These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Galatea] First batch of sov capture iterations

First post First post
Author
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1301 - 2015-09-01 15:57:41 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:

At the moment? Unfortunately not nearly enough. High sec was a much better place when Marmite was deccing CFC's alliances indefinitely.


It came as a shock on Friday when I went through highsec with no wardecs
Rivr Luzade wrote:

With regards of ISK making, I do not see how 200M ISK earned in 2-2.5 hours is bad ISK making. But we obviously have different standards here. Also, thank you again for proving that you like to avoid risk. It is not sane to say that sane people make ISK in High sec when they have Null sec holdings running.


Highec isk making is better than in null for a fraction of the risk and downtime.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#1302 - 2015-09-01 17:49:17 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Surely these things go hand in hand though. The reason we are in highsec is because the rewards are better compared with the risk than in nullsec. That tells us that there's either too little reward/too much risk in nullsec, or too high reward/too little risk in highsec. If these were all in balance there would be no reason to choose highsec. Surely the fact that most null groups do their high end income earning in highsec shows that there's a serious balance issue there.


Since you make money trading in high sec, your actual problem is that high sec is where the economy is.

Now, why would that be?

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1303 - 2015-09-01 18:33:17 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Surely these things go hand in hand though. The reason we are in highsec is because the rewards are better compared with the risk than in nullsec. That tells us that there's either too little reward/too much risk in nullsec, or too high reward/too little risk in highsec. If these were all in balance there would be no reason to choose highsec. Surely the fact that most null groups do their high end income earning in highsec shows that there's a serious balance issue there.
Since you make money trading in high sec, your actual problem is that high sec is where the economy is.

Now, why would that be?
Because most people live there because it's ludicrously safe and rewarding, while groups from null ship stuff out of there because industry in null is dead.

About right?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#1304 - 2015-09-01 23:41:27 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
At the moment? Unfortunately not nearly enough. High sec was a much better place when Marmite was deccing CFC's alliances indefinitely.
If you truly believe that, feel free to pay them. Personally I think they were a bit weak as they only patrol around hubs.

Rivr Luzade wrote:
With regards of ISK making, I do not see how 200M ISK earned in 2-2.5 hours is bad ISK making. But we obviously have different standards here. Also, thank you again for proving that you like to avoid risk. It is not sane to say that sane people make ISK in High sec when they have Null sec holdings running.
lol? You should seriously look into high end higsec income. Not only can you earn more than nullsec, but it's easier to scale with alts as you don't have PvP concerns.

I make isk in highsec because the only way to reliably make the largest volumes of isk is through trading. It's not risk aversion to strive for the most you can get. Again, why would I cripple myself by limiting how I make isk to only nullsec activities, when I can make significantly more elsewhere passively on an alt to support my main?

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Please, even you honestly can't believe that clap trap.

The Imperium is all about safety in numbers.
If I wanted safety I'd be in highsec, not in a group that is universally hated and living outside of concord.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Quit don't quit, just don't try to say The Imperium is anything more than the jurassic park of new eden, dinosaurs grimly hanging on to life in a universe that is not suited to them .
Your threat "If CCP go to far down that road" that many of those who choose to hide in mega groups will quit - Good - No-one really wants your stuff, biomass it along with your characters.
Roll Grr.

I take it you don't like EVE then? I'm fairly sure that if all the people you hate in the "mega-groups" quit, they'd discontinue EVE.

You would be at far more risk of getting killed than you are hiding in your sov space if you went live in in highsec.
Your alliance is a protected species, made up of alts and carebears. (like many imperium member alliances)

I like Eve, a lot. What I don't like is people who pretend to know what is going on in the game but are too scared to actually participate in the game. Not everyone in mega groups feels as you do, a lot remain because the alternative is to get shat on by their previous "friends" - Fear of having to fight for what you have is what keeps the imperium together.

PS; Your insistence highsec is safer than your protected little pocket of sov, is just such a clear indication - We aren't playing the same game.
(although, if you were to go to highsec right now, you would be safe - there are more Goons in highsec ganking than there are in nul)
-- - -- - -- - -- - --
If your right and the imperium quitting eve did "discontinue the game" - ccp really have fuked up.

Note to CCP Development teams - Goons and pets are paying your wages - Better change eve to better suit their outdated game play.

-- - -- - -- - -- - --
I don't "hate" large groups (I belong to a fairly large group) - Just the one group who refuses to change / adapt and play the game.

