i very much appreciate all of this. for 1 i have gotten 3 people to come teach, maybe 4. i am learning from everyone i can.
for 2. i have a defensive position in high sec scouted (3 actually) and a plan for implementing. any more suggestions are always welcome, but since its off topic lets talk in direct messege 
The most important one during a war:
- donāt accept anymore applications to Corp until the war(s) are ended, unless you have a really good reason for doing so.
2 Likes
i have been saying that but that decision is higher up the food chain. ill lead ops and do what needs to be done.
can we direct messege on the forums? i tried to find a way but couldnt
you can add me on discord Blatancy#9467
food chain is a good choice of words. You guys are on it.
Not on the new forums. No.
Old forums yes, but CCP has a taste for removing features (RIP Jukebox, etc.).
1 Like
maybe but YEARS of gaming online in some of the most TOXIC conditions have given me the ability and experience to USUALLY suss out ā ā ā ā ā ā ā ā like what people say ICANP is. i just havent seen anything to make me think any of it is true.
2 Likes
Which is good. Maybe he learnt his lesson last time around.
By the way, for anyone who says we are entirely carebears, check out our highlight from our last thrasher roam. We probably wonāt have the active numbers to do this again while war is active, but once this is all over one way or another, come be our guest, roam with us!
3 Likes
I think people seriosuly underestimate what even 200 arty thrahsers/rail corm/beam coercers can do. Especially in hisec - all very easy to train into, extremely cheap to replaceā¦
2 Likes
yes when my fleets hit high sec its going to be the doctrine of strategy + accuracy through volume
Agreed Darkesthan, check out my link a bit further up, we have already been using Thrashers to great effect in our null roams.
2 Likes
They are not doing it to everyone - only 20 or so corps. One just canāt mass spam gantriesā¦
still enough to justify some concern XD
look my main issue is that corps like ICANP are supposed to be SAFE. no wars. they have found a way around that and its hurting members that honestly just want to mine and explore and be left alone.
1 Like
Maybe it was intendedā¦ after all this does prevent mass decs.
Thatās like saying the PNS exploit to avoiding defenders having allies is ok because itās not been done to many corps.
there is documentation that states its not intended.
from the article:
When this option is set to reject structure transfers, any attempts to transfer an Upwell structure or customs office to the corporation will be declined automatically. Transfers of sovereignty structures within the corporations of an alliance are not affected by this setting.
Customs office is specifically named
2 Likes
No ships for pvpā¦ really? Not even artillery thrashers? Stop spewing nonsense and excuses, at your numbers even t1 frigs are force to reckon with
its not nonsense or an excuse its a fact. we have about 10-15 active pvpers. and they mostly run around in thrashers.
we are changing that as we discuss it here. making some changes to fleets and getting more people interested. its gonna be fun
Since the thread in General Discussion has devolved intoā¦ whatever it is, Iām creating this to hopefully get a proper response from CCP.
According to that thread, and this video, a normal corp member, with no roles, is able to anchor a customs office - therefore making the corp war-eligible.
The question is whether anchoring a customs office is supposed to require the appropriate role - considering it opens up the corp to wars, it seems to me it should.
5 Likes
can you ICANP kids stop spamming these threads?
2 Likes
can we get a ruling or comment on this please?
Thanks!
edit. Itās something that could be fixed simply by making a gantry deployment NOT an anchored structure for wardec purposesā¦
2 Likes