Missions & Complexes

I call it BS
thousand of folks fighting to protect space and they get is 60~70m/hr ratting in null

20~30 dudes fight to hold the wh system, making over a bil/hr but have to split between 10 dudes in the ops but still have LIMITED resource, not account in hassle of logistics

where is the "Group Based Activity versus Reward" ?????

There is some of us who like High sec, We play this game in HOW WE WANT TO PLAY IT, <-- Read that.

Now HTFU

Back on topic or this thread will be locked like the others, you idiots. I swear it's like herding a flock of dodo birds. Hint: they are now extinct.

Rofl, a high sec player telling people to HTFU. priceless.

There is nothing wrong with playing in high sec if you accept the natural balance of the game ie some things are just not going to be as good in high as it is in other places because (as a trade off) you get concord protection/retaliation against non-consensual pvp. I still wonder why some high sec people don't get that concept.

Come out from under the protective skirts of Concord, into space where people can kill your ships without having to suicide you, wardec you or awox you, and you then rightly get the rewards for that, [/i]OR[/i] accept the fact that High Sec gameplay and rewards CAN'T be as good as the rest of the game (because then no one in their right mind would leave high sec) and

(wait for it)

HTFU.

StuRyan you make a good point .(Sarcastic).

Eve online already runs on the"Group Based Activity versus Reward" model. The "risk versus reward " way of thinking facilitates interesting and dynamic gameplay such as Griefing, thievery, infiltration, spying etc. It also adds trust as a variable/commodity all of these things make Eve a great game and not just another wow in space. Like the new SWTOR (Star Wars the Old Republic MMO).

Now before you jump down my throat, let me lay it out for you in layman's terms. Any task that is risky is always safer with more people. If those people are properly organized that task becomes even safer. That i how Major Alliances are able to to hold sovereignty, which we need in order to operate the sovereignty upgrades to allow our members to have any marginal increase in income over high sec. These upgrades were moved/built and installed by our logistics team. Our PVP fleets keep our space clear of hostile so that we can make money when we need it. Our intelligence network(containing Intel channels, voice communications, and many other goodies both in game and out) helps to keep our members safe and instruct our fleet commanders where there are people to shoot. We are able to manage all of this, through our out of game infrastructure (Mumble,Jabber, forums) which are on a Web server that one of our alliance members has donated to us. All of these services are fed information and maintained by players(our members). If you are Ratting/Mining in a sovereignty system you are you are protected by information. This information is collected presented to you by your fellow alliance mates and their allies and present it to you via our intelligence infrastructure.

In a major 0.0 alliance at all times100 - 500 people reporting Intel infrastructure. Yes 0.0 Ratting is a solo activity, if you are only counting what's happening on in the immediate area (on grid). However if you take into account all the time and effort it took to set up the infrastructure, to keep the intelligence flowing and up-to-date.It takes a lot of organization to keep that space safe enough in order to rat in the first place. It is most definitely a group activity. The amount of that organization would put a small military operation to shame. And this is all done by volunteers. Which you would have known if you've ever spent any time in any alliance that held sovereignty for any reasonable amount of time not hiding, under Concordes skirt.

The risk versus reward way of thinking encourages people to work together in groups to get higher rewards , so that would lead me back to the point I proved above Eve online already runs on the"Group Based Activity versus Reward" model. Understand my point yet. In high sec you don't truly need to trust in the people you're flying with. If they shoot you Concorde will kill them. Everywhere else below 0.5 They could shoot you without game mechanics automatically killing them. Every activity with few exceptions that is done in space outside of high-sec is a group activity on some level. Even something simple like traveling. Traveling, to do this for any amount of safety you require scouts and/or Intel channels (which might consist of your alts), but that is still a group activity. There were people who 10 boxed in incursions....

If you don't understand it by now there's no helping you. Go play WoW or SWTOR you might have more fun. Now back to the actual topic

As far as incursion balancing the CCP must make up their mind what they want incursions to be. So if we want some progress we should get CCP to decide what they want it to be that way it doesn't become an abandoned feature that hardly anybody uses. Examples of good questions are:


What does CCP intend incursions to be?

Do you want them to draw conflict between null-sec and low-sec entities or low sec and high sec entities or both?

Do you intend them to be just an alternate activity to the existing PVE mechanics or do you wish them to pay out more?

Where do you intend that the bulk of the incentives to run these to come from?


Because CCP will do what they want because this is their game, we just play it. We can try and shape it but calling the dev stupid is not a way to ingratiate yourself to someone with the power to make or break your game experience. Use your brain people.

The thing that makes me laugh at this is that for the most part the high seccers have accepted the "natural balance of the game" namely that reward does follow security ratings and that in fact high sec rewards are not as good as the rest of the game.

For this specific issue incursions outside of highsec pay 42% more ISK and LP than those inside, that is the bonus for taking the extra risks inherent to running incursions outside of highsec, that highseccers choose not to take that extra risk and gain the extra rewards is their choice, and they're happy with it, it's when various elements outside of highsec attempt to overrule that choice based off of the quaint notion that the highseccers somehow aren't playing Eve that they get annoyed and rightly so.

double post sorry

Let me repeat myself, Just for you cause you are cute, EVE Online is to be played by that person how he play's it, I find it funny that you look at people differently cause they bear in High Sec, It is totally up to them.

You must be another 0.0? HTFU.

I love you really.

Nice read – Let me point out a few things:

When writing a post in a discussion it is good practice not to assume.

Since I have been involved in high sec groups, low sec groups, worm hole groups and null sec groups I have a varied background and am perfectly capable of contributing without sounding condescending, something that you may wish to consider when contributing to a discussion.

From all that writing I took the following points:
Group based activity versus Reward already runs.
Null sec is condemned to hundreds of people working together to achieve an infrastructure.
Infrastructure is used to secure a higher ISK/Hour.

Question then – Why do I see a lot of Test Alliance pilots in High sec running Incursions?

Pubbie Test got served....

Test pilots run incursions because null space doesn't give the same pay out--- hmmmm perhaps thats an issue with null sec...since everything about eve is null sec.... Null pilots really do think that they are doing eve a favour from playing the game thatt way??? 6% of eve plays in null sec ladies = thats the issue. Besides null sec isn't about moons is it? All that passive isk?