-- - -- - -- - --
Fountain, is a clear indication of how inept and outdated The Imperium really is - Black Legion moved in and took it. The Imperium's counter, was to bore them into leaving. (or did they secretly get paid off as often happens with such threats)


I was part of the CFC, for many years - I know just how boring it becomes, I also know first hand how inept some member groups are. There are some groups within The Imperium who can and do play the game very well - It is just a shame they are the ones keeping everyone else safe.
Any group who may become a threat to The Imperium, is crushed quickly, set to blue or paid off.


My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1305 - 2015-09-02 06:38:46 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:

PS; Your insistence highsec is safer than your protected little pocket of sov, is just such a clear indication - We aren't playing the same game.



Anyone who utters this tripe is talking out of their arse.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1306 - 2015-09-02 06:54:39 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
You would be at far more risk of getting killed than you are hiding in your sov space if you went live in in highsec.
Just wrong, in every way. This is some next level grr right here.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
I like Eve, a lot. What I don't like is people who pretend to know what is going on in the game but are too scared to actually participate in the game. Not everyone in mega groups feels as you do, a lot remain because the alternative is to get shat on by their previous "friends" - Fear of having to fight for what you have is what keeps the imperium together.
And what I don;t like is little nobodies that presume to sit around telling people they are playing the game wrong because they are angry and jealous. But I guess we both have to put up with each other, don't we?

Sgt Ocker wrote:
If your right and the imperium quitting eve did "discontinue the game" - ccp really have fuked up.
Not really, we're simply a large part of the playerbase, most of use long time vets. The ACU is already dwindling, and forcing us out of the game would be a significant blow to that

Sgt Ocker wrote:
I don't "hate" large groups (I belong to a fairly large group) - Just the one group who refuses to change / adapt and play the game.
Lol? We're the only big group thta has adapted. That's what you're all mad about, that we've adapted to the new mechanics and are unstoppable.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
I was part of the CFC, for many years - I know just how boring it becomes, I also know first hand how inept some member groups are. There are some groups within The Imperium who can and do play the game very well - It is just a shame they are the ones keeping everyone else safe.
Any group who may become a threat to The Imperium, is crushed quickly, set to blue or paid off.
Good for you. It's a shame you appear to have learned nothing while you were there.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Media freak
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#1307 - 2015-09-02 07:39:13 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:

PS; Your insistence highsec is safer than your protected little pocket of sov, is just such a clear indication - We aren't playing the same game.
(although, if you were to go to highsec right now, you would be safe - there are more Goons in highsec ganking than there are in nul)




I would like to see a null sec pve ignore entire dessy gangs that land on him, cause thats what you do in high sec.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1308 - 2015-09-02 08:56:43 UTC
Media freak wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:

PS; Your insistence highsec is safer than your protected little pocket of sov, is just such a clear indication - We aren't playing the same game.
(although, if you were to go to highsec right now, you would be safe - there are more Goons in highsec ganking than there are in nul)




I would like to see a null sec pve ignore entire dessy gangs that land on him, cause thats what you do in high sec.


Aside from the fact that it rarely ever happens you ignore several key facts, the biggest being concords very existence.
Media freak
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#1309 - 2015-09-02 16:51:56 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Media freak wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:

PS; Your insistence highsec is safer than your protected little pocket of sov, is just such a clear indication - We aren't playing the same game.
(although, if you were to go to highsec right now, you would be safe - there are more Goons in highsec ganking than there are in nul)




I would like to see a null sec pve ignore entire dessy gangs that land on him, cause thats what you do in high sec.


Aside from the fact that it rarely ever happens you ignore several key facts, the biggest being concords very existence.



High sec has concord to slap around anyone that engages you, you just have to survive till they show up. You can ignore them in high sec if you aren't stupid where as null no one is coming to save you.

High sec is by far the safest place in the game.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#1310 - 2015-09-02 22:07:27 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Again multi quoted to make his bad arguments difficult to address.

I can assure you.. SMA leave The Imperium and move to highsec - They would fail cascade within months. (they won't ever risk actually playing the game - regardless of where in

"Little nobodies" - Presuming to know more than you do, once again shows just how inept you really are.
I suppose you are "a somebody" - oh wait, your a Goon pet - Of course I'm wrong and jealous of you .
I need to walk away for 5 mins, laughing this much hurts.




Adapt - become adjusted to new conditions.
Yes that is exactly what the imperium did, they got bigger to ensure less chance of actually engaging in game mechanics as intended.



What I learnt from my time in the CFC - IS exactly how bad groups like it are for the game.


My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1311 - 2015-09-02 22:52:11 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Again multi quoted to make his bad arguments difficult to address.

