Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
sg3s
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 12:41:00 -
[31]
Originally by: CCP Incognito
Originally by: Raeni Le'sex Are stations going to have a massive upkeep cost post-dominion?
If thats the case and you have more stations than you can manage, then start selling systems before you are forced to abandon them.
I'm sure there are penty of smaller alliances willing to move in.
I personally like the new dominion changes, it forces you land grabbers to only claim what you can maintain.
No Outposts don't add to the upkeep costs. You only pay upkeep on systems with Sov claimed. Then the basic cost if fairly reasonable. The costs go up the more you upgrade the system. But planting a Hub and Cyno jammer upgrade is not honorably expensive.
I get the point where outposts will not increase upkeep (isk) costs... But what the other people are saying is that a station takes a lot more to keep it 'safe' meaning defenses like cynojammers and pilots. Just not defending a station is unthinkable since as pointed out that would giving the enemy a base of operations. Giving it so an other corperation to defend is probably not as reliable and you might not trust the people (they might turn on the alliance).
I think the OP here has a good point here and I see how the next patch could go horribly wrong due to how a station is completely seperate from the sov system... Maybe an upgrade to link the station to sov would be in place? Like station invul until upgrade is destroyed/sov is taken?
|
Evelgrivion
Ignatium. Aggressive Dissonance
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 12:47:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Evelgrivion on 02/11/2009 12:49:05 The problem of what to do with items and people inside of stations if they were to be destroyed is an easy one to solve.
All a "destroyed outpost" needs to be is an extension of disabling system services. If enough damage is dealt, every system goes permanently offline. You'd still be able to dock with it, but permissions settings, market orders, etc would all be canceled, and the properties returned to their owner's hangars.
The "when" would take some work, and the question of whether or not outposts should be fixable (and if so, with what requirements) remain unanswered. However, belongings are a non-issue (Aside from the need to write code!).
Why bother making outposts destroyable? Answer: to make people work to use the space they hold. People wait out timers and shoot stationary objects to earn most space, due to the huge collection of outposts that have been built over the years. If outposts are destroyable, an even stronger mechanic for limiting the territory spread of alliances than the ISK sink tactic emerges.
|
|
CCP Incognito
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 14:16:00 -
[33]
Originally by: sg3s I get the point where outposts will not increase upkeep (isk) costs... But what the other people are saying is that a station takes a lot more to keep it 'safe' meaning defenses like cynojammers and pilots. Just not defending a station is unthinkable since as pointed out that would giving the enemy a base of operations. Giving it so an other corperation to defend is probably not as reliable and you might not trust the people (they might turn on the alliance).
I think the OP here has a good point here and I see how the next patch could go horribly wrong due to how a station is completely seperate from the sov system... Maybe an upgrade to link the station to sov would be in place? Like station invul until upgrade is destroyed/sov is taken?
We have changed this slightly in the last week, you can check out sisi to see how it works, and a Dev blog is in the works about it.
|
|
Cadde
Gallente 221st Century Warfare
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 14:36:00 -
[34]
Originally by: CCP Incognito
Let me count the ways this would fail. A) everything gets ejected, the attackers would pick through for there stuff then smart bomb. Scorched earth...
How is this different from finding yourself DEEP in enemy space after they have taken the outpost from you? Also, if you wasn't docked when it switched hands then your stuff is in there and you can't reach them anyways. Sure, you can try and sell them to the enemy but they might just go "HAHA, your loss".
Originally by: CCP Incognito B) clones could now be in a station where security status of the character is that he is KOS by concord.
Concord doesn't attack pods.
Originally by: CCP Incognito C) It will cause allot of Emo rage. "I LOST EVERYTHING, I QUIT!!!" we do kinda like to avoid people quitting :)
In the current mechanic it's the same thing. They can't reach their stuff or sell it to the enemy hence they can't do anything with it. If they emo rage quit because of that then they never wanted to play eve anyways. Also, it's pretty dumb to store all your stuff in an outpost and leave it there for days without logging in. I took a summer break from eve, i had a bunch of battleships in an outpost and when i came back my corp and alliance had left the region due to high pressure from our enemies on the borders. So i returned with no chance to retrieve those items. I just thought to myself...
