These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

4.29 billion reasons why CCP loves the Goons lol...
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cpt Roghie
Chemical Invasion Co.
#61 - 2012-05-04 13:12:37 UTC
I still can't understand why people have so much against Goonswarm. They're hilarious.

This could be fun.
TheBlueMonkey
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2012-05-04 13:35:21 UTC
Cpt Roghie wrote:
I still can't understand why people have so much against Goonswarm. They're hilarious.


They're a big groups of players who have gotten together and worked towards a common goal, taking over space and seizing tech moons\CSM seats and in game sway through an amount of hard work and coordination.


That's wrong because Johnny empire and his 6 friends can't get a tech moon and QQ.


I'm not a fan of the goons, I don't like the whole "break your game" aspect of things but then conflict is what makes eve interesting.
flakeys
Doomheim
#63 - 2012-05-04 13:40:04 UTC
Rico Minali wrote:
Thomas Kreshant wrote:
Rico Minali wrote:
Thomas Kreshant wrote:
Zagdul wrote:
It costs me 54billion isk a month to run my alliance's infrastructure and logistics.

As it stands, an empire griefer alliance can shut that down for pocket change. A few dudes looking to kill unguarded ships who don't fire back isn't what war declarations intention was when they were introduced.

The people who are upset are the ones who declare war against entities to grief their pilots, not actually fight them in empire.


This fix to a broken mechanic is long over due.




Maybe you should guard your infrastructure sending escorts along with your haulers to protect them, seriously you expect high sec to be safe so you can carebear along happily picking up the shopping?



Last time I went on an FA logistics escort we had around a hundred combat ships, didnt see any war targets coming at us for 'good fights'.
If you dont know what you are talking about, its best not to talk.


Lick Windows much?

Firstly what does good fights have to do with anything?? We're not talking about 'good fights', we're talking about Zagdul crying that that unguarded haulers were getting prevented by a couple dudes in highsec, so either those hundred combat ships are afk or you're not talking about the day to day hauling in high sec.

Now it doesn't matter who you are but if you want to be able to buy crap in highsec and move back to your lowsec/0.0 base then you need to be flying escort and guarding the damn ships all the way through.

Highsec isn't safe for the little 1 man corp noob miner sitting in a belt and it should be for the 1000+ strong alliance in 0.0 who wants risk free empire hauling.

So feel free to take your own advise.


I told you to stop talking so stop now please before you embarass yourself more.


He had you by the balls there eh rico , come on admit it .

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
Cpt Roghie
Chemical Invasion Co.
#64 - 2012-05-04 13:43:44 UTC
TheBlueMonkey wrote:
Cpt Roghie wrote:
I still can't understand why people have so much against Goonswarm. They're hilarious.


They're a big groups of players who have gotten together and worked towards a common goal, taking over space and seizing tech moons\CSM seats and in game sway through an amount of hard work and coordination.


That's wrong because Johnny empire and his 6 friends can't get a tech moon and QQ.


I'm not a fan of the goons, I don't like the whole "break your game" aspect of things but then conflict is what makes eve interesting.


and here I was, thinking it had something to do with how stupid others are to fall for their scams Roll

This could be fun.
flakeys
Doomheim
#65 - 2012-05-04 13:57:53 UTC
Cpt Roghie wrote:
TheBlueMonkey wrote:
Cpt Roghie wrote:
I still can't understand why people have so much against Goonswarm. They're hilarious.


They're a big groups of players who have gotten together and worked towards a common goal, taking over space and seizing tech moons\CSM seats and in game sway through an amount of hard work and coordination.


That's wrong because Johnny empire and his 6 friends can't get a tech moon and QQ.


I'm not a fan of the goons, I don't like the whole "break your game" aspect of things but then conflict is what makes eve interesting.


and here I was, thinking it had something to do with how stupid others are to fall for their scams Roll


Or that they behave like total ***** ingame and on forum .... good we now know the REAL reason.

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
Cpt Roghie
Chemical Invasion Co.
#66 - 2012-05-04 13:59:57 UTC
flakeys wrote:
Cpt Roghie wrote:
TheBlueMonkey wrote:
Cpt Roghie wrote:
I still can't understand why people have so much against Goonswarm. They're hilarious.


They're a big groups of players who have gotten together and worked towards a common goal, taking over space and seizing tech moons\CSM seats and in game sway through an amount of hard work and coordination.


That's wrong because Johnny empire and his 6 friends can't get a tech moon and QQ.


I'm not a fan of the goons, I don't like the whole "break your game" aspect of things but then conflict is what makes eve interesting.


and here I was, thinking it had something to do with how stupid others are to fall for their scams Roll


Or that they behave like total ***** ingame and on forum .... good we now know the REAL reason.