I can assure you.. SMA leave The Imperium and move to highsec - They would fail cascade within months. (they won't ever risk actually playing the game - regardless of where in

"Little nobodies" - Presuming to know more than you do, once again shows just how inept you really are.
I suppose you are "a somebody" - oh wait, your a Goon pet - Of course I'm wrong and jealous of you .
I need to walk away for 5 mins, laughing this much hurts.

Adapt - become adjusted to new conditions.
Yes that is exactly what the imperium did, they got bigger to ensure less chance of actually engaging in game mechanics as intended.

What I learnt from my time in the CFC - IS exactly how bad groups like it are for the game.
Good lord man. What the hell did the Imperium do to you to make you so incredibly butthurt? I mean seriously, reread this from a neutral standpoint (if you are able) and see how insanely grr it is.

Long story short though mate, there's all types in this game, and you sitting around crying that we exist won't change that.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#1312 - 2015-09-03 12:27:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Sgt Ocker
Lucas Kell wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Again multi quoted to make his bad arguments difficult to address.

I can assure you.. SMA leave The Imperium and move to highsec - They would fail cascade within months. (they won't ever risk actually playing the game - regardless of where in

"Little nobodies" - Presuming to know more than you do, once again shows just how inept you really are.
I suppose you are "a somebody" - oh wait, your a Goon pet - Of course I'm wrong and jealous of you .
I need to walk away for 5 mins, laughing this much hurts.

Adapt - become adjusted to new conditions.
Yes that is exactly what the imperium did, they got bigger to ensure less chance of actually engaging in game mechanics as intended.

What I learnt from my time in the CFC - IS exactly how bad groups like it are for the game.
Good lord man. What the hell did the Imperium do to you to make you so incredibly butthurt? I mean seriously, reread this from a neutral standpoint (if you are able) and see how insanely grr it is.

Long story short though mate, there's all types in this game, and you sitting around crying that we exist won't change that.

Not crying at all. Just voicing my opinion, which I believe I am entitled to.

The Imperium is bad for the game. Any large dominating group who exploits game mechanics to remain all but invulnerable would be just as bad.

Neutral standpoint - Ok lets look at it from a neutral standpoint.
You have a multi player online game; One large dominating group who exploit game mechanics to ensure its members are all but invulnerable to normal game play has evolved..
From a neutral standpoint - Not knowing anything else about the game - Is that group good for the game?

There is a huge difference to pushing game mechanics to win fights and exploiting them so as to not engage in normal game play.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1313 - 2015-09-03 12:45:50 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Not crying at all. Just voicing my opinion, which I believe I am entitled to.
Of course you are, but it's still coming across as crying.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
The Imperium is bad for the game. Any large dominating group who exploits game mechanics to remain all but invulnerable would be just as bad.
Objectively wrong. Large groups such as ours are a good part of the reason that EVE is as widely known as it is. No game mechanics are being exploited, and we're certainly nowhere close to invulnerable. In addition, most of the changes that have made things more difficult for us have been driven by us.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Neutral standpoint - Ok lets look at it from a neutral standpoint.
You have a multi player online game; One large dominating group who exploit game mechanics to ensure its members are all but invulnerable to normal game play has evolved..
From a neutral standpoint - Not knowing anything about the game - Is that group good for the game?
But that's not neutral, since you're claiming multiple things that are false. Game mechanics aren't being exploited and the group isn't even close to invulnerable. Effectively what is happening is a group of paying customers are working together (as is actively encouraged) to achieve more than other groups, to be winning so to speak. In all MMOs, there are groups and players who outperform all others. The only thing that makes EVE different is that this portion of the game is highly competitive.

Imagine it's a team deathmatch. Our team is working together, while your team is split into little groups and trying to do your own thing. It's neither our fault nor the games that you refuse to do what you need to win. You want to compete, but you refuse to work with others and instead think the mechanics should force us to split up. It's not going to happen. If you can't handle that, move on.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1314 - 2015-09-03 13:48:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Lucas Kell wrote:
Objectively wrong. Large groups such as ours are a good part of the reason that EVE is as widely known as it is. No game mechanics are being exploited, and we're certainly nowhere close to invulnerable. In addition, most of the changes that have made things more difficult for us have been driven by us.

Objectively right if there were many of that size. There are not. In the middle of last year, 2014, this opinion could have counted as right as there were still people capable of opposing CFC (kind of), as numbers were not as important. Now however, raw numbers are more important than a couple of good players in order to obliterate sov or hold sov.

That these changes make anything more difficult for you is more than questionable. I go so far as to call this opinion rubbish. The changes introduced, in particular Aegis Sov, are tailor-made for entities with large numbers of players. No ceptor ban from ELing, no limitation to BC or similar things can change that fact.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1315 - 2015-09-03 14:32:34 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Again multi quoted to make his bad arguments difficult to address.