"Oh well, some day i might be able to get back to the stuff. And i really don't wanna sell it cheap to my enemies... Obviously"
But luckily enough, a friend of mine who was blue to the enemy had access to the outpost and therefore i sold my stuff to him and he brought it out of there and probably exploded somewhere with it. Fine by me, it wasn't used against my friends and it didn't serve my enemy directly.
In short, i don't see how it's any different from current mechanics. Smart people don't store all their stuff in an outpost in 0.0.
My opinions belong to me, you can't have them!
|
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 14:43:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Terranid Meester on 02/11/2009 14:44:07 I think merely shooting a station to destroy it would not be enough. If you reduce a stations structure to 0 then it shpuld leave a giant station hulk left there full of holes BUT it can be patched up again to a fully working station once more (through industrial means etc).
In order to destroy a station hulk you could either a) shoot it for a few days or b) salvage/mine it to get items inside the station and some of the minerals used to produce the station/outpost back. Think of it as a manmade asteroid. Anyone inside the station at the time of its destruction to a derelict hulk should either be pooded back to empire space (their ships they were in at the time blown to bits, ejected from the hulk as soon as they log in or all of the above (it is 0.0 right so anyone who docked in a 0.0 station knew the risks).
Itmes in the station? Like a ship some (or all?) are destroyed while others are left (in the hulk) for salvagers to claim.
|
Germaldi's Dad
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 15:24:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Aralis It hasn't actually got much to do with bank accounts. It's stations I don't want - stations that were useful and no longer are and I can't get rid of them. Leaving an untended station in one's territory is like leaving a mine in your living room. Forget though for a moment about CVA.
Alliances are being told by CCP - you have too much space - give some up. I think that's unfair and ridiculous. But even accepting it - shouldn't people be allowed to take back their stuff from the space they are giving up?
why dont ye rent those unwanted stations out to your pets or create both a CVA Civillian Alliance (for industrial corps) & the main CVA become the military? it seems to work for Xdeath (legion being military & shadow being industrials) surely that rental income would pay for the sov upkeep
|
Fullmetal Jackass
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 15:55:00 -
[37]
Originally by: CCP Incognito Let me count the ways this would fail. A) everything gets ejected, the attackers would pick through for there stuff then smart bomb. Scorched earth... B) clones could now be in a station where security status of the character is that he is KOS by concord. C) It will cause allot of Emo rage. "I LOST EVERYTHING, I QUIT!!!" we do kinda like to avoid people quitting :)
Well like I say, is there a way to treat a disabled station like a pos array/hangar array or a giant can, or a collection of individual hangars? You can get near it and take stuff out, but not add anything or dock. Is that feasible at all?
As for clones, I don't know exactly how your system works and I'm not a programmer, but shouldn't there be a way to make it so that when you log in at a derelict station you get a pop up warning that says "this station is no longer active, you will not be able to redock once you leave. Clone vats are no longer active". It's been a while but I've lost jump clones at outposts before. Can't you make it work like that but disable all clones? You clone jump out, you can't clone jump back. Maybe every player should have a default med clone location. If for whatever reason his current med clone location becomes invalid, the default becomes his new location.
|
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 16:43:00 -
[38]
Originally by: CCP Incognito Let me count the ways this would fail. A) everything gets ejected, the attackers would pick through for there stuff then smart bomb. Scorched earth... B) clones could now be in a station where security status of the character is that he is KOS by concord. C) It will cause allot of Emo rage. "I LOST EVERYTHING, I QUIT!!!" we do kinda like to avoid people quitting :)
There is already a similar system in place for when players try to log on to an overloaded node: they are allowed to choose a nearby system, and spawn in a random station. All that's needed is an extension of this system that allows a greater choice, possibly with a warning box that appears if people try to spawn in systems where they're KOS to CONCORD / faction navy etc. Stop looking at the limitations of the existing code and think more about how you could change it.
As for people's assets, I think it would be far more workable just to destroy them. Current tenants would have plenty of warning with any reasonable self-destruct mechanism (I propose a 1-week countdown, interruptible only by capture or cancellation), and it would be a further powerful incentive to capture / defend outposts. --- 34.4:1 mineral compression ISRC Racing, Season 7 - schedule |
Aralis
Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 19:07:00 -
[39]
I'm being widely misunderstood. I think deliberately in some cases.
I'm not asking for a change to the game long term. I'm asking for a one off power to takedown/move stations to allow people to adjust their assets for the changes being made by Dominion. Assets/people could be moved with the station or to another station belonging to the owner as designated by them.
|
sg3s
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 19:25:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Aralis I'm being widely misunderstood. I think deliberately in some cases.
