This is going to be one of those posts I write sometimes that someone out there might be able to blow out of the water. And if you can, fantastic! I’m going to make a statement and maybe someone out there can disprove it. And after you do, I’ll be more than happy to say that I was wrong and you were right. Ready?
I think renting is bad for EVE.
Matter of fact, I can’t think of a single alliance that has enjoyed long-term success in New Eden that started out renting some null-sec systems. If you can, please tell their story in comments because I’d love to hear it. In the meantime though, after long thought on the matter, I have become completely hostile to the idea of renters. How we remove them from game, I have no idea, but I think they need to be removed. More than that, I’ll take it a step farther: I think the very idea of renters hurts the game.
I came up with a list of reasons I think this:
- Renters fill null-sec fleets with bloat, engorging fleet sizes and adding little value by their presence except the requirement that the other side have a lot of meat shields, too.
- In so doing, they make null-sec fights less likely and less frequent.
- When the fight starts, renters die in larger numbers than non-renters both impacting your fleet’s likelihood of winning the fight and the morale of the rest of your fleet.
- Renters directly contribute to CCP making structure shoots more boring by giving them such high HP… because with fewer HP they’d be too easy to kill with a renter-engorged structure shoot fleet.
- Joining a null-sec coalition as a renter has a chilling effect on your potential PvPers by making them worse at the game: they become poorer pilots only able to fly properly in enormous fleet doctrines and unable to think for themselves.
- Renters are less likely to defend “their” territory from small-gang raiding parties.
- They’re more likely to turtle up if facing bigger threats.
- When their time comes to die, they are quickly and easily smashed by enemy forces.
- They’re the most likely groups in EVE to be awash in care-bears with no loyalty to their parent organizations.
- They’re the most likely to abandon their parent in droves if trouble starts.
- Renting stultifies or just flat-out wrecks many budding FCs by forcing them into fleets or fights too big for them to handle.
- And finally, renting teaches their leaders nothing about holding sov since the renter is beholden to their master to play the both the sov mechanics game and the meta game on their behalf. Renter leaders are therefore no more qualified to be sov-holding alliance leaders than the roughest high-sec care-bear.
If a bottoms up income system for sov comes to pass, under such a system, renters are only going to become even more common and more beholden to their enormous masters.
Aside from the very ephemeral and short-term gains a renter makes in terms of making a few ISK, I can hardly think of any benefit the renters get out of this relationship at all. And that assumes your corp or alliance isn’t just the target of a rental scam of some sort.
I’d love to hear a counter-argument on this one. Go!
If you would like to read more we invite you to visit his blog here.
they give pvpers space rich carebears to hunt. what are you cryin about
easy prey doesn't make pvp any better
true, but it gives pvpers something to do while waiting for cfc hbc to undock and blob them.
easy prey doesn't make pvp any better… but still gives a lot of FUN
:P
Something you need to keep in mind is in alot of situations renters are NOT allowed to join the main coalitions/alliance PvP fleets. They can run their own roams and such and if they prove to be competent maybe, and i stress maybe, they will be allowed to join the coalition fleets or fly in their own fleet as support onlongside ours, but that is rare.
Renters tend to be people that stick to their space and rat it up, or some industrial team looking to build capitals. Not a source of numbers to "bloat" a fleet.
lots of corperations/alliances have started out as renters or,
pets that get drafted for cta fight's to their master.
becouse with there blue standing in the erea they can survive and make some isk
they get to make 0.0 there home and feel more relax
the ones that don't have older players with long term freindships to give them a sling shot
by rental at least everybody got a change to make 0.0 there home and own there won i-hub with upgrades.
and there plenty of corperations/allainces that started by rental either in isk or meat shield
Most alliances rent out those shit systems that arnt very good for ratting ect, Renter corps of 10-30 will pay 2 bill a month for the average system and then thats all they do, Rat non stop, mine thier balls off and not worry about anything else. Alot more ratting would be spread out if 9/10ths of the systems in eve were not absolute shit to rat in, back in the day before they changed how anoms spawned it was perfect. As for mining make more stations than the minmatar able to refine, Most large mining corps live in a minmatar station or the 50% refine seeded station and no where else. Caldari stations are useless as a large pos can match it in slots, gallente stations are only usefull for offices and nothing much else and then amarr are just used in systems besides major mining systems.