Pssst... Guys I think he's a little bit mad. Where did they touch you son? :(

This could be fun.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#67 - 2012-05-04 14:18:10 UTC
DarthNefarius wrote:
http://www.evenews24.com/2012/05/03/insight-the-other-cost-of-war/

How much does Eve luv your corp?
Please everyone put an end to inflation & declare war on the Goons so the WarDec ISK sink eleminates all inflation Blink

you know they already announced they plan to cap the maximum price right

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#68 - 2012-05-04 14:36:16 UTC
Schalac wrote:
Zagdul wrote:
It costs me 54billion isk a month to run my alliance's infrastructure and logistics.

As it stands, an empire griefer alliance can shut that down for pocket change. A few dudes looking to kill unguarded ships who don't fire back isn't what war declarations intention was when they were introduced.

The people who are upset are the ones who declare war against entities to grief their pilots, not actually fight them in empire.


This fix to a broken mechanic is long over due.


How is it anyones fault but your own if you are going to move items unguarded? This is why we send gun trucks with supply convoys and why submarines would flank transport ships moving goods between continents.


If something expensive is being moved, we guard it. However, suggesting it's good game design to do this daily makes you look really mentally challenged.

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Amity Lane
Hek Mining Association
#69 - 2012-05-04 14:44:55 UTC
Saia Tae Arragosa wrote:
They don't need a wardec to fight Goons, all they have to do is fly into Goon held space and they can fight them all they want - no wardec needed.

I see this argument all the time in discussions involving the wardec system and null sec corps. It's horribly, horribly flawed.

Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao have struggled to arrange a fight for years, but I've not once seen anyone suggest that Pacquiao just show up at Mayweather's front door and pick a fight with him amidst his entourage. To do so would be suicidal. No Empire corp/alliance is stupid enough to attempt such a thing (or at least I would hope not).

People get all caught up in arguments about what is "real PvP" and how Empire PvP is "cheap ganking", etc. and I just find that odd. It seems that most large alliances want to force everyone into outmoded phalanx-style warfare where all lines are clearly delineated and they quickly degenerate into simple battles-by-numbers that are decided by simple attrition. It brings to mind 18th-century Imperial military thinking: "Let's have both sides march toward one another in formation, stop in a neutral field, and on an agreed-upon signal begin firing until one side has no men left." That's all that is acceptable? I've never heard anyone claim that the American Revolution, Vietnam, Iraq, The Troubles, Darfur, and the like weren't "real". I guess it could be funny, though..."OMG NERF CASTRO STUPID PUBBIE CAREBEAR GANKED MY BATISTA NO FAIR."

It's funny how the larger alliances all seem to support asymmetric warfare in situations they instigate (the recent Burn Jita campaign being an excellent example) but don't believe the reverse should apply to them (terrorism, guerilla skirmish wars, etc).
Ana Vyr
Vyral Technologies
#70 - 2012-05-04 14:49:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Ana Vyr
Thomas Kreshant wrote:

Maybe you should guard your infrastructure sending escorts along with your haulers to protect them, seriously you expect high sec to be safe so you can carebear along happily picking up the shopping?


Why does every option for being able to function in this game involve some crappy gameplay option for someone?

Who the hell wants to guard haulers or miners...that sucks.

Why do people have to suffer ****** duties like this to be able to just run a corporation's day to day functions like logistics and mining?

Stop asking for more of this kind of thing.

It's like you aren't allowed to have fun in EvE unless somebody is paying a price in terms of boring gameplay. You could include mining in that too, to be honest.

To achieve anything substancial in EvE, somebody has to suffer. Is this the equivalent of grinding in EvE?
Rekon X
Doomheim
#71 - 2012-05-04 14:54:23 UTC
Or you could just ally like the rest of the server.

http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Clusterfuck_Coalition_(Player_coalition)

I don't care what you think, if you ever think at all.
Twulf
Purple Void Corporation
LinkNet
#72 - 2012-05-04 14:56:16 UTC
Zagdul wrote:
Maybe now, empire griefer corps will put together proper fleets, come to null sec and fight us for real instead of hiding behind broken empire mechanics.


So let me get this correct. Now people have to play the game on your terms instead of playing the game the way they want? And you still think that EVE is a Sandbox game? Priceless.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#73 - 2012-05-04 15:23:26 UTC
Twulf wrote:
Zagdul wrote:
Maybe now, empire griefer corps will put together proper fleets, come to null sec and fight us for real instead of hiding behind broken empire mechanics.


