No PVE = no industry = no ships = no need to buy PLEX because there’s nothing to buy = not even need to subscribe because there’s nothing to do… But they want to destroy PVE because they want to go bankrupt, because… why not?
1 Like
Services.
Can you sing? 
1 Like
Think it is about time that Concord Police start clearing gates.
There is no reason for the Triglavianites to be even staging on gates.
2 Likes
Yes, there is.
The reason is that those people need to be able to continue playing the game, and not be banned from part of the game that have nothing to do with this event.
You not liking Triglavians isn’t a reason to find every excuses to basically ban their players from EvE.
Edencom can’t go in Trig systems safely, Trigs can’t go in Edencom systems safely. Nothing more is needed.
Something-something “players actions have consequences”.
Not in this game though.
1 Like
The main reason in asking this threads question was due to the Triglavian are not just invading Blue Stars systems and that Scope informed us that they were after the Blue Star systems.
Why would any pro-trig be allowed to Empire space without auto-concord snuffing them out? What would be the lore justification for it?
Exactly none.
Because CONCORD is a cop-out mechanic to punish player aggression, and not a genuine NPC faction with which players can engage.
They have consequences. They are currently equivalent for each faction.
You just somehow consider that the faction you don’t like should have more consequences than the other one, for no valid reason.
Concord aren’t shooting Triglavians NPC either.
The part of Concord you are refering to is made to deal with Capsuleers fighting other Capsuleers in the Empire space. Did you ever saw them warping on a Guristas or Blood Raider position in the system? By your own logic, why wouldn’t they be here, snuffing them out?
They just don’t.
The Concord wing dedicated to the Triglavian invasion is called Edencom.
Guess what?
Edencom do shot the Triglavian players on sight.
This have nothing to do with lore, you don’t even try to understand any of it. This is just you being salty and trying to push more consequences on other players because you don’t like their choices.
If you don’t want pro-Trigs to be able to enter the rest of High-sec, then move your ass, and Wardec their corporations. Do the job by youself and stop crying on the forums.
3 Likes
Last I checked, most (if not all) pro-trig corps have no structures and thus not deckable. So how exactly you wardec them?
For example, one wardec was started and pro-trigs killed their own structures to invalidate the war before it had even started.
I’ve been asking CCP this question for a while, now.
I mean, I can understand from a gameplay standpoint why faction relations and security status are not tied to the invasion. If they were, an increasing number of Kybernauts could find themselves getting shot on sight by faction police just from running hi-sec invasion sites, or even trapped in stations just because their relations nosedived midway. It just doesn’t make sense lorewise for them to travel through un-invaded systems with impunity, arm up in a trade hub, and then contest a system. It also lends itself to the implication that the Empires and EDENCOM had already made backdoor deals with Zorya for one massive proving, with capsuleers on both sides as unwitting pawns and stooges.
1 Like
Good point. I’ve returned from a long break and the first thing I thought was that exact thing: this is great for new players as they force you to treat them like a blob of players.
Seriously? Since when you can assist one faction to completely capture star system of another one without any change for it to be recaptured?
And if you cannot do that for any of other factions how to you compare consequences?
(Not talking about FW because it is not relevant here)
2 Likes
Okay so these Invasions are still happening and the forced playstyle that was mentioned in the opening thread is due to capsuleers requiring to change their tactics when warping cargo through such systems such as requiring a 2nd omega account to act as a decoy or at the very least another player to bulk tank a decoy ship to align and pull aggro at the gates long enough for the ie; Orca full of Ice or Ore to align and warp to the next gate.
This is the not fun part I wanted to explain.
Empty mission loot truck tried to run the gauntlet!
If you fight in a system until it becomes an Edencom Forteress then it becomes a system that a Triglavian friendly character cannot use anymore.
The consequence is just the same for them as it is for an Edencom player who would like to continue using a final liminality system.
You could make an argument about players who would like not to play the event and end-up affected by Triglavians victories, but when it comes to players actually choosing a side in the event, the consequences are the same: Some systems that you won’t be able to use anymore if your side lose.
Yeah, lore wise, you don’t “capture” the system, but gameplay wise, that doesn’t make any difference.
2 Likes
You’re only looking at the lowest and least important level of consequences. “Trigs can win a system or lose it, and Edencom can win a system or lose, so consequences are equal” is the reasoning of a child or someone who is being purposely disingenuous.
Edencom wins a system: Essentially nothing changes, except the system becomes harder for Kybernauts to travel through. Since kybernauts were never even in the game until Trigvasions started, this is a quite small and player-chosen consequence on the individual player level. The change does not cost kybernaut players anything since any prior assets they had in the system are not affected.
Triglavians win a system: System security level changes. Travel routes change. All player assets in that system become at risk, potentially costing players who have assets there billions of ISK. The changes affect all players who don’t have Trig standing, which is the vast majority. (Even players who are not currently active in the game are permanently affected.)
To pretend the consequences are equivalent for both sides is a demonstration of willful ignorance.
Personally I don’t care, the changes don’t affect me. I assumed things would go this way (or worse) as soon as CCP started talking about their “grand new strategy”, and took steps to keep my holdings safe. That doesn’t mean I’m blind to the effects on other players or that I can’t see how CCP is shooting themselves in the foot here (yet again) with short term thinking and poor game design.
6 Likes
Sigh…so many people hating content and just love have a stagnate game
4 Likes
But at least one thing is well: The salt continues to flow. 
4 Likes
No, it’s just facts.
That’s factually wrong.
You had a point when it was still possible to be neutral.
As a neutral char, Edencom systems were just normal systems, and Trig systems were a problem.
Now, you are forced to pick a side. Depending on which one you pick, you are gonna face the exact same consequences when it comes to system owned by the other side.
Travel and commerce route change for both Edencom victories and Triglavian victories, which one affects you depend of your choice of side. If you play for Trigs, you can’t travel as you were doing before as soon as there is an Edencom system on the way. Your assets are not safe because those NPC are more dangerous than most players will ever be if you ever undock in those systems. Okay, I’ll give you that the sec status don’t change.
That’s not a valid argument.
My point is that the consequences are the same, ie you lost the possibility to properly use systems that the other side won.
You can’t tell me “But one side have bigger consequences because there are more players in it”, that just doesn’t make sense. Having more players affected doesn’t change the impact of the consequences themself on each individual player.
No, it’s a demonstration of logic and ability to reasonnate without using a logical fallacy every two sentences.
Like this, for example:
Cute little appeal to emotion, isn’t it?
I’m not blind to the effects on other players. Quite the opposite. I actually see and understand the consequences for both side, meanwhile you are trying pretty hard to convince people that one side has it worst, without a single factual example.
As in most debates, you try your best to be a smartass, and you fail pretty miserably. Yes, that’s an Ad Hominem. After all those fallacies, you can’t refuse me the use of one for my personnal enjoyement!
1 Like