Dont qq at the result of the problem look for the root
First of all, renters by in large do not PVP at all. Renters do not add to the blob at all because all they are required to do is pay rent to the larger alliance—–that would still be large without the renters (hence why they can charge people for space..they are already capable and big).
Rental income is a much more active way to get ISK then moon mining, so it is actually helping to keep null from being stale. Renters need things, upgrades, stability in their region, actual SOV (you mean its worth something?). Moon mining needs none of that. You can mine a moon anywhere and if its a good moon you collect the ISK.
But lets go down your list since you want a counter argument:
1. Renters just pay rent. They are not required NOR ALLOWED into any serious pvp fleet. If they want to PVP, they must do it on their own and show the "landlord" they are valuable. They then can be allowed into fleets and work their way up to being "pet" or "ally". (very rare to happen though).
2. Not at all. Renters have nothing to do with who fights or not. PETS and ALLIES have to do with that. Renters CAUSE fights because if someone messes with your renters SOV, you defend them….often with decent battles. Renting encourages PVP b/c they make good prey for roaming gangs, and the roaming gangs make good prey for the main alliances to get fights.
3.Renters. are not. allowed. in fleets. If anything, they can show up, but they do not have comms access, nor are giving any details at all on ANY activities the full alliances are doing. Renters showing up hurts morale most times. They often do not know pvp, which is why rent (they have isk and want quiet space to make more..they literally do not actually care about pvp and do not mind renting for "protection").
4. No idea what that is about. Structures are ground all the time regardless. Renter, pet, whoever. Renting does not effect that.
5. uh….no? A renter must first prove he can pvp (small gang, constant activity) before he will ever be allowed into an actual coalition cta fleet. So a renter does not have to do anything at all expect pay his bill when its due and use intel to report activity in his area so pvpers can respond (if they are not busy).
6. WOW. You got one right. They actually don't pvp. hence why they rent. The can make more money or just need to be in null sec, so they rent. They do not want any obligations at all to pvp, and if they form up it is on their own for their own benefit. renters cause fights b/c when people mess with them, the pvp alliance shows up to deal with it.
7. No. If facing a bigger threat they just leave and go rent from someone else….its just a business deal…they are not obligated to stay if they feel their side will lose. There is no loyalty expected from a renter. It is simply an EVE business transaction for services. Period.
8. Yep. If they undock or get caught. But some can actually pvp and do fight, and they usually end up moving up to non-renting alliances once they continue to prove themselves.
9. See number 7. Most are non-pvp based. That is why they rent. They have money, and want space but can't defend it on their on. AND they are not expected to defend the SOV. It is a business transaction with contracts, terms, and everything. Renting is a business.
10. Yep. its a bad business to stay around if you can't make ISK since you don't pvp.
11. How? if someone wants to be an fc, they should join a pvp corp and work their way up and learn how to FC. not sit in a renter corp. Again….not….allowed….in fleet…..certainly not allowed to FC anything…..
12. Actually. Some renters do get sov, depends on the contract. They have to take care of it all themselves, pay bills, etc. Renting is a business, so it teaches the groups how to get their finances together while still meeting obligations to pay rent.
I honestly have no idea where you came up with any of that b/c it is virtually completely wrong. However, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and say this: you have confused a RENTER with a PET. I would say that pretty much everything you said is true of PET alliances, not RENTERS.
Pet alliances do not rent, but have to provide pvp numbers in cta's, etc. What you said applies to them. They can effect morale (their own), and their fc's may be put into situations they are not ready for.
BTW, I started as the co-founder and co-leader of an alliance who wanted to go to null sec but with the way the blob is, there were no options unless you could pvp and carry your weight. We could not, since we were a new alliance. We had no choice but to rent to get our foot in the door. We worked our way up into a full null sec alliance….we even went out on our own and took space for ourselves in addition to what we rented, and were working on cap fleet, etc (all why paying gradually reducing rent).
