lowsec.....right?


Or they can just duel. Or they can set up a separate corp and war dec each other.

Shooting corpmates is 99.9% done by AWOXERs who are totally unrealistic. It's nothing but an exploit. They call Titan bumping an exploit but not AWOXING? Please. If you're in a high security area and you do not have a legal war going or are not in a voluntary duel and you kill someone, the cops should take you away, whether that someone is in your corp or not.

Carte blanche killing corp mates is just contrary to reason. It's also bad for PR and discourages new players. There's no talent involved. There's no skill involved. There are secondary exploits involved such as using out of corp logi, another thing that doesn't make sense. If I am in a high security area and someone tries to kill me, the cops will come unless the killer is my friend, yet the cops WILL come to kill me for shooting his accomplice because his accomplice is NOT my friend.

AWOXING is not only bad for the game but just utterly absurd.



Dude, just take that common sense and reason back to where you came from. None of that is needed here.

We just want to grief and gank under the guise that we are creating content. (and we don't want to risk anything)
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#206 - 2014-10-30 18:27:27 UTC
Syn Shi wrote:

We just want to grief and gank under the guise that we are creating content. (and we don't want to risk anything)


Yeah, the Guiding Hand Social Club totally wasn't one of the single largest generators of long term subs in the history of the game.

It's just "griefing" that stops CCP from attracting the kind of people who just want to watch Family Guy with one hand down their pants while they mine endlessly in highsec. Oh, if only we could have less of the former and more of the latter!

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#207 - 2014-10-30 18:30:36 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:

If the angel arc mark you kill a concord deputy, it means the angels want to kill concord, not that concord want to devote effort to kill pirates.


One wonders why CONCORD is in Curse, then.




I would need to read the flavor text of the arc to know if there was ever a reason given for CONCORD to be there. Scouting operation before they hire capsulers to do the dirty work there? I really don't know man. All I know is they very rarely shoot at pirate faction but seem to hold as really important to punish capsulers when they cross the lines they set around the pilot licence. Maybe it's all a ploy to play on us by paying us to ill armada after armada of the pirate's ship while they have backroom contracts with the pirates leaders to supply them ships and other stuff. We don't really know how much ISK a PLEX is worth for concord. We only know how much it's worth for a capsuler and it keeps rising anyway.

:tinfoil:
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#208 - 2014-10-30 18:33:00 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:

I'll even cut your job a bit and grant you that if it does not hurt subs, there is absolutely no reasons to change this so you only really have to think about what you might do if it did.

Both option might be true in reality but we don't know which scenario is actually being played right now.


It doesn't cost subs.



I will take your words for it as soon as you provide a proof of it. You seem to have access to CCP's account history data so it should not be hard for you to provide fact about how it does not cost subs.
Paynus Maiassus
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#209 - 2014-10-30 18:33:31 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Paynus Maiassus wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
Persifonne wrote:
When will hisec become pvp free (except for duels and wardecs). Anyone activating weapons on player ship that you arent wardecced to, isnt flashy red or in a duel with will get concorded. Only pvp in lowsec null and wh. This day is coming. It is closer than we think.


I'm ready to unsub my accounts basically any time at this point.

No point in staying subbed... once EVE goes themepark it'll go the way of all the other themepark MMOs.

In it's place some other small, niche, dark game will pop up to satisfy people who actually enjoy hard games without having their hands held.


AWOXING has nothing to do with Eve being hard or player skill. It's an exploit. Doesn't make sense from a lore perspective that the police will come to stop crime in a highly policed area except when the crime is a betrayal of a friend.

AWOXERs need to get a real job. Do something hard in Eve. There's plenty to do. Eve is a hard game. AWOXING isn't one of them.


Dec dodging has nothing do with EVE being hard, or player skill. It's an exploit. It doesn't make sense from a lore perspective that a declared war suddenly goes away by paying 2 million isk if they reform under the same name as five minutes ago.

Dec dodgers need to go to NPC corps with the rest of the cowards. There's plenty to do in a player corp, dec dodging isn't one of them.


Well, that may be something that needs to be addressed. It has nothing to do with AWOXING though.

And it's less of an exploit than AWOXING. If Germany declares war on America and every single American runs to Canada, Germany will need to declare war on Canada. I'm not saying dec dodging isn't en exploit. Only that it is slightly less unashamedly ridiculous as the idea of freely murdering corp mates.

But sure, if you want it addressed, start a thread, talk to the CSM, get something going. This thread isn't about that though.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#210 - 2014-10-30 18:34:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
Thanks for the toothsome reply.

