Eve is a sandbox mate, in any case so says a person shooting defenceless whales or noobs in hisec as part of VMG, I could ask you the same question?
There have been so many heists that have destroyed corps and alliances, that you are unaware of them does not surprise me.
There would have been a lot of major fleet battles without this, thus it destroyed content.
I love the emotional reaction to this by the troll posters…
Of course, that is because you have no answer to this:
I’m playing in the sandbox. You only seem to whine about it.
Can you name other alliance shattering heists that have displaced and effected thousands of other players? I can think of like… two? Stealing 50b or even 200b is really kind of trivial when you’re talking about alliances with large capital fleets.
This is its own kind of content. Content that does far better for Eve Online than a few shitty battles and fake wars.
What can I say, I’m an emotional guy. When I call you a name, just know that it was done with a real and raw passion.
Changing the context now, you said:
Which happened a lot.
So says a person who shoots whales and noobs. It was most definitely not a fake war, what bubble are you in?
That is all you have mate, emotion and feelings.
Can you share with the class who they’ve happened to, when it happened, and any backstory? The point I was trying to make in saying that was heists of this magnitude are not common.
That’s not all I do. Those are among some of the things I do. I’m just not a fan of these nullsec wars that are fought on timers and such. The best battles and the stories that everyone remembers are the huge TIDI slugfests when someone does something on accident.
Well that was not the point I was making, you are focusing on the magnitude, I and others were focusing on the ease of it and the lack of granular control, but more of a focus on it being a shame as CO2 were a very PvP orientated alliance.
This would have been a full on major Citadel war with people who wanted to and were able to fight, as I said it would have been an interesting war, something a lot more meaningful than Boat jumping his bridging Titan for example.
Good!
in your weird mind, yes. in mine, i don’t care, because you have nothing of substance to say. all ou care about is looking good for those you declare victims, which is a horrible approach towards humanity. actually did i write a pretty long post, and after sending, i’ve editted it to this. i’m not like you, stop seeing yourself in other people.
thanks and please leave early. 
PS:
That is all you have mate, emotion and feelings.
this, coming from you, is hilarious. 
My dear boy, it is all about game balance, some people have different views on that and get rather emotional, so much so that they just use trigger posts such as nullsec is 100% safe, or you are a carebear, or even attack someone personally in some abstract way.
Personally I find it rather amusing that you think I am trying to white knight it, which is really what you are trying to say at the end of the day.
Anyway glad that made you laugh, laughing is fun!
And he wouldn’t be wrong.
You absolutely are. The controls we have with a corporation are fine. The UI could use some work but that’s about it. In all of your posting it’s very evident that you don’t like or enjoy conflict in eve. You don’t care for the reason this game isn’t just another terrible MMO with sub-par gameplay. People interacting with people, creating a story together is what this is about. You’re just trying to 
on the story.
Your argument is basically an appeal to motivation, which is generally considered a logical fallacy. Its easily dismissed since you have no idea what motivates drac, and its ignoring the obvious evidence that he lives in null and has an active killboard.
I’m happy personally with the outcome, because I think regardless of finer grained controls, CO2 would have made the same mistakes - ie Judge would have been given all of the roles and permissions anyway, and imo, giving a diplo the keys is a mistake from the start (they after all have contacts all over the place, and can easily arrange golden parachutes).
I do not however think that finer grained controls are unreasonable. One of the issues right now is when an alliance has 1 keepstar or 1 critcal keepstar. Pretty difficult choices especially if the alliance is old and historical and is suddenly concentrating its power in that location.
So we gave up one big fleet battle for hundreds of people working for months to regain what they lost.
And that destroyed content?
Except they wont, and never do. Large scale betrayals have a near 100% success rate of causing the collapse of those it happened to. You’d be hard pressed to actually find an example where a group came out stronger or immediately fought back to recapture what they lost on a large scale and didn’t just immediately go into recruit and rebuild mode in a safer area. I know it will be hard because there is not a single instance of the contrary.
I’m not at all arguing to make these things impossible. What I argue for is the rework on corp roles that we have been promised for years that would finally give the tools to the CEOs to apply proper permissions to their members. You will never prevent a CEO from taking everything, and that’s fine, it’s well within their power and their membership at least knows whats possible when they join and see how roles/permissions are distributed. If they stay in a bad situation that’s on them. But it doesn’t change the fact that roles and corresponding permissions need to be expanded upon.
Yes, it is. In EVE it’s so overpowered that makes this game mechanic completely broken.
It’s ridiculous how the assets, alliance or coalition distribution rights works in the game. The EVE isn’t a usual game like WoW, DOTA. In this game assets are hard to collect and can be easily destroyed by it default origin. To build an alliance or other kind of empire a lot of players should be involved for years. People working together to acquire something, to perform some actions and to complete the goal. It’s socializing and is the primordial concept of any MMORPG. All this MMORPG game can be instantly destroyed by one just bored, incompetent, arrogant, selfish person which yearns for fame and the victims can’t defense themselves (something like hell griefers level of cheating).
Let’s put apart spy games, corporation theft and betrayal. EVE is interesting, due to realistic risks, economy, wars, politics and influence. Excluding alliance and coalition unreal politics and assets distribution, everything else works more or less realistic. For example, just imagine a president of France who will announce one day: “My dear French people, I love you so much, that I signed some papers to transfer the Eiffell Tower under North Korea dominion last night”. Geeze! Take your timers and notice the time in minutes before people will make a rebellion, will capture the hero and will jail him to the Bastille.