It is all about the leadership of the alliance. Renting can be a foot in the door if you have no experience in null sec, but it comes with a very high learning curve (compared to normal null sec in pvp alliance). However, I left to join PVP-only alliance because the admin of running a mixed alliance was affecting my real life job.
However, during all that and before i left, the alliance lost most of its members anyway when goons invaded Tribute and took all of our space in a week, so the morale hit was from that…not from renting. We handled all our own defence and space and even helped organize all the other renters. But there is nothing we could do against a blob of PETS (from goons). Anyway so I just moved over to the PVP alliance…which I would not have been able to get into otherwise had I not been in null sec (albeit as a renter).
I fced fleets up to 50-60 (probably not very well though), and eventually got command access for coalition fleets, op times, etc and lead renter fleets against goons during the main cta battles–where we proceeded to die in glorious battle…over and over….and over (cause tidi). But at least we tried, which actually meant something to those involved.
Anyway. that was a long post. i may have gotten carried away. oh well. its just a game (i think).
Good post, you should post more often. +1
good rely
Good points.
Renting already occurs in High Sec in a minimalist degree: State Charters for POSes and Rental Bills for stations. It also does not obligate you to fight the other states but if you want to, there is the militia.
Yeah. It is a legitimate business in EVE. It is a good start. It is a system where the SOV is actually important, and holding space is more then "just because we can".
I have never seen renting cause staleness in EVE. It is all over moons. The fights over renters are actually fun, and that is because it is active ISK, not passive. It must be worked on to be maintained. If the main alliance no longer functions, then the renters take their business elsewhere.
Wrong. Renters pay rent so they do not have to fight. Also being a renter allows smaller corps without combat experience to enter the 0.0 game, and maybe one day outgrow their renter status and join the real deal if they desire.
on paper thats the best thing ever unfortunately 90% of times its not what happens
If they work hard, it happens. Or they should just be handed the free meal?
True but one in ten goes on to.something good. I tell.you this as the Ceo of a corp that started small and made it big. We began with 17 toons and a couple of.poor skilled carriers. Now we have 93 toons get over 1000 kills a month and have a small but growing super fleet. I don't even keep track of.carriers any more. Yes most corps.fail. It is survival of the fittest. To me that IS eve online.
when you can take sov for free from CVA when u apply NRDS?!
you dont get sov for free from CVA you buy it and payment methods are never the same.
being a CEO in an alliance that actually doesn't pay a single isk to CVA (all what they ask is apply NRDS and adopt their open space policy) … and ur in
So yes… i disagree .. not because i heard from here and there.. because i practiced it myself
Haha, having to pay CVA, you sir have never been to provi it seems.
Yeah really – you don't have to pay CVA…you have to lick their fuckin' boots no matter how arrogant and rude they are and put up with their self important delusions of grandeur. So long as you can feed their ego and ignore their hypocrisy they'll let you stay.
My tolerance for bullshit just isn't that high, unfortunately…and again…I'll just leave this here…
www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQMlmRvVDKU
I heard one of the directors of CVA cried when evoke and ncdot took providence, haha!
I disagree. You don't have to lick their boots…You occasionally will have a bad run in with a new CVA player that thinks because they are CVA they have some authority over you…but the only authority is the rules of Providence and those of us that enforce it. You can choose to either ignore an arrogant CVA member or take it into diplo. But my guess is based on your comments that you are not a very diplomatic person and would fail in that endevor.
Been living in Providence a long time, not in CVA, and confirming I do not lick boots.
You pay for docking, repairing, refining, etc
Sometimes when I read this guy's posts I wonder if he's playing the same game I am…
So is this guy related to Mr Goblin?O.o
Dude, this article is horrible. You have no clue about life in 0.0
Please be so kind to provide a single link to a fleet fight that has renters en mass. Only alliance that EVER used renters that actively was X.I.X. No other alliance used them because several, very obvious reasons:
A. Renters are not that good @ PVP
B. It's very easy to get into renting corp so basically chances of getting spy in your fleet increase to 100%
Renters will not join CTA fleets because:
A. Their ships are not reimbursed
B. Why would they protect somebody that should be protecting THEM instead?
Only cases when you see renter on KB in large fleet fights are:
A. Pilot is an alt of sombody who actually belongs to "master" alliance and is using his alt for scouting, giving bonuses or some other reason
B. Guy came just to KMwhore, loot the field, was dumb enough to fly through that system while fight was raging on and died to support fleet on gate.
