Don´t massacre my words.
Dont make me laugh so much then
When you laugh about the reality, maybe you´re right wherever you are.
Im sure thats very profound in the original klingon or whatever you speak.
What does that even mean?
1 Like
Don´t ask me, I´m bored @ work 
2 Likes
Emphase
Word. Meaning: to emphatically phase through objects.
It makes me unhappy I no longer have this ability
1 Like
Maybe the point is not “Why do I have to keep protecting these 20 random structures all over the place?” and maybe the point is, “Do I really need all these structures and systems in the first place?”
I think the practical impact is very clear. You better be willing to protect your structures, or you do some internal math and figure out which ones you can afford to protect without burning out your linemembers.
If you have so many structures spanning so many systems across an entire region BUT you are unable to protect them all, maybe that’s more a sign that your alliance is not as strong as you thought it was and that you should be considering downsizing instead of greedily trying to keep everything.
1 Like
This is a good question.
1 Like
It is a dumb question.
Moonming + Reprocessing to avoid hauling. So yes 20+ structures / system are normal.
Having to defend a large space = need places / bridges.
To be compareable, every station in LS/HS should down every service module or the stations should be powered down. Let´s see what would happen 
I bet no HS alliance could defend a single constellation.
Able to protect them against every PvP content, able to defend it against drifters → until everyone is exhausted because of their bad design.
It´s like fighting an enemy with unlimited ressources, which coulddrop in everywhere and where even the best intel doesn´t give you numbers → so you always have to react with a big fleet.
(drifters can´t be scanned)
We adapt, but we prefer the PvP game much more than this PvE ■■■■■■■■.
You mine, you rat, you run various PVE content. The only time most of you PVP is by accident.
2 Likes
Let me make it simple for you.
The point I’m making is, “maybe you don’t deserve to moon mine, if you cannot protect those structures without burning out.”
Adapt or die, and it looks like you’re choosing to die.
1 Like
You have to PvE for ISK to buy ships to lose them in PvP.
Now you have to PvE to … defend everything against CCP´s stupid idea.
I didn’t realize you loved AI/NPC so much…your hatred of players borders on @Dracvlad levels of anti-social sentiments.
Should I make it easy for you ?
The biggest alliances are the biggest, because they are able to adapt. The two worst things you can do to a human is change an standstill.
I know it feels good when something is happening that you could never achieve. But think about that it´s not you who achieve this.
We´ll see what is happening in the future.
Ya but the Germans wanted PvP…not some NPC/PVE monstrosity…
Goodwin #1 → you lost
Godwyn’s Law isnt a win/lose statement.
There’s a lot less adapting and a lot more whining and crying.
Adapting would be increasing the number of gunners in your ACL to trusted individuals so that you don’t have only 2 people and their alts gunning. But you’re so afraid of your own members who might go rogue and pull some rigs that you guys are refusing to adapt.
Adapting would be prioritizing the structures you can save and determine which ones are within the “effort budget” so you can focus chasing off what you can without line member burn out.
Or did you mean “adapt” as in “cry about it, strengthen the blue donut and have everyone join in on a 'highsec embargo and cry together as a community until CCP reverts the change” ?
5 Likes