These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Highsec vs 0.0 - enough is enough, time to add some risk to the real carebears!
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Copine Callmeknau
Dirty Vagrants
Intergalactic Space Hobos
#101 - 2012-07-06 13:51:20 UTC
Cebraio wrote:
Copine Callmeknau wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:

i'm really not going to bother rehashing literally every bit of advice i've given to hisec miners, but there are so many basic steps they could take to avoid getting into a situation where they get targeted for a gank in the first place, i.e. fitting an actual tank rather than whatever it takes to tank pitiful hisec belt rats

That generally doesn't help, we bring two cat's for this exact reason. Only so much tank you can get with < 50PG, and cat's are super smexy with their uber dps Twisted
If I were going to give any hulk pilots out there any survival tips, it'd be to fit a full rack of ECM bursts, pray, and spam warp.


LOL! Awesome advice from a ganker! ECM bursts in hi sec! So if they don't die to your guns, they'll get CONCORDED in the end. Brilliant!

Also staying aligned during mining is not really feasible. You will move out of mining range sooner or later.



Yes, I know they'll go out of range, I already said that, y ouquoted me saying it in fact...

Also confirming that CONCORD will destroy you for ECM bursting people agressed to you Roll

Unless of course you are mining in a belt surrounded by neutral miners, in which case go back to square one and learn how to mine.
Theodoric Darkwind wrote:
Copine Callmeknau wrote:

While his ideas are derptarded, the basic premise that nullbearing is currently as safe or safer than hisec bearing is a valid one.


you have clearly never lived in null.

And you are clearly incapable of reading a thread in it's entirety, or clicking a character to check it's employment history.

Tell me, how many years of schooling did you have to repeat before settling for a GED?

There should be a rather awesome pic here
Generals4
#102 - 2012-07-06 13:52:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Generals4
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Generals4 wrote:
Cloned S0ul wrote:
Nullbears hate Highsecbears and vice versa this is true competition.


Actually to my knowledge highsecbears don't care about null.

read who wrote the OP, revise your knowledge.


If you would have kept on reading you would have known the reason why that is so according to me. Nullbears have dedicated their existence to ruining the ones of highsecbears (kinda exagerating but just think of hulkagedon, the Goon funded bounties on mining barges and all the whining about any lucrative high sec activities (like incursions and level 4 missions)). Surely it is normal that those who are targeted by so much love send some back? Just think about it, why would a highsecbear care about the life of a nullbear? No reason at all. However nullbears have often enough explained why they hate highsecbears, because they aren't shooting targets in nullsec like the nullbears would like them to be.

_-Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily. _
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#103 - 2012-07-06 14:00:27 UTC
Generals4 wrote:
If you would have kept on reading you would have known the reason why that is so according to me.

How's it our fault NPC corp posters endlessly create dumb threads about buffing CONCORD and nerfing 0.0 and other places they've never played in?
Generals4
#104 - 2012-07-06 14:05:39 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Generals4 wrote:
If you would have kept on reading you would have known the reason why that is so according to me.

How's it our fault NPC corp posters endlessly create dumb threads about buffing CONCORD and nerfing 0.0 and other places they've never played in?


Maybe subsidizing the suicide ganking on them? Maybe because for every thread calling for a null nerf there are 5 calling for a high sec nerf? And how is a demand on buffing concord somehow showing hatred towards nullseccers? Concord doesn't exist in null.


Anyway, this is OT and i'll leave it at that. But please refrain from quoting the first sentence out of posts and than asking something which is answered in the content that followed that sentence.

_-Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily. _
Werst Dendenahzees
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#105 - 2012-07-06 14:07:48 UTC
Copine Callmeknau wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
another NPC corp poster regales us with his well-informed and unbiased insights on nullsec

While his ideas are derptarded, the basic premise that nullbearing is currently as safe or safer than hisec bearing is a valid one.

Except for the fact that you can warp your bestower full of PI loot straight into a Sabre.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#106 - 2012-07-06 14:15:58 UTC
Generals4 wrote:
Maybe because for every thread calling for a null nerf there are 5 calling for a high sec nerf?

All I see is this thread, and threads like this.
Werst Dendenahzees
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#107 - 2012-07-06 14:18:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Werst Dendenahzees
Theodoric Darkwind wrote:
contrary to popular belief suicide ganks of miners are still fairly rare as a % of the total hulks out mining (if ganking were that much of an issue then the economy would be suffering hyperinflation due to low supply of highsec minerals, and highsec mineral prices are still reasonable).


Funny you should talk about that

Please check trit and pyerite prices TIA
Cebraio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#108 - 2012-07-06 14:24:56 UTC
Copine Callmeknau wrote:

Also confirming that CONCORD will destroy you for ECM bursting people agressed to you Roll

Of course CONCORD does not act in that case. But only in that unlikely case that you jam nothing neutral. It would be hilariously easy to trap miners with ECM bursts by warping a neutral, not aggressed, alt with the attackers. So yes, still a brilliant advice.

Regarding the alignment, it was not specifically directed towards you. Just wanted to point it out.

PS: "miners with ECM bursts" shall be my next corp name.
Valek Noor
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#109 - 2012-07-06 14:28:39 UTC
this age old long winded argument basically comes to one thing if you stand far enough back

the ability to go AFK

folks in empire seem to think they should be safe as houses if they leave there PC for a while, carry on mining/hauling AFK while they go do something else, CCP and the game should protect them while they make ooodles of isk risk free

Null sec folks know different- leave PC while not safe = death

Stupid enough not to warp when red comes into local when mining = death

null sec folks ganking in empire are merely trying to help educate those in empire to the higher aspects of the game.........

It really is as clear as mud when you look at it
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#110 - 2012-07-06 14:30:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Quote:
Taurich Vorsel
#111 - 2012-07-06 14:44:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Taurich Vorsel
Cebraio wrote:
Copine Callmeknau wrote:

Also confirming that CONCORD will destroy you for ECM bursting people agressed to you Roll

Of course CONCORD does not act in that case. But only in that unlikely case that you jam nothing neutral. It would be hilariously easy to trap miners with ECM bursts by warping a neutral, not aggressed, alt with the attackers. So yes, still a brilliant advice.

Regarding the alignment, it was not specifically directed towards you. Just wanted to point it out.

PS: "miners with ECM bursts" shall be my next corp name.

Oh I'm sorry, is it common practice for gankers to bring neutral alts with them?

Eh? It's not?

Then use the damn tactic...


Besides what do you care anyway, a hulk isn't going to survive a gank from multiple catalysts whether you tank it or not, your dead either way. Does it matter if CONCORD is the one that gets you?
Seems worth it to me for a chance to evade otherwise certain death


And you KNOW you'll look like the hardest motherfracker in EVE when people see you suicide ganking catalysts in a hulk


Copine Callmeknau wrote:
Theodoric Darkwind wrote:
Copine Callmeknau wrote:

While his ideas are derptarded, the basic premise that nullbearing is currently as safe or safer than hisec bearing is a valid one.


you have clearly never lived in null.

And you are clearly incapable of reading a thread in it's entirety, or clicking a character to check it's employment history.

Tell me, how many years of schooling did you have to repeat before settling for a GED?

I was in the middle of editing this before being rudely interrupted by ISD

I took the time to check out your employment history
One day lad, you'll understand EVE and be able to make accurate statements about it's gameplay

Copine Callmeknau disappeared one day now we are left with Taurich Vorsel AKA BIZARRO COPE!
Cebraio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#112 - