A week back into this game after my years upon years break… I see stations! stations everywhere! high, low, you name it. It’s a spam fest! worse of all these stations are cheap, my first thought was wow everyone must be loaded in this game but after looking at the market you can deploy one of these bad boys for as little as 1 bill. so… it brings me on to…
CCP Product owners, have you actually every played this game?? I’ve always dreamed of being a DEV at CCP games but god, would I cringe by having to implement these poor game changes.
You’ve ruined the needs and goals every corp had… Build a corp large enough to move to NULL space and join an alliance and suck up to leadership to get a station. If everyone now has a station whats the point…
Excuse me what? Citadel spam is 10times worse than POS spam ever could be. You never had the ability to drop 10 POS on a gate. You never had the ability to drop more POS than the number of moons in a system. You could not put dozens of them on a station grid. If a spot was taken, no one else could take a spot just 1000 km next to that spot.
How so? NPC stations had services for everyone before structures. Not to mention that structure concentrated the the biggest income chunk from indu and market activity in the hands of very few people, namely Mogul, ICY and TTT because they can afford to kill every other competing structure. This is not democratization, it’s the polar opposite.
Yes, by making it possible to end wars against the biggest groups with ease and making it impossible to keep wars against them up indefinitely, in essence making these biggest groups safer from wars than before.
Maybe you should take your alliance name more serious and shut up and try first before you write down so much nonsense. If POS spam was so much worse than citadel spam (which it wasn’t) and CCP introduced structures without any of the limitations that POS or Outposts had, the contradiction in your claims is just mind-boggling.
So which systems have more structures than moons and 10 structures on a gate again?
If you’re just gonna pull stuff out of your ass because it’s technically possible then you do you, but I’m not countering a non-argument.
Yet there are competing structures available. I use them all the time. Also NPC stations don’t provide all the services of a POS or structure, and POS were not available to use for people outside your Corp/alliance.
So yes, that’s democratising content. More people have access to those services specifically because they don’t have to own the infrastructure and yet they can if they want and many do. Both your points are facile.
You don’t need an indefinite war to take out structures. It’s also removed griefing wars from a lot of smaller corps. I never said the system was perfect, so this is a straw man.
You’re good at the classic fallacies, I’ll give you that.
I’ve owned and maintained structures. This is what we call an ad hominem. That’s three quotes and three strikes. Consistency is good I guess.
Which don’t get nearly as much use as those structures that receive the biggest chunk of activity.
That’s not democratization of content. All it does is centralize the content in a few hands. Just because you can have a reactor in low sec does not mean you will be able to use it or keep it.
That’s the problem with your argument. It is not about taking down the structure, it is about taking down ships from huge groups that roam around high sec with impunity. Point missed.
That is patently false. This change has not done anything like that. In contrast, it made it worse because now you are an even bigger target just because you have a structure as you are listed as war eligible.
Aww, shucks. I do not see any ad hominem since everything you wrote is simply false, incomplete, incoherent and misleading.
More structures than moons or 10 structures on a gate?
Are they like, super low moon systems? Is this really indicative of a widespread problem? No? Didn’t think so.
There are what, 8000 systems that you can anchor a structure in.
0.002%. Cry me a river.
So what? Sad you’re getting out-competed by larger established players? Welcome to capitalism.
Again you’re making this ■■■■ up. There are competing structures in high sec. if you can’t keep yours it sucks to be you. More structures have been unanchored due to moon changes than blown up because IChooseYou and whoever don’t want competition.
And yes it is the very classic example of democratisation. Making something accessible to everyone, even if it can’t be owned by everyone. Another real good example is the industrial revolution. Very few factory owners, very many customers.
It’s dictionary definition democratisation.
And still you’re peddling the myth that others can’t own structures but they can and do. So that has been democratised too. POS used to get cleared out by wardec all the time too. There’s no major change here.
You didn’t make that point. You made a statement about wardecs in the context of structures. Where’s the reference to ships? Also you don’t even need a wardec to do economic damage to an enemy in highsec. In fact it’s easier to do in highsec because you can’t pre-emptively strike against an enemy as you can freely do in low and null.
Nonsense. A Corp that doesn’t want to be bothered by wars CANNOT be wardecced because they don’t have structures. A Corp that doesn’t want to be bothered by wars but wants to own structures can use a proxy Corp to protect its players from any war risk. A Corp that wants to protect its structures from war can join any of the many alliances that provide PvP support.
You know what you’re asking for when you choose to anchor a structure. So yes, griefing wardecs are a thing of the past. Anchoring is explicit consent to wardecs. Wars are part of competing in Eve.
And you just do it again while claiming ignorance and being actually ignorant. Classy guy.