|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 10:35:00 -
[1] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:Posting in yet another "Gewns R Bad" thread. Honestly, are we so bored in high sec that all we have to talk about is GSF?
I recently finished Cruise Missile V and did Cruise Missile Specialization to II, put on 6 Cruise Missile Launcher IIs and did a mission and it seems like I am doing a lot less DPS. This seemed odd to me. I guess I will have to tinker with the fitting.
In other news, this thread sucks. Cruises are pretty much terrible in general. Much like this thread. |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 10:41:00 -
[2] - Quote
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:The only thing that bugs me about the new wardec system is that it makes my eve mail icon blink more then before. But I did get a bit of a chuckle thinking these guys would be locked into a forever war.
Other than that, I still could not care less about wardecs. They have zero importance to people based in nullsec as we basically live in a state of forever war with any one that happens by.
It sure as hell isn't goons crying about the possibility of being shot on sight at any moment. I've had corpmates ask on more than one occasion how to change a setting so that they didn't have to get a notification every time a 1-man bandwagon corp jumps on one of our current wardecs. True story. |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 10:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
Virginia Virdana wrote:without the inevitable journey to null and instant explosion that would result. You might find 1-2 goons who actively enjoy playing dock/undock games with high sec pubbies.
|
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
237
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 00:54:00 -
[4] - Quote
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:Constable Chang wrote: In brief, 'The Goons' exist at a 'meta level' outside the MMO. They are like some kind of higher-order entity and as such they have an 'evolutionary' advantage.
So much so that we are the reason CCP never finished up with the Jove stuff. We are just so powerful and mysterious that they didn't have to bother making npcs to fill that role. Next CSM, we are pushing for a goon faction ship. It will jam like a blackbird and use rifters like drones. Oh god, why are there not 20 of these in my hangar right now. This is literally the only good post in this whole stupid thread. |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
237
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 00:58:00 -
[5] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote: Problem is there is no effective way to secure an alliance of disparate groups against infiltration and alliance disband which is surely what would happen. Until CCP spend some programming effort giving us configuration options on how we want to run alliances to specific purposes (for example a hisec mass wardec alliance would not be run or configured to work the same way as a tight 4-5 corp lowsec pirate alliance) then its not going to be a very feasible project.
For example, if we wanted to move our current 46 allies over into a single alliance shell that could join the goon wardec for free (assuming for a moment that we don't count the 6-7 actual alliances that are allied) then we'd need to create an additional 46 alt corps (for a total of 92 member corps) simply to ensure that the alliance is not disbanded by infiltration. Since each alt corp needs at least one account in it to stay functional and click the support button thats a minimum of 16 accounts devoted purely to anti infiltration technqiues and is quite a ridiculous length to go to simply to continue what we have already.
The alliance structure would cost 1b isk to set up, 16 trial accounts full of alts, and 200m a month maintenance fee. With an additional one account full of alts per 3 additional members (+6 maintenance per month.)
Very quickly running this kind of thing would become a full time job which is quite the disproportionate :effort: to go to when opposing a dec of 50m per week and a couple of dozen random stealth bombers at trade hubs.
As always with the type of grand vision suggested by the poster above - Eve makes things far more complicated than it needs to be.
I've seen you posting this around a lot as if it were some sort of excuse. If you can't figure out how to keep your alliance secure enough to function and can't trust the people you seem to want fighting with you then you aren't really "allies." This all smacks of more needing CCP to hold your hand through things that real alliances have been able to pull off for years. |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
238
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 01:24:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote: Well obviously hisec trade hub raider friends are not going to be as tight as formal alliance members in some nullsec pact that are only brought into the game from 3rd party forums are they?
Jade Constantine wrote:But sure, you can always trot out the "well you should be more like us!" reponse - but the reality is quite a few people don't want to the play the game precisely how the nullsec blocs are playing the game - they like their independence.
By "more like us", you mean actual trustworthy allies to eachother and not just opportunistic bandwagoners right? Oh wait, highsec. Right.
Jade Constantine wrote:Really. The whole point of the Inferno 1.0 wardec allies system seemed to be to provide a quicker and neater way of growing dynamic war situations in the sandbox.
I'm not really sure how making just about every initated wardec unwinnable for any corp or alliance of equal or lesser size than the defender makes the game "dynamic". There's a lot of buzzwords and begging the question in here. I'm sure you'd like to explain in a way that actually makes sense.
Jade Constantine wrote:And lets remember another reality here. This is not hisec wardec people asking for a change in the in game to their benefit.
Oh really? You have the CCP email/evemail transcripts and the CSM minutes to show who is asking for these changes or are you still on some kick about how Goons are totally afraid of you and your super scary allies list? |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
240
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 03:46:00 -
[7] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:David Cedarbridge wrote: Oh really? You have the CCP email/evemail transcripts and the CSM minutes to show who is asking for these changes or are you still on some kick about how Goons are totally afraid of you and your super scary allies list? Such things are not to be discussed on these forums anymore. Then I'm afraid that nobody is going to take your word for it. If you can't prove something then it is worth literally nothing. |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
240
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 03:53:00 -
[8] - Quote
Marconus Orion wrote:Alia Gon'die wrote:Caliph Muhammed wrote:
You're welcome. DevSwarm wins you the game. You can't beat the man with the pencil.