I dealt with many renters, had my alt in different renter corps for different reasons (Spy stuff, carebearing), thus I know what I am saying.
No please stop posting. You are terrible.
12. And finally, renting teaches their leaders nothing about holding sov since the renter is beholden to their master to play the both the sov mechanics game and the meta game on their behalf. Renter leaders are therefore no more qualified to be sov-holding alliance leaders than the roughest high-sec care-bear.
Let me shed some more light on this. Renters are the ones who actually make u understand how hard it is to maintain the system coz they permanently moan about:
A. Number of production lines in station
B. Lack of ice belts in system and how hard it is for them to keep their 1000 poses per system fueled and running
C. That you need a cynogen in said syste,
D. You need Cynojammer in system coz they are willing to rat in supers and titans
E. That you have to be always available for cycling damn cynogen whenever they want to deliver things to system
F. That you need all sort of upgrades etc. etc. etc.
Some diplos are strong enough and keep up with renter's requirements and constant whine, some just transfer sov to them and forget.
So renters are the ones who actually reminds u more then anybody else how hard is that to keep system healthy for ISK printing.
Most leaders of Sov holding, combat alliances review system from military point – coverage of titan jump range, ability to deliver reinforcements to different locations ASAP, etc. Moment when alliance leader will start viewing system as "I think I will farm a lot of ISK in sanctums here" he will lose alliance. Just because this game is about WAR, more war and ever more war. So in order to keep your soldiers in good shape you have to generate content aka fight. In order to keep fleets running and supply war machine u need money. Renters and moons, that's where u get that from. Renters build ships with minerals they mine in systems, they create a fuel that you use for your infrastructure from same belts u rent to them. They create modules that your PVPers will buy to fit ships.
And you don't have to be damn ali CEO to realize this. So once again THINK before you actually write about something.
"Aside from the very ephemeral and short-term gains a renter makes in terms of making a few ISK, I can hardly think of any benefit the renters get out of this relationship at all. And that assumes your corp or alliance isn’t just the target of a rental scam of some sort."
renters perspective: average member of renting corporation makes from 10 to 20 billion ISK per moth just by ratting and doing plexes. If corporation CEO is smart enough he makes around 50 billion ISK by just producing stuff. Renter corporations do mining ops frequently, also they salvage and reprocess anything that can lock. They are like damn vacuum machines sucking up everything around them. Proper renting corporation can start supplying landlord with ships and modules for price that is bellow JITA market price. Average PVPer has to work hard to get that income and he will still manage to waste all that ISK on ships that his alliance requires for CTAs, ships that he wants to fly in solo or small gang PVP, Implants and clones, PLEXes. This is what renting part looks like. I'm thinking of creating a corporation and renting system from my own alliance just because it's very profitable.
So basically it is win-win situation, carebears are happy because they make ton of ISK. Landlord is happy getting endless and cheap supply of military hardware and renting payments to sustain his reimbursement program.
So if you will take a step back and look at bigger picture you will see that THIS is the only case in EVE where income goes from BOTTOM TO TOP.
BOTTOMS UP CHAIN GOES:
Renter pilot rats in belt, Corporation taxes him for % of income from spawn (regular corp tax), after reaching specific amount corporation transfers payment fee to renting alliance; Renting alliance transfers ISK to Landlord; Landlord transforms this ISK to combat hardware that he gives out to his pilots or pays for lost hardware.
P.S.
Remember that this game is about conflicts, bloody conflicts that we ignite. You cannot run conflict having army of peasants with pitchforks. So you need renters. That's the way it works in eve and in RL. Have you ever seen general asking his soldiers to work in McDonalds for a while just to save some money for new AC 130 that will keep their asses safe on next operations?
I think renting is bad for EVE.
Renting system is solely based on pilot's will who is renting that system. This game is player driven. Nobody drags people from empire to 0.0 by force and mugs ISK every month for staging there. Renting is based on mutual agreements and will of landlord and renter. Thus it is solely player base's decision. This game is driven by it's players base, so what is good for players is good for EVE. If you feel somehow unhappy with this… well… it's your problem.