Just compare the Fozzie SOV security mechanic (how you can defense just one system) to this (how you can defense a social alliance, crafted over years). There are so many ways how to improve the EVE spies and theft games. Make some additional UI interfaces like PI, not to gather resources, but to influence on planet’s population with political propaganda, to sabotage the PI factories of real players in SOV space. The ability to downgrade the planet population happiness with current SOV owner and gain their happiness to the alliance the spy works for. This means lower SOV indexes and much easy ways for respective hostile alliance to conquer the system. Reconfigure useless Corporation skills with new one for respective activity.
Geeze! There are so many tools to apply political games in this game. Just take as an example the Sid Meier’s CIVILIZATION.
Do you have any clue how hard it is to run a huge corporation/alliance? Do you know how many useless minor issues great you everyday when you login because clueless Newbie #3874326744 has decided that because you are listed as the CEO, they have the right to demand you pay back their loss because they were distracted by their kitten? Have you ever had someone keep coming you till you block then because someone in your corp had the audacity to shoot them in nul when they didn’t want PvP?
Do you get that under the current system, a corp hangar can only hold 1500 unique item stacks and if you need to have 500+ doctrine ships up on contract and ready to go, you end up needing to use 2 or 3 hangars alone to cover assembly and contract setup. And god forbid if your are the one who has to haul the stuff from hi sec to nul, assemble it, and put it up on contract, how much time you lose?
Do you want all your free time to be taken up with fueling reaction POSes so you can keep the isk flowing into the corp wallet? Oh and hey, better get those fleets up as you are an FC as well, and run through all the reimbursement emails from the last OP. Then vet all the new applicants, kick any spies that popped up, bump all the recruitment threads, stay in the public channels and answer all questions… Oh and manage all 3rd party apps like the mumble server, website, killboard, etc.
Being a corp leader is hard work in a large corp. Add to that all alliance and coalition work too and well… You have no free time to have fun. Eve becomes a job which kills your desire to log in. And if you have a computer problem… Ugh! Hence why people delegate. If you couldn’t, there would be no CEO’s.
And by delegating, you are trusting people. The logistics people who handle keeping the market going and ships available, they need corp hangar and wallet access. They could so it without and just hope they make a profit or you can grant roles and use corp wallet to help fund.
Those jump bridge and reaction POSes, and now citadels which all need fuel, access rights and a fuel hangar make that job easier but require rights and roles.
All you people saying Gigx could have not granted judge roles have no clue how hard it is to run a large group. You have to delegate and grant roles or nothing gets done. And you know what, that opens you up to the potential for betrayal. Nothing will change that. Yes it does mean a betrayal can mess you up big time, but guess what… That’s why you do your damn best to keep your underlings happy. Otherwise, you have to do all this yourself and well… Unless you consider all that fun, you will have no time for anything else.
And all you people saying no trust… Do you think Mittini, Sort Dragon, Gigs, etc did all the alliance/corp work themselves and enjoy that?
And if you don’t have back up when running a large corp, what Do you do if you wish to take a family vacation? For one week no changes? Or what if you do get banned. Do you want all assets locked away because only you had access?
Maybe you misunderstood my post above.
The ability to grant roles is ok, but they should have quota. The roles quota should work similarly to how you restrict the amount of cash you can withdraw daily or weekly from your credit card, similarly how auctioneers using voting mechanism in big none-democratical corporations (principle of 50% of shares + 1).
You know, if there is a rebellion in a coalition then some alliance should start a disband voting process (during a week). If more alliance leaders are voting to leave, if they think the coalition doing badly, then the coalition is disbanded. Something like ‘Fozzie Roles’. If more corporations in an alliance want to leave it then they must open the same process.
Coalition level controls aren’t a thing. You have corporation CEO’s and the CEO of the executor corp. The CEO of the executor corp is most often referred to as the alliance leader.
Why should CCP restrict how much ISK you can transfer out of a wallet? Why should they restrict how many and which structures I transfer to another corporation?
The answer is that they shouldn’t. These ideas sound a lot like how a Guild Bank works in World of Warcraft, where you have lots of control over which tabs players can see, interact with, how much they can take out per day, and the amount of Gold they can withdraw or use on repairs. That cute, because this is Eve Online and there’s no room for soft changes that coddle to those that don’t embrace the spirit of the game.
You are an infidel. You are poison in a well. This game flourishes when there’s conflict and drama. I guarantee you there have been more actual subs and more people actively googling, “Eve Online” in the past week than there were in the past few months.
The game gets attention, it does not flourish, for one.
But those should be roles and permissions a CEO can set because it simply makes sense in therms or realism. No company in existence is going to had over the keys to the vault to anyone with the need to have limited access. A company may give you access to a company car, but they aren’t going to give you the entire fleet. I give a store manager the keys to the store so he can open and lock up, I do not give him the deed the the property to sell/transfer if he ever desires. See how that works? Because it makes logical sense that we would be able to apply these same restrictions to varying degrees.
I’m also not an immortal capsuleer.
At try to put some effort into your troll logic. Defend your stance, don’t just start spouting worthless dribble when you’ve lost an argument.