I can assure you.. SMA leave The Imperium and move to highsec - They would fail cascade within months. (they won't ever risk actually playing the game - regardless of where in

"Little nobodies" - Presuming to know more than you do, once again shows just how inept you really are.
I suppose you are "a somebody" - oh wait, your a Goon pet - Of course I'm wrong and jealous of you .
I need to walk away for 5 mins, laughing this much hurts.

Adapt - become adjusted to new conditions.
Yes that is exactly what the imperium did, they got bigger to ensure less chance of actually engaging in game mechanics as intended.

What I learnt from my time in the CFC - IS exactly how bad groups like it are for the game.
Good lord man. What the hell did the Imperium do to you to make you so incredibly butthurt? I mean seriously, reread this from a neutral standpoint (if you are able) and see how insanely grr it is.

Long story short though mate, there's all types in this game, and you sitting around crying that we exist won't change that.

Not crying at all. Just voicing my opinion, which I believe I am entitled to.

The Imperium is bad for the game. Any large dominating group who exploits game mechanics to remain all but invulnerable would be just as bad.

Neutral standpoint - Ok lets look at it from a neutral standpoint.
You have a multi player online game; One large dominating group who exploit game mechanics to ensure its members are all but invulnerable to normal game play has evolved..
From a neutral standpoint - Not knowing anything else about the game - Is that group good for the game?

There is a huge difference to pushing game mechanics to win fights and exploiting them so as to not engage in normal game play.


This is just coming across as grr gons. Your irrational hatred for an organisation is why your opinion should be ignored simply because you can't give honest feedback. We are trying to tell CCP where the problems are with the new Sov mechanics so they can make the system as fun as possible while also being "goon proof". No matter what we say you will be against it simply because of the alliance ticker.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1316 - 2015-09-03 14:38:44 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Objectively wrong. Large groups such as ours are a good part of the reason that EVE is as widely known as it is. No game mechanics are being exploited, and we're certainly nowhere close to invulnerable. In addition, most of the changes that have made things more difficult for us have been driven by us.

Objectively right if there were many of that size. There are not. In the middle of last year, 2014, this opinion could have counted as right as there were still people capable of opposing CFC (kind of), as numbers were not as important. Now however, raw numbers are more important than a couple of good players in order to obliterate sov or hold sov.

That these changes make anything more difficult for you is more than questionable. I go so far as to call this opinion rubbish. The changes introduced, in particular Aegis Sov, are tailor-made for entities with large numbers of players. No ceptor ban from ELing, no limitation to BC or similar things can change that fact.


Fact is that over 90% of eve is either neutral to us or hostile. That you cannot organise yourselves or figure out how to use this new Sov to your advantage is not our fault.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#1317 - 2015-09-03 14:50:53 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Not crying at all. Just voicing my opinion, which I believe I am entitled to.
Of course you are, but it's still coming across as crying.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
The Imperium is bad for the game. Any large dominating group who exploits game mechanics to remain all but invulnerable would be just as bad.
Objectively wrong. Large groups such as ours are a good part of the reason that EVE is as widely known as it is. No game mechanics are being exploited, and we're certainly nowhere close to invulnerable. In addition, most of the changes that have made things more difficult for us have been driven by us.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Neutral standpoint - Ok lets look at it from a neutral standpoint.
You have a multi player online game; One large dominating group who exploit game mechanics to ensure its members are all but invulnerable to normal game play has evolved..
From a neutral standpoint - Not knowing anything about the game - Is that group good for the game?
But that's not neutral, since you're claiming multiple things that are false. Game mechanics aren't being exploited and the group isn't even close to invulnerable. Effectively what is happening is a group of paying customers are working together (as is actively encouraged) to achieve more than other groups, to be winning so to speak. In all MMOs, there are groups and players who outperform all others. The only thing that makes EVE different is that this portion of the game is highly competitive.

Imagine it's a team deathmatch. Our team is working together, while your team is split into little groups and trying to do your own thing. It's neither our fault nor the games that you refuse to do what you need to win. You want to compete, but you refuse to work with others and instead think the mechanics should force us to split up. It's not going to happen. If you can't handle that, move on.

Ok, you see it how you like.
You obviously know my intentions and what I mean far better than I do.