Hey man that is really nice elaboration on how renting works and what it actually is!
From Jster's article and other comments it is clear most people don’t understand how those things work so you should write an article explaining it (you could almost copy paste comments you made here as response to this article) and submit them to Riverini for publishing.
I started out as a renter and am now one of the best pvpers in eve. If I had not been allowed to go to null sec I would have got bored and left the game. I learned to become a good player in null and by supporting the alliance I was renting from.
the biggest risk renters pose to a landlord alliance is RMT. if a botting renter is using a landlord's pos for safety, he puts that landlord's pos at risk of being nuked by ccp. it is upto to landlord to ensure their renters are not botting, if they are using their poses for safety.
Ohgod. That post is just so wrong in so many ways
lol i thought this was going to be about renting was a rip off and shouldnt be allowed, yada yada (which i would of agreed to) and this was just an attack on renters.. oh dear, this guy clearly has no clue
Jester is wrong about renters filling fleets with incompetent dudes. Renters are not in nullsec to join fleets, they only farm ISK.
The guys, who are making huge blobs are HBC fags. It is really hard to create a good composition, when you bring 30 sniping ships and they undock 200 tech1 frigs. Sooner or later, the smaller gang of good ships is forced to run or being killed by inevitable tackle from dude who cares not about his ship, because it cost 300k ISK.
Even then, still they would be destroyed by competent enemy, the problem is they are backed by PL. And PL is another problem – one alliance after another fall and their "content creators" who are there to create wars from which everyone has fun, are being recruited by PL. Then, these guys who used to be fighting each other from different reasons and then occassionally became allies, are now in single group. And so, PL by taking away dudes who could create their own groups and make universe separated into factions of various alliances, is actually ruining game for themselves. Because soon, there will be nobody left to fight, except the single blob they created and rely on.
cos sniping shipos are for pussys maybe?
you got it wrong, its fuck goons, not hbc…
fuck both
"Renters are less likely to defend “their” territory from small-gang raiding parties."
thats bullshit…
most of them can defend themselves but if they respond with violence, they will get more and more gangs, because they will be known that they fight back…
thats enough, from now on i stop reading posts from jester´s trek! He just fails every article he writes, but there is also a good side, in the comments everything will be cleared by people with actual knowledge about eve and thats worth reading it. So i will just read the comments in jester´s trek articles and i´ll be fine
Agreed. Between these & the angry salty ranting drivel written by that Asperger's sufferer Goblin, really wondering where they found these bloggers. They'd be better off asking some of the commenter's to write their articles.
you obviously dont know shit about 0.0
renters provide money to sustain the big blocks.
you are looking at this issue totaly one-sided
Taking renters out of the game is nearly impossible. I don't see how a mechanic could be implemented where people wouldn't be able to make verbal/written contracts to use some space at the cost of isk without causing huge side effects to other parts of eve. The worse that could be done is to force the renters into their masters alliance, which really won't do much to stop people from renting.
Most of your points about renters have some merit to them, but I don't see how this is any different from any other carebear alliance out there (aside from maybe the bloated fleets part). Most people that rent, cannot or will not go and take their own null space (like the majority of eve players). If renters were somehow removes from null it's just gonna make more empty 0.0 space imo, as well as devalue the space to sov holders since they won't have rental income.
In other words, there's good and bad things that happen as a result of renters. Simply listing off the bad things without weighing out the positives imo isn't the best way to discern if renters are a problem.
There is that rare case of a renting alliance becoming an actual member of a coalition. SQUEE. is a good example of this. They were renting MVUO from Nulli when they were in Period Basis. Will SQUEE be around in the long term? Time will tell, but they have been growing.
Why does Jester hate the sandbox so much? Feudal and vassal obligations are nearly as old as human history. I think the fact that we have that structure in EVE is a testament to how well the sandbox has been constructed, and how effective it is as a simulation writ small for human interactions.
I find it equally interesting that EVE democracies tend to fail, EVE triumvirates inevitably transition to dictatorships, but EVE consular structures tend to stick around for awhile (so long as said consuls work together). Heck, EVE has civil wars! How cool is that?