I'm not asking for a change to the game long term. I'm asking for a one off power to takedown/move stations to allow people to adjust their assets for the changes being made by Dominion. Assets/people could be moved with the station or to another station belonging to the owner as designated by them.
Well that does make more sense... And even though I might not like it since I am against reducing in space assets that can be acquired, I can see why you would want it... Maybe if it was a very limited option to somehow merge one outpost into another (must be in same region, same racial outpost, build by players etc) it could work... I guess...
Shame you want to just abandon large assets like that though :-/
|
|
Sumelar
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 19:42:00 -
[41]
Originally by: CCP Incognito
I can tell you it won't happen any time SoonÖ. The reason that stations are created during down time is that we we need to do a bunch of SQL magic to make them happen. And the reason that they can't be destroyed is that it would strand all characters that had logged out in the station. They would log back in and the location they are in doesn't exist. So the Server would refuse to load that character, basic sanity check.
Having said that, I would still like to know Why?
Is that really the reason?
Another alliance has conquered the station: all pilots in it are dead, and wake up in their clone.
Owning alliance decides to move it: All pilots log in as pods in the space it used to be in.
I'm no programmer, so maybe that would be tough to implement, but it seems like an easy solution.
|
Sumelar
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 19:48:00 -
[42]
Originally by: CCP Incognito
Let me count the ways this would fail. A) everything gets ejected, the attackers would pick through for there stuff then smart bomb. Scorched earth... B) clones could now be in a station where security status of the character is that he is KOS by concord. C) It will cause allot of Emo rage. "I LOST EVERYTHING, I QUIT!!!" we do kinda like to avoid people quitting :)
A sounds exactly like EVE to me, and last time I checked pilots with -10 have been flying through empire for years in their pods in complete safetly.
And do you really want the people in the C category anyway?
|
sg3s
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:00:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Sumelar loads of crap divided over two posts
Really buddy cool down. Have you ever lived in 0.0? You can't just put people in space in their pods with everything they had in the stations gone. Sure enough that would probably be easy to implement... but let me put it this way...
How would you like it if your house you worked bled and cried for, including the garage with 30 sport cars, seem to have VANISHED into thin air after you come back from a weekend vacation?
Right. If you have any sense then by now you should see your mistake. Also, no you're not a programmer obviously, not even close probably. Anything that is hardwired in the database will take effort to change... All items have their location pretty much hardwired. Checking where characters are and changing the location of those, not so easy..
Come back if you have something more constructive to say, this is eve yes, but there is a limit to how cruel you can be before players will just leave the game because nothing gets done or everything gets destroyed.
|
mchief117
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:35:00 -
[44]
OK i have a basic under standing of what he is asking but to me it seam like a ow shoot we have the wrong outpost. why not at least add the ability to reconfigure them to the other 3 types available. if you accidentally set up a gallente HQ you could say pay half the cost for the mimimar factory and a few DT later its built , you would need the BP for this of course.
|
Sumelar
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 22:29:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Sumelar on 02/11/2009 22:30:13 Edited by: Sumelar on 02/11/2009 22:29:44
Originally by: sg3s
How would you like it if your house you worked bled and cried for, including the garage with 30 sport cars, seem to have VANISHED into thin air after you come back from a weekend vacation?
Which can happen already if someone conquers it while you're on the beach.
And everything takes effort to change, I never said otherwise. If they were afraid of that, the game would be the same as it was in 2003.
Think by now you can see your mistake.
|
ServantOfMask
Minmatar Eye Bee Em
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 23:10:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Aralis I'm being widely misunderstood. I think deliberately in some cases.
I'm not asking for a change to the game long term. I'm asking for a one off power to takedown/move stations to allow people to adjust their assets for the changes being made by Dominion. Assets/people could be moved with the station or to another station belonging to the owner as designated by them.
nope i get you 100%.. your alliance over-extended it self lightyears beyond what you are capable of come dominion and now you want a one time, get-out-of-**** free card. the only reason you were able to extend this far was on the back of a broken sov system.
you knew the risks of dropping all those outposts, you knew that you'd have to keep defending them until node-armageddon.
either sell them, suck it up or go to empire and let them burn behind you. "Misina Arlath
GIRL = Guy In Real Life MMORPG = Many Men Online Role Playing Girls." |
sg3s
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 14:13:00 -
[47]
Originally by: ServantOfMask
Originally by: Aralis I'm being widely misunderstood. I think deliberately in some cases.