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Due diligence when recruiting new members should be an integral part of the recruitment process, look at how many corps Psychotic Monk has managed to awox, with very obvious awoxing alts, because the recruiters didn't practice due diligence and do the most basic of checks. Personally I won't join a corp that doesn't request a full API, they're taking no steps to protect their corp members and IMHO it's a sign of poor leadership. As I said earlier there are ways to detect potential awoxers, and to balance that there are ways for potential awoxers to avoid detection, eg. using an alt account.


Quick question: how do you know what an API is, and how do you provide a full one? Where did you learn that? Not anywhere in game! How do you balance that with the opposite concern, that the joining player doesn't entirely trust the corp he's joining and, for whatever reason, wants to maintain a certain degree of privacy at least initially?

I mean, if you reduce corporate recruiting to a choice between making every potential recruit strip for a full colonoscopy and losing everything to some alt with a glint in his eye, isn't that a little broken by itself?

Is it any wonder that most of the people who stay in this game are people more like me, who knew exactly which people from which out-of-game community they were going to play with when they came in?

If you're someone like me who prefers to learn by doing (it's the only way to make most of the family recipes, for one thing, because LOL measurements) how and where do you learn to run a corp? How tolerant should the game be of mistakes, given that most players learn from mistakes?

I'm asking questions because I'm not going to pretend that they all have clear-cut answers, or certainly that I know the answers there are. But they're real questions that CCP has to find answers to.

If it's any consolation, CCP just nerfed my previous corp's playstyle beyond the point where we felt it was worth putting up with the hassle, so I have a first-hand understanding of how it feels to have your little part of the game disappear one day. The difference is that once we all recover from burnout we'll probably just find a different little part of the game.

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
That remains to be seen, nothing is concrete yet, it'll be interesting to see how it plays out.


I'll just say that I have great confidence in the ability of EVE players--certainly including new players!--to be diabolical little bastards, and I mean that in the best way possible.

For me, this change is similar to Sugar Kyle's suggestion in the CSM minutes to get rid of sec status loss in low sec if you shoot first. That's another weird little corner of the rules that just doesn't make a lot of sense. If you're in a low security space, in a ship with medium- to long-range weapons, and a brawler lands on grid with you, why should you be penalized for firing before he gets under your guns, which is the tactically sensible thing to do? if no law enforcement is on grid, why should they even notice?

Also, if you eliminate that quirk, you eliminate a lot of the peripheral issues that dedicated low sec players have getting into high sec because of greatly reduced sec status, and you obviate the need for workarounds like tags4sec that just make security status even more pointless and arbitrary. I know I'm veering a bit off topic, but it's only to establish that the goal here, to me, is that things should be streamlined and consistent, and whether that process makes one little bit of the game more or less safe, it's a change for the better on balance, especially as far as new players are concerned. Other players provide arbitrarily high levels of complexity already, without some computer's attempts to add more, and we want players interacting with other players.

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Once again I agree to a certain extent, corps should be comfortable with recruiting newbies, but not so comfortable that they have a lax recruitment process. I'm in the process of joining a corp with a fairly new alt, full API was requested on top of having an existing corp member vouch for me. To me that shows the corp cares about who joins them, and is taking steps to protect themselves, and their members.


OK, you're a total newbie. You just joined cold because you liked the tagline in the EVE web ad. You don't know anyone. What do you do?

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Player retention is crap, nobody is denying that. Whether or not it's down to current mechanics, or down to people thinking Eve is something other than what it is, is up for debate.


The part I've highlighted is a very serious issue with the NPE. But here's the rub: you learn what EVE is from other players. So the sooner you put new players in touch with existing players, the sooner they learn what EVE is, one way or another. The current mechanics place obstacles between new players and existing players.

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
With reference to the topic of awoxing and predatory gameplay and any changes to them; some see it as the start of a slippery slope in which Eve ends up as a shadow of its former self, only time will tell. (Yes I am aware that the slippery slope is considered to be a fallacy)


Yes, and for good reason. I mean, I could also say that CCP was on a slippery slope to chase PVP corps out of wormholes, because I was in a PVP corp in a wormhole and now I'm not, but I would be full of it. I've picked up Star Trek Online. That's a theme park, and perfectly enjoyable as the set of interactive Star Trek episodes that it is. Looking from that to the stated direction for EVE, which CCP is quite open about... yeah. I just can't see any similarity beyond there being spaceships which are online.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Reiisha
#211 - 2014-10-30 18:34:50 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
If you attack someone in hisec w/o a wardec or duel, expect to lose your ship. Simple. There's no real reason for the corp concord loophole to exist save giving the risk averse easy pew.


Why, because you say so?