Bitching that the strong oppress the weak is effectively saying "I don't want to play in this sandbox", which is fine: go find another.
Don't vote this guy for csm. It's pretty apparent he has no idea whats going on.
The comments/replies this far have generally been spot on. Renters have their place in Eve for various reasons. No point in enumerating them again. Ripard: if you A) don't understand how the renter system works to the need it of both te sov holding "master" and isk producing tenant, or B) you think this can ever be eradicated from a game like Eve, you are truly bad at the game and should feel bad for wasting your time ad ours just to fill a page with words. The more you write shite like this the more I'm feeling inclined to absolutely use every chance I can on Eve Radio to highlight the fact that you should never ever ever be on the CSM. Just dumb.
Renters are a necessary source of income, especially for sov-holding alliances that don't have technetium or R64 moons. Income is always useful to do things like finance ship replacement programs, finance alliance contests for the PvPers rewarding top killers, etc. PLUS renters are great at buying stuff on the market, and not so great at shipping it down. So they trickle some of their ratting isk income to those players who stock the market, not just to the alliance leadership.
Renters are hardly ever in a CTA fleet. They're usually not expected to be. When they are they have about the same possibility of dying as any other fleet member. Renters are not always lemmings.
As others have said, learn how to play the game (or that aspect of the game) before making unjustified comments.
Renting is emergent game play so I don't think you can really force it out, but on another note people are always pointing out and/or complaining that some alliances hold them Tech moons and that they should be spread out, that renters are necessary income for non tech alliances, etc. I mean CCP put the tech moons in the game in the manner they did to encourage conflict. Yes, renting is an alternative income for non tech entities but thats because its a more convenient option than conquering GSF's tech. Without renters there would be a much greater incentive to fight over tech moons.
Who cares if its "bad for EVE?" Its emergent gameplay.
I feel your over thinking it renters want to enjoy null sec without putting the hard effort into it………those who are in rent alliances but do want to put in the hard effort usually join the land lord alliance instead of having a renter alliance bud into something note worthy in null sec
Renters alliance should be looked at like a bussnies not a military…. The goal of anyone in a renter alliance most of the time is to make money before it goes to shit… i know of one renter alliance after they lost space the disbanded and the alliance owner had kept the 500b or so in the wallet for himself…
End of the day renters are carebears i rather them be in null were there is a chance for them to die then in a high sec lvl4 mission
According to a Kil2 commentary, he preferred roaming in renter territory as they were much more prone to respond with a home defense gang as they do not get the exposure to PVP that big corps/alliance do and therefore are much quicker to jump at the chance to fight in small engagements (while also adding that they did so in a much less organized manner). Not saying Kil2 knows all just pointing out an opinion from a well respected pvper.
CCPKIL2 FOR PRES
1 single argument : the non(low) tech sov holders NEED renters as their main source of income other moon-goo is worthless thats why there are and always will be renters, if you remove them you remove ALL remaining relatively small coalitions/ alliances who still got sov (like proviblock)
I wonder if the author has ever actually spent a single day in null.
I can't think of anybody who'd want them in fleets – there's enough spies and awoxxers as it is, having renters in fleet would magnify that 10x. Renters aren't required to contribute to fleets.
Does anyone else suspect that there are probably a hundred or so players who've been playing this game since about 2004-06 who are just running the whole show at this point?
someone please sack this author all his posts are utter bollox about situation he knows nothing about
take your blinkers off child – state why you think its bollox
why do noobs that come from wow (or somewhere) and know nothing about how things work like to imagine how things are and splerge
IRC originally purchased/rented etherium reach from goon swarm
Do you need a cookie little boy?? because you got it a bit all wrong
Some clarification is in order.
I am a Co-Founder of TMA and we started as a renter alliance. As a renter the larger alliances told us that the rent was not only payment for the sov but protection of that sov. Not day to day protection but protection of those trying to take our sov or our ability to use our sov. We were very fortunate to have found NC. . While with NC. we saw a lot of corps and alliances come and go. But we stayed with them through thick or thin.
