You'd think CONCORD would be suspicious of any null-sov corp, and by connection, any alliance of those corps to the point that they declare all members of the alliance criminals in response to the actions of a few. Meaning that if a null sov corp wants to have anything to do with Highsec, they better weed the bad standing people from their ranks. This would also have the effect of limiting mega alliances.You'd also think that CCP would catch a clue and stop "combat bumping" by getting rid of player to player collision. The Online Game industry learned that lesson with Ultima Online... I guess that game didn't make it to the fjords.
When you go out and shoot expensive "rocks" (that dont shoot back) with your self made bow, thats hardly can be called a battle.You used to call that a gank a few months back then, but nowadays you want to look more glorious...
Ok, so Marmites gank 2 jump frigates, a shuttle (I assume it was the gate scout or something.) and a Cyno ship.Ok. Don't fly your war decced multi billion isk loot pinatas into highsec.My question is... WHY were these rocket scientists flying said multi billion isk assets into highsec in the first place? One is empty and the other looks like it has the detritus of a million rat kills piled into the hold.
Ill be more impressed when marmite kills some 'capitals' of the armed variety...
its funny but rippard ted used to translate naval sea battles to eve. I am reminded of those posts by this. In WWII the Japanese navy almost exclusively avoided shooting cargo ships, while the american navy almost exclusively hunted them. The result is clear if you can not disrupt your opponents cargo routes while they can disrupt yours you lose.
Would be more credible kills if they attacked capitals that could actually fight back. Easy kills are kills, but they are not what I would consider kills of merit or worth publishing.
Post a Comment