Look at that one post. Who is im mrmessy? I will further challenge you, can you find more than one post of Goons asking for this change? Maybe one that people have heard of? How many times are you going to move the goal post? Drawing attention to a yet-to-be-met standard is not moving goalposts. Good attempt though. |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
242
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 14:02:00 -
[9] - Quote
So wait, changing a mechanic that functionally makes declaring war for any alliance smaller than GSF impossible to win is a sign that the devs favor GSF?
Are you guys really that dense? As it stands now, any 5 man corp declaring war on another 5 man corp is instantly blobbed by "allies" (read: people who just want more things to shoot and have no stake with their other "allies."
I thought you pubbies were against blobbing? |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
242
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 14:22:00 -
[10] - Quote
Cutter Isaacson wrote:David Cedarbridge wrote:So wait, changing a mechanic that functionally makes declaring war for any alliance smaller than GSF impossible to win is a sign that the devs favor GSF?
Are you guys really that dense? As it stands now, any 5 man corp declaring war on another 5 man corp is instantly blobbed by "allies" (read: people who just want more things to shoot and have no stake with their other "allies."
I thought you pubbies were against blobbing? Interestingly I have personal experience of this. I got war dec'd last week by a 50 man alliance, and within 3 days I had amassed 243 people spread over 8 corps as allies, most of whom joined for zero cost. While I am obviously happy to have a large amount of allies, this does seem stupidly unbalanced and is a perfect example of why it needs changing. Hey Jade. Look at this post. I did your work for you. No need to thank me. |
|
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
243
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 14:54:00 -
[11] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:David Cedarbridge wrote:Cutter Isaacson wrote:David Cedarbridge wrote:So wait, changing a mechanic that functionally makes declaring war for any alliance smaller than GSF impossible to win is a sign that the devs favor GSF?
Are you guys really that dense? As it stands now, any 5 man corp declaring war on another 5 man corp is instantly blobbed by "allies" (read: people who just want more things to shoot and have no stake with their other "allies."
I thought you pubbies were against blobbing? Interestingly I have personal experience of this. I got war dec'd last week by a 50 man alliance, and within 3 days I had amassed 243 people spread over 8 corps as allies, most of whom joined for zero cost. While I am obviously happy to have a large amount of allies, this does seem stupidly unbalanced and is a perfect example of why it needs changing. Hey Jade. Look at this post. I did your work for you. No need to thank me. Yeah which is precisely the issue the proposal I widely circulated would resolve in a far more elegant solution than the clumsy 1.1 changes. With the proposal I make - the concord escalation fee would only kick in when the defending coalition IS (or has increased to be by adding allies) beyond the size of the attacker. Hence the purpose of the 1.1 (escalation charge) for protecting small attackers from ridiculous dogpiles would remain intact, while the defense option for smaller defenders facing massive attackers would also remain intact. Thanks in fact for providing yet another example of how its possible to resolve problems in the wardec system without cutting one half of the community to pieces in the interest of the other. Some game mechanics can be improved for everyone. Dear CCP, Please change wardecs for the reason you already stated you would and are going to. While you do though, please only fix it for half of the game as I rather enjoy forming an alliance of non-allies on the cheap without having to do all the work of actually forming an alliance! Thanks! |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
244
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 14:56:00 -
[12] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:Arrgthepirate wrote:Dear Jade Constantine,
You have 80 kills so far in the month of June according to Eve-Kills. None of those are against Goons, or TEST. Why do you even give a ****? It's not like you're fighting us.
SIgned, Me A better question for you to consider is why am I (as the object of a Mittani's ministry of love special griefing contract ) ABLE to score 80 kills in the month of June (in lowsec no less) without needing to kill a single GOON/TEST pilot in order to go about my business in the Amarr/Minmatar FW conflict zone. I'll give you a hint. I've seen 3 GOONS total. The first 2 fled system the moment I switched into a gank tornado to blast their bombers to bits. The 3rd fired a torp at me but spammed escape warp so quickly his weapon didn't even detonate in his haste to leave the field. The reality is that the Goons of the ministry of love are more terrified of mockery and personal consequences they would face on losing a ship to me than they have a desire to actually fight. Hence they run back to empire and get farmed by our many allies. When you make a wardec against an entity its your job to go find that entity and try to stop them doing what they want to do. I'm playing faction warfare and making a fortune from kills/complexing/missioning (8.7b so far while this wardec has been running) Surely its your job to stop me. Otherwise your wardec (like your leader) is going to look pretty foolish. I think you mistake foolishness for disinterest. As much as you talk about other people having hilariously inflated egos, yours takes the cake. You've done what of value to call your claim to fame exactly? |
|
|
|