Now we enter another idiotic debate where you say it's risk-free PvP, and in comes people with actual experience to tell you it's not, and you deny facts, logic, and reason and kiss CCP's butt because you want to be safer in HiSec.


Because griefing is pvp, yes, of course. Nothing better than to show your skills at shooting completely defenseless targets.

So why is it that those people don't go to low or null sec for their pvp fix? Might it be... that it's too dangerous?

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...

PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
#212 - 2014-10-30 18:35:15 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


Furthermore, CCP should not be concerned with the kind of people who "level their Raven and then quit", because they'd be quitting anyway. This game will never attract AND keep such people, they treat it like it's a Facebook game.

Yes, but what if they didn't?

Retaining even a small portion of the "upgrade your raven types" (~40% of new players as per CCP Rise at FF) could, over a modest time frame,significantly increase the quantity of targets in our sand box.

Providing for these worthless souls, whether it be in the form of dojos/arenas, improved missions, reducing awoxing, etc. has the opportunity to vastly enrich the sandbox and is therefore a worthwhile pursuit.
Gaan Cathal
Angry Mustellid
#213 - 2014-10-30 18:37:59 UTC
Paynus Maiassus wrote:

Well, that may be something that needs to be addressed. It has nothing to do with AWOXING though.

And it's less of an exploit than AWOXING. If Germany declares war on America and every single American runs to Canada, Germany will need to declare war on Canada. I'm not saying dec dodging isn't en exploit. Only that it is slightly less unashamedly ridiculous as the idea of freely murdering corp mates.

But sure, if you want it addressed, start a thread, talk to the CSM, get something going. This thread isn't about that though.


AWOXing is not, and never has been, an exploit. CCP intentionally made Concord not respond to intra-corp combat. They are now planning to change that behaviour in order to make the rules of highsec more intuitive and remove exceptions that are not immediately apparent or regarded as logical. That does not make the current behaviour any less intended.

AWOXing is not, has not been, will not be an exploit.
Sol Project
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
#214 - 2014-10-30 18:38:19 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Sol Project wrote:

If CCP really believes this will help player retention, then this game is doomed.

Tell me, you CSM person, what are they doing against the real reasons that make new players quit?

.) Player run New player corps which do not provide gameplay for their new players, or completely one sided gameplay.

.) Vets in rookie corps who make people mine or run missions, which equals to playing solo or not at all, although CCP themselves said that players who become social are more likely to stay.

.) Vets in rookie corps who lie about lowsec and the attitude of PvPers in general.

.) Player run New player corps who do not teach anything and force their members to become targets,
instead of making them understand how to survive and defend themselves.


I will wait for your response.


Out of curiosity, what makes you think that the above are the real reasons new players quit? Have you stats? Exit polls? You know, the things CCP does to see why people leave?

But bullet by bullet

'do not provide gameplay' yeah, I agree some folks who came looking for a themepark experience leave when they find this is not it. I do not propose we ever try to become one, either. Sometimes you are just not the right game for the player.

Force players to mine or run missions. um, how? Oh they may suggest it for standings or to get some isk while the skill queue ripens but are you talking slave labour? What are they, Amarr?

People lie in Eve . . . yup

Some corps are bad and don't teach. Yup, others are better at it. I'd like to see an encouragement to the latter class of corps.

m
If you do not believe my words, I will carefully take your hand, will try not to break it, and show you actual reality. You can ask awoxxers themselves about the huge amount of corps who gather new players and do not care for them or teach them anything of actual value.

You can also by yourself spend lots of time in ALL the rookiecorps to find out that there are assholes who do exactly what I am telling you. Tippia can also confirm this to be true and points it out often enough.

I take my information simply by playing and talking in the relevant areas, with the people it's about. Something CCP does not seem to do and I doubt you do it either. You people look at "data", thinking it mirrors reality. The more you look at data, the less connected with actual reality you will be.

If you think you know better, then please show us relevant data that proves that the issue that absolutely exists is not actually there. I bet that your data does not consider social interactions and the influence of the few on the many.

You are welcome to tell me otherwise and show me something that proves that you or CCP actually know why people are leaving this game. So far, it seems that you all suffer from a big questionmark.

Do you have any ideas why people do not stay for longer or do you just have data?

Ladies of New Eden YC 117 by Indahmawar Fazmarai

Warning: NSFW! Barely legal girls in underwear!

Diana Kim > AND THIS IS WHY THE FEDERATION MUST BE DESTROYED!!