I'm not asking for a change to the game long term. I'm asking for a one off power to takedown/move stations to allow people to adjust their assets for the changes being made by Dominion. Assets/people could be moved with the station or to another station belonging to the owner as designated by them.
nope i get you 100%.. your alliance over-extended it self lightyears beyond what you are capable of come dominion and now you want a one time, get-out-of-**** free card. the only reason you were able to extend this far was on the back of a broken sov system.
you knew the risks of dropping all those outposts, you knew that you'd have to keep defending them until node-armageddon.
either sell them, suck it up or go to empire and let them burn behind you.
lol, wrong, CVA was able to take and hold their space because it's the most worthless space in eve.
|
quygen
Minmatar Acting Neutral
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 15:09:00 -
[48]
Damn, you had enhough isk to add your own piece to the game. You can always say, look those are station you/your alliance have build. No-one can take that away.
I wish I had the isk, just to deploy a station. I would mind where or for whom. I added a piece of game, THAT should be the honor of building a station.
Q
Please resize your sig to a maximum of 400 x 120 - Mitnal
^ You seen it CCP =) Now go fix! |
ServantOfMask
Minmatar Eye Bee Em
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 23:09:00 -
[49]
Originally by: sg3s
lol, wrong, CVA was able to take and hold their space because it's the most worthless space in eve.
well that certainly helped, they did fight off a few wannabe nullsec starters. credit where credit is due... nobody stays in ANY nullsec forever without fighting for it at some point.
tbh i don't see the issue here since CVA has alot of traffic they should be able to tax the **** out of their visitors. go from NRDS to NTSI (No Treaty/Taxes Shoot It) not to mention that all those neutral visitors ratting/mining/plexing/pvp'ing will help prop up your systems stats and thats alot less grinding you and your taxable blues have to do. "Misina Arlath
GIRL = Guy In Real Life MMORPG = Many Men Online Role Playing Girls." |
Jugon
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 23:41:00 -
[50]
Read the thread, and this is what I got out of it ...
1) CVA has Mass Numbers of SOV'd Systems. 2) CVA has Mass Numbers of Outposts 3) While currently logistically possible, post dominion it probably won't be. 4) CVA planning ahead for dominion realizes that they will probably have to give up some of these outposts 5) CVA doesn't want another alliance moving in and using something they had to do all the work on putting there, therefor they don't "need" the outpost anymore and want to take it down/move it etc. (which is somewhat understandable)
6) From a CCP Employee , removing Outposts is currently not an option. Possible sometime in the future, but not before dominion.
7) did I miss anything?
I'm not in CVA, but I would think that if this is an issue for CVA a more appropriate approach for the time being would be to Check with other Alliances that they have NAP's with, and see what the possibilities of some those outposts being used by them are.....
|
|
Wil Stryker
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 04:13:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Wil Stryker on 04/11/2009 04:15:08 So, the only reason I have read about why outpost's cant be dismantled is
jump clones ( can be moved now) clones (can be moved now) Logged characters Players gear.
Could you implement a 1 month countdown that is visible in space above the outpost that the outpost is in deconstruction mode and ALL material held within its pod hangers will be destroyed.
You then issue an eve mail to every character that has jump clone or clone there of the impending destruction.
Any JC's or clones will be automatically moved as they do now when an outpost owner cancels your clone.
With people not being logged in, is it possible to send an eve mail to ALL characters on that account notifying of the intended destruction of the outpost in x days. People may have alts in an outpost that they don't play too often. Failure to move them will result in a podding and a quick trip to your designated clone bay. If your KOS in that region then you pod to where you are not. The joys of being an outlaw.
If you notify them that once the countdown timer has elapsed that EVERYTHING held in the outpost will be destroyed then people may not put all their eggs in one basket.