LOL team deathmatch - You really are off with the pixies aren't you. TDM's have rules, limits on group sizes etc - Your group would not be able to enter as a whole. It would need to reduce in size to compete. I for years played a game where TDM was part of daily game play, team sizes were limited to 100 and they were a lot of fun. Developers removed the ability for groups to form into large alliances (alliance sizes were capped at 500 or 5 clans with a maximum of 100 members in each) because they found large dominating groups hindered normal game play. When they removed large alliances they lost a lot of players but as word spread that the large groups had been disbanded, player numbers grew even higher. When I left the server was averaging 50k players online per day. There are something like 30 servers all over the world and the one I played was one of the smallest population wise. (before you ask, I no longer play because they moved to a full on pay to win model)(which was nearly as bad as when the server had 2 large dominating groups, who didn't fight "each other")

And the "you vs the rest" attitude you presume is exactly why such a large group is bad for Eve. One mega group lording it over all others (most of whom chose not to be "just another one" in the blob) is not playing the game.

Look up what exploit means - It is EXACTLY what your group does. And for the record, nothing I said was false, your group is "all but invulnerable" (which is what I said) you push mechanics to their limit (exploiting them to their fullest).

By your logic, I won Eve for four years (the time I was part of the CFC) - Then realized - I wanted to play eve and moved on.
There are groups within the CFC many would like to fight but can't because they have so many allies - Everyone loses out on content because the dinosaur is too big for the average group to tackle.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1318 - 2015-09-03 14:55:18 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Objectively right if there were many of that size. There are not. In the middle of last year, 2014, this opinion could have counted as right as there were still people capable of opposing CFC (kind of), as numbers were not as important. Now however, raw numbers are more important than a couple of good players in order to obliterate sov or hold sov.
There are still plenty of people who can oppose us, they just won;t work together to do it. That's not our problem.

Rivr Luzade wrote:
That these changes make anything more difficult for you is more than questionable. I go so far as to call this opinion rubbish. The changes introduced, in particular Aegis Sov, are tailor-made for entities with large numbers of players. No ceptor ban from ELing, no limitation to BC or similar things can change that fact.
These changes don't, but then we didn't push for these. We are actively against these changes. The new sov system makes it easier to defend and less appealing to generate content for others.

The types of changes I was talking about are changes such as the nerf to drone assist, and the power projection reduction, both of which negatively impacted us.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1319 - 2015-09-03 15:05:16 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Fact is that over 90% of eve is either neutral to us or hostile. That you cannot organise yourselves or figure out how to use this new Sov to your advantage is not our fault.

You include the wrong numbers in your argument. Not High sec people are who matter, it is people living in Null sec. People who live in High sec, as you very well know and as it has been confirmed by you and Lucas Kell are not interested in risk for one part, and for the other part not in Null sec in the first place. People who live in Null sec already are who can oppose you, and there are certainly not 90% of people able to oppose you. Including people who have no interest in Null sec life or politics in the calculation is a cheap trick.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1320 - 2015-09-03 15:05:46 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
LOL team deathmatch - You really are off with the pixies aren't you. TDM's have rules, limits on group sizes etc - Your group would not be able to enter as a whole. It would need to reduce in size to compete.
Except of course than in EVE, there is no player cap. And if you consider the whole game to be a TDM, then the anti-Imperium side is FAR bigger than the Imperium side. You're simply not organising yourselves in such a way that you can win. That's the point you are missing here. The problem isn't that CCP aren;t artificially limiting group sizes, the problem is that people like yourself would rather whine for CCP to step in and change the game rather than getting your allies together and breaking us up yourselves.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
And the "you vs the rest" attitude you presume is exactly why such a large group is bad for Eve. One mega group lording it over all others (most of whom chose not to be "just another one" in the blob) is not playing the game.
I beg to differ. I enjoy the game the way I play it, so do thousands of others. Even our enemies tend to enjoy what they are doing. We're no worse for EVE than players like yourself who want to win but refuse to put in the effort to do so.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Look up what exploit means - It is EXACTLY what your group does. And for the record, nothing I said was false, your group is "all but invulnerable" (which is what I said) you push mechanics to their limit (exploiting them to their fullest).
In the context of games, exploit has negative connotations which is what you were gunning for with your post. Had you truly been objective you'd had said "using mechanics to their maximum benefit". But you didn't. And no, again, we're not invulnerable. You're simply not doing what you need to to defeat us.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
By your logic, I won Eve for four years (the time I was part of the CFC) - Then realized - I wanted to play eve and moved on.
Good for you. When is the rest of that moving on coming or are you going to sit and cry about the blobs until the end of time?

Sgt Ocker wrote:
There are groups within the CFC many would like to fight but can't because they have so many allies - Everyone loses out on content because the dinosaur is too big for the average group to tackle.
If they don't like what the Imperium offers, they can leave, noone is stopping them. I have no problem getting fights when I want them.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.