As Shark, also a Co-Founder of TMA, said renting sov is purely a business deal. Most groups do not expect rentees to stay for very long. Most move around from sov to sov. Rentees move into areas usually with mostly Industrial pilots looking for opportunities to make isk and not pvp. A few with the corp or alliance that rent will pvp. It seems most corps and alliances turn into a dichotomy of Industrial and PVP which begin to tear apart the alliance or corp. The reason for the tear is found in the killboard which industrial pilots can care less about but PVP pilots hold near and dear.
Nulli from my understanding started as a renter alliance. They have grown into one of the major coalitions in null sec. I am sure that there are others I just can not tell you who they are.
Renters are not the issue of null sec today nor do they engorge the fleets ranks. As a FC, I did not find it to be overwhelming or an issue of how many was in fleet. In fact, the best place to learn to FC is in a renter group, for the expectations are low. Instead I found that NC. and other pilots would join my fleets and share their opinions on what I could improve very helpful. The large fleets do not allow new FCs leading them. Coalitions would be foolish to allow this, do to heavy losses due to mistakes on the FC's part. You give little credit to the judgement or intelligence of the leaders renting sov.
The proposed idea that renters are bad for eve I find to be subjective and obsurded. Without renters goons would own all of null sec by now. They have taken almost all of the tec moons leaving most coalitions to depend on renters for the income to supply their troops with isk, ships and fits.
As far and engorged fleets they are created by engorged coalitions. I have been in large fleets and they are exciting. But my favorite is still 20 – 60 pilots. The 800 pilot to 1200 pilot fleets are fun but way to laggy. By the time half of the targets are targeted they are dead.
I appreciate the fact that you were trying to write this to be engaging, my point is stick to articles about things you are knowledgable of and can speak with experience and not conjecture.
All you're saying is that renters are not landlords, and spinning that in a negative light. Not everyone can be a landlord, or landowner for that matter. Nor do they want to be, or aspire to be. That does not mean there should be no renters, or that they are worse than landlords, or a negative for the game, or failures.
It's a sandbox. There will always be people paying others to provide them a temporary advantage or shortcut as a means to an end. Is someone who buys a ship in Jita a worse player than someone who mines and manufactures his own ship? No, it's just someone who has no aspirations or interest in that side of the game. They are paying for a service: manufacturing. Renters are also paying for a service they do not wish to be bothered with directly themselves: sovereignty.
As i person who has ran the rental programs in 3 former 0.0 alliances. I would like to thank everyone for their ISK
Happy forever alone day
7.They’re more likely to turtle up if facing bigger threats.
^ what exactly would you have them do? They wouldn't be renting if they could take the space themselves. Do you expect them to fly everything they have in a last ditch Texas – Die to the Last Man – Alamo fight, against overwhelming odds? To lose millions for the "gud fight". No thanks.
Not everyone's idea of a good time is getting podded back to the station.
WTF is this ?
Test and PL both have done well considering they were (and could still be) renting space from goons. Nuff said.
Also:
renting present participle of rent (Verb)
Verb
1. Pay someone for the use of (something, typically property, land, or a car).
2. (of an owner) Let someone use (something) in return for payment.
Test rent delve, they live there and paid rent in full upfront by providing the initial man power to take it. PL are the same, they have moons and wot not and very little sov. They too also pay via manpower and other mean.
Who is the Landlord of the above tenants ? CFC. Disobey or face eviction…….
I started out a high sec mission runner, missioned mon-fri and learned to pvp in lowsec on weekends. Once i felt i had a handle on things I joined a renter alliance (HTA) I made alot of isk and guess what, We PVPed (poorly) we even defended our sov (several times) becuase our landlords were off on a fail campaign. then we got kerbstomped by RA and PL. After that i joined a sov holding alliance and won a couple sov wars and lost a couple. Now i'm a member of a pvp only alliance with no sov (thank gawd) and have more fun than ever.
My point is that it seems a very natural progression and renting serves it's purpose, many people who were in my first renting alliance crawled back to highsec, some went elsewhere to rent and some progressed. the rental space was like a trial period so that opinions and friendships could be formed with the resulting career paths afterwards stemming from how the experience in rental space worked out.