Ohh and CVA, I'm sure UK will take a few systems of your hands for you. :)
|
Yon Krum
The Knights Templar R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 05:11:00 -
[52]
Ok, so here's a proposed sequence of tasks, should an outpost be finally destroyed:
1) Disable all station services, without ability to repair (remove their icons from space). 2) Revoke all clone contracts. 3) Cancel all market orders and contracts active from the station, as per normal mechanics (returns items to hangers), and prevent future placement of market sell orders and contracts from the ex-station. 4) "Freeze" corporate offices, preventing them from being added or used for recruitment purposes (in the case of offices) 5) "Freeze" hangers, preventing them from having items added to them (can still use ships in hanger as storage space, however) 6) Clear all docking standing restrictions (free access) 7) Prevent ships that have been aggressed (per the 15-minute logoff aggression timer) from docking with the ex-station. 8) Add a 1-minute docking navigation delay when attempting to "dock" with the destroyed station. 9) Swap the graphics (external and internal) to represent the harrowed hulk of a one-mighty outpost of mankind. Overview icon could be a small rectangle on top and (wreck) triangle on the bottom.
The end result is a 'station' that is functionally unusable as a base except to hide ships in and anything left over from the previous owners' stay. The docking time restrictions are important to prevent a dead station from becoming a haven for ships during combat, while still permitting previous residents to access their stuff should they be able to secure the system. (Navigating by hand into the ruined hulk and sifting the contents of their locker....)
As a conqueror of the region, the question becomes "do I take the station and lock up access" versus "do I destroy it entirely".
Optionally, the station could be salvaged once every 24 hours. Bonus points for dropping free "frozen corpse"-es randomly into hangers and around the station hulk....
There you go: balance between the database pain, and the desire to scourge space clear of old, useless bases. Of course, this would not work on NPC conquerable stations.
--Krum
PS. Doesn't solve the OP's desire to move assets around, but them's the breaks. I disagree entirely that you should be able to pull up an outpost and move it--that's silly. Blowing it up is another matter! --Krum |
Iamien
Caldari Democracy of Klingon Brothers
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 06:11:00 -
[53]
You guys who are bashing CVA and other alliances in their situation need to try and see from their perspective.
When CVA decided to invest in all those outposts, they did it with the knowledge, from CCP, that they would keep them unless they failed to achieve sovereignty under the current system.
The new system, to it's credit, makes taking sovereignty from a much more pragmatic event. With the loss of sovereignty being more pragmatic it puts outposts at an INSANELY higher amount of risk than they were before.
CVA, as well asany other alliance who invested in an outpost because of the security granted by the current system, deserve the right to be considered. CCP is now discouraging alliances from holding space they do not use, at a great detriment to those alliances who invested greatly in the current system.
Only possible workable solution I can provide is to allow the alliance to scuttle the outpost and possibly return a small amount of the base isk sink for placing the outpost(Maybe 10-15 bil).
Scuttling would: Disable all services(Clones can remain but no new contracts allowed) Only allow Docking to player with assets at the station. Disable docking with anything other than a shuttle or pod(Maybe include industrial due to volume of items). Disable Market orders in scuttled station. Disable moving items out of cargo while docked at station.
If this is too much work, simply disable the outpost completely while transferring all player assets(and players) to a neutral concord station designated as a "Outpost Closure Processing Facility" in some system that is accessible to most. The only possible issue I could see is that the system that outpost is in would have to be in at least low-sec as it may contain capitals. This system would be camped 24/7 by pirates if there was only one of them.
It is my opinion that something needs to be done however.
|
Grarr Bexx
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 12:40:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Skulmar
Originally by: AsheraII Simple solution: don't maintain the stations you no longer want? No supplies, no ISK, no nothing.
Station empty. Hostiles come in, take over station. Hostiles have base in your space...
not a really good plan.
Oh no, FIGHTS! God forbid you have to fight. If you don't want to fight, keep the station, but don't whine about the upkeep.
|
Mr Bright
Shade. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 16:32:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Mr Bright on 04/11/2009 16:31:55 On another note! *Adds Ccp incognito to buddy list :3
Just cause of his neat and cool replies :D!
|
Dharh
Gallente Ace Adventure Corp
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 16:39:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Yon Krum Ok, so here's a proposed sequence of tasks, should an outpost be finally destroyed:
1) Disable all station services, without ability to repair (remove their icons from space). 2) Revoke all clone contracts. 3) Cancel all market orders and contracts active from the station, as per normal mechanics (returns items to hangers), and prevent future placement of market sell orders and contracts from the ex-station. 4) "Freeze" corporate offices, preventing them from being added or used for recruitment purposes (in the case of offices) 5) "Freeze" hangers, preventing them from having items added to them (can still use ships in hanger as storage space, however) 6) Clear all docking standing restrictions (free access) 7) Prevent ships that have been aggressed (per the 15-minute logoff aggression timer) from docking with the ex-station. 8) Add a 1-minute docking navigation delay when attempting to "dock" with the destroyed station. 9) Swap the graphics (external and internal) to represent the harrowed hulk of a one-mighty outpost of mankind. Overview icon could be a small rectangle on top and (wreck) triangle on the bottom.