So let me get this correct. Now people have to play the game on your terms instead of playing the game the way they want? And you still think that EVE is a Sandbox game? Priceless.

part of the joy of a sandbox game is kicking sand in your face until you get down on all fours, let us put the saddle on, and ride you around like a donkey

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Herping yourDerp
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#74 - 2012-05-04 15:30:11 UTC
All they have to do is have a modifier of "if alliance has sovernty war dec cost is a straight 200mil
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#75 - 2012-05-04 15:40:34 UTC
Keep the prices high and GTFO of highsec. Whats to worry about anymore...no need to wardec and you will rarely if ever get wardeced in null or low where its not needed.
Pinky Feldman
Amarrian Vengeance
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#76 - 2012-05-04 15:52:58 UTC
So lemme get this straight. Not even a week after Burn Jita, the CFC is complaining that its unfair and poor game design that there is a game mechanic that allows groups like us to kill their freighters in highsec, while also stating that we don't concern them at all despite posting more than any other group about how highsec wars need to be fixed.

Seriously, for a group that lives in nullsec, you spend more time whining about war decs than EVE-Uni. I'm sorry that groups like us prevent highsec from being totally safe like you apparently feel it should be. Please, tell me more about how the only time highsec logistics disruption becomes a valid game tactic is when you guys do it.

The moar you cry the less you pee
Ur235
Appetite 4 Destruction
#77 - 2012-05-04 16:13:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Ur235
I like it tbh as long as CCP sorts the trial accounts and alt accounts thing out its a great idea. Wars should mean something and be for a proper reason not just to camp a gate or a station so we can kill a 30bill isk freighter with no resistance whatsoever. And if they do come and fight us we can just dock up not fight until they go away and get back to killing freighters and unlucky sods who end up in the wrong system at the wrong time because thats the only reason we wardeced them for.

It is worrying the effect it could have on smaller less expensive corps and alliances though, but at least they will be able to hire people to fight for them and alongside them. Never know some corps might pop up and do it for free. Also its worrying how RVB will be able to keep functioning if there wardecs are costing 2 bill or more a week at least they declare war on each other for good fights

hmm
xavier69
Stark Enterprises LLC
#78 - 2012-05-04 17:30:24 UTC  |  Edited by: xavier69
base cost of war 50m starting plus 500k per person x1 = 50.5m


Example #1

50M starting plus 500k per person (Goonswarm) = 4.297 Billion to war decree

Example #2
50M starting plus 500k per person (xxdeathxx) = 789.5m to war decree

Example #3 small corp
50M starting plus 500k per person (12-man corp)= 56m to war decree

This clearly favors the larger alliances and is bordering on CHEATING by ccp , i dont see how this fixed the decree shielding ?
Clearly you are giving the largest alliances the ability to bully around smaller corps with no chance of war them back.

Example 1#
Goonswarm attacks my 12 man corp. they don't care they didn't even war me cause they dont care about standing ext, for my corp to war them and fight legit with out taking standing hits i have to cough up 4.2b or become crinmals

Wow CCP do your employees even have brains anymore or is how can we make more $$ #1 in any dev choice?

How many plex are you forcasting to increase in sales due to these war decree changes... exactly you people are SHAMELESS

CCP hasn't had a balanced or good idea sense dominion most of CCP choices are based on $$ not the game well being so this kind of idiot trash from devs i have come to expect.

I understand why
ccp makes the most money off the largest alliances so keeping them around means more profit margin for CCP

In ending this is BULL the largest alliances in the game do no deserve more advantages
Ur235
Appetite 4 Destruction
#79 - 2012-05-04 17:35:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Ur235
xavier69 wrote:
base cost of war 50m starting plus 500k per person x1 = 50.5m


Example #1

50M starting plus 500k per person (Goonswarm) = 4.297 Billion to war decree

Example #2
50M starting plus 500k per person (xxdeathxx) = 789.5m to war decree

Example #3 small corp
50M starting plus 500k per person (12-man corp)= 56m to war decree

This clearly favors the larger alliances and is bordering on CHEATING by ccp , i dont see how this fixed the decree shielding ?

CCP hasnt had a balanced or good idea sense dominion most of CCP choices are based on $$ not the game well being so this kind of idiot trash from devs i have come to expect.

I understand why
ccp makes the most money off the largest alliances so keeping them around means more profit margin for CCP


Do you ohnestly think a bunch of ganks on loan pilots in high sec are really going to make the rest of the members of the alliance quit? (especially these much larger alliances) Get a grip man

Stop with the OMG CCP wants to keep so and so members for money bullshit

hmm
Mordecai LXXXIII
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#80 - 2012-05-04 17:35:47 UTC
Andski wrote:
look at these scrubs who think that wardecs from jita 4-4 camping "mercenaries" are a concern to nullsec alliances




It's kinda cute.