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#215 - 2014-10-30 18:39:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Gaan Cathal wrote:
It involved the infiltration of corps with the goal of making ships explode, not necessarily via the direct application of the AWOXer's guns. The main way certainly used to be via the AWOXer providing a warpin to a fleet hostile to the AWOXee. Ship-exploding AWOXing currently has two forms:

A) Warping in a hostile fleet
B) Shooting someone without Concord intervention

Post change it has two forms:

A) Warping in a hostile fleet
B) Shooting someone with Concord intervention
I stand corrected, I was aware of the hostile fleet bit but was under the impression that it was mainly shooting your corpmates in the face, thanks for the clarification. It does somewhat remove one of the reasons for infiltrating a corp though, you can do both post change parts without having to.


Quote:
This is exactly why I think it should come in with the Concordokken fix. If the two things are parceled as one update there will but much less kickback. The Concordokken delay is just a "part of the package" as opposed to a standalone nerf to suvivability, in terms of perception.
It may be worth a F&I thread to discuss a compromise like this, it certainly won't get a lot of support from carebears but it may well mollify the people who indulge in highsec hijinks.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Paynus Maiassus
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#216 - 2014-10-30 18:40:22 UTC
Gaan Cathal wrote:
Paynus Maiassus wrote:

Well, that may be something that needs to be addressed. It has nothing to do with AWOXING though.

And it's less of an exploit than AWOXING. If Germany declares war on America and every single American runs to Canada, Germany will need to declare war on Canada. I'm not saying dec dodging isn't en exploit. Only that it is slightly less unashamedly ridiculous as the idea of freely murdering corp mates.

But sure, if you want it addressed, start a thread, talk to the CSM, get something going. This thread isn't about that though.


AWOXing is not, and never has been, an exploit. CCP intentionally made Concord not respond to intra-corp combat. They are now planning to change that behaviour in order to make the rules of highsec more intuitive and remove exceptions that are not immediately apparent or regarded as logical. That does not make the current behaviour any less intended.

AWOXing is not, has not been, will not be an exploit.


It's an exploit. It's bad for the game. It's absolutely absurd.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#217 - 2014-10-30 18:41:02 UTC
Gaan Cathal wrote:
Paynus Maiassus wrote:

Well, that may be something that needs to be addressed. It has nothing to do with AWOXING though.

And it's less of an exploit than AWOXING. If Germany declares war on America and every single American runs to Canada, Germany will need to declare war on Canada. I'm not saying dec dodging isn't en exploit. Only that it is slightly less unashamedly ridiculous as the idea of freely murdering corp mates.

But sure, if you want it addressed, start a thread, talk to the CSM, get something going. This thread isn't about that though.


AWOXing is not, and never has been, an exploit. CCP intentionally made Concord not respond to intra-corp combat. They are now planning to change that behaviour in order to make the rules of highsec more intuitive and remove exceptions that are not immediately apparent or regarded as logical. That does not make the current behaviour any less intended.

AWOXing is not, has not been, will not be an exploit.


So is corp jumping and NPC corp hugging but people keep labeling those as an exploit. It's almost as if people were labeling stuff they don't like about the game an exploit in the hope CCP will somehow think that way too. It's always fun to read 2 threads at the same time about 2 of those and see both side sling poo at each others by calling the other an exploiter while being wrong all the time.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#218 - 2014-10-30 18:41:04 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:

I'll even cut your job a bit and grant you that if it does not hurt subs, there is absolutely no reasons to change this so you only really have to think about what you might do if it did.

Both option might be true in reality but we don't know which scenario is actually being played right now.


It doesn't cost subs.



I will take your words for it as soon as you provide a proof of it. You seem to have access to CCP's account history data so it should not be hard for you to provide fact about how it does not cost subs.


Prove that it does.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Sol Project
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
#219 - 2014-10-30 18:41:15 UTC
Also I like to add that your attitude stinks. I am trying to help and you come up with a crappy response.

Try to be better. It's about the game and you seem to not understand what's going on at all.

Try it.

Ladies of New Eden YC 117 by Indahmawar Fazmarai

Warning: NSFW! Barely legal girls in underwear!

Diana Kim > AND THIS IS WHY THE FEDERATION MUST BE DESTROYED!!

PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
#220 - 2014-10-30 18:43:22 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:

I'll even cut your job a bit and grant you that if it does not hurt subs, there is absolutely no reasons to change this so you only really have to think about what you might do if it did.

Both option might be true in reality but we don't know which scenario is actually being played right now.


It doesn't cost subs.



I will take your words for it as soon as you provide a proof of it. You seem to have access to CCP's account history data so it should not be hard for you to provide fact about how it does not cost subs.


Prove that it does.

He can't prove his point without access to ccp's data anymore than you can prove yours. All we know is that ccp has the data, and they're the ones choosing to make these changes.