The end result is a 'station' that is functionally unusable as a base except to hide ships in and anything left over from the previous owners' stay. The docking time restrictions are important to prevent a dead station from becoming a haven for ships during combat, while still permitting previous residents to access their stuff should they be able to secure the system. (Navigating by hand into the ruined hulk and sifting the contents of their locker....)
As a conqueror of the region, the question becomes "do I take the station and lock up access" versus "do I destroy it entirely".
Optionally, the station could be salvaged once every 24 hours. Bonus points for dropping free "frozen corpse"-es randomly into hangers and around the station hulk....
There you go: balance between the database pain, and the desire to scourge space clear of old, useless bases. Of course, this would not work on NPC conquerable stations.
--Krum
PS. Doesn't solve the OP's desire to move assets around, but them's the breaks. I disagree entirely that you should be able to pull up an outpost and move it--that's silly. Blowing it up is another matter!
This is actually a really good idea. Make the station unusable for everything except docking and make docking take twice as long as before.
If CCP did see fit they could remove the docking feature altogether and make it so you can only undock. Once everyone has undocked the station would finally crumble away.
|
Rogerano
Minmatar Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 01:05:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Iamien When CVA decided to invest in all those outposts, they did it with the knowledge, from CCP, that they would keep them unless they failed to achieve sovereignty under the current system.
Did they? I suppose that's something only CVA leadership can know. If they did it was short sighted and greedy. Pretty much everyone who has been paying attention for the last couple of years would have known that sov and POS changes were on the cards.
And yet CVA chose to splatter **** all over Providence anyway, without consideration for the consequences. Other alliances in the thick of war can perhaps be forgiven for a certain amount of excess. But CVA (pre-dominion) have hold over very stable territory. Greed creates such delicious circumstances!
Oh yes, I feel a satanic pleasure watching these dramas unfold. You reap what you sow. Bon Voyage! --- Not happy with something in EVE? An emo whine will doubtless help your cause. |
Iamien
Caldari Democracy of Klingon Brothers
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 01:50:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Rogerano Did they? I suppose that's something only CVA leadership can know. If they did it was short sighted and greedy. Pretty much everyone who has been paying attention for the last couple of years would have known that sov and POS changes were on the cards.
And yet CVA chose to splatter **** all over Providence anyway, without consideration for the consequences. Other alliances in the thick of war can perhaps be forgiven for a certain amount of excess. But CVA (pre-dominion) have hold over very stable territory. Greed creates such delicious circumstances!
Oh yes, I feel a satanic pleasure watching these dramas unfold. You reap what you sow. Bon Voyage!
Please point to one acknowledgment, by CCP, from years ago(2-3+) that sovereignty was being completely overhauled.
It is easy to yell greed, but ask yourself, if you were in the same position, with the current sov system, would you honestly show restrain because of the possibility of sovereignty becoming easier to take?
|
Rogerano
Minmatar Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 02:19:00 -
[59]
I don't really need to do this because I honestly couldn't care but here is one reference from mid 2007.
2007: http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=477
The issue was prominent before that, obviously, as it wouldn't have such a priority in 2007 if it were just the minor beginnings of resentment. I recall reading CCP's "The Drawingboard" section mid 2006 where sov issues were noted.
Motivations other than greed are unlikely. The inability to foresee issues with station spam may not be limited to CVA leadership but faaaaaark me it's cheering me up to see the tears.
Also note that some entities have deliberately held off occupying space on account of the un-fun nature of that particular business. Clearly CVA regarded the ISK as more important than the fun. --- Not happy with something in EVE? An emo whine will doubtless help your cause. |
ThaDollaGenerale
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 06:04:00 -
[60]
Speaking of devblogs. Are we ever going to get to see another one about how these mechanics work so we can take appropriate preparations. It's pretty ridiculous that like 3 weeks before this patch is dropping, we have no idea what the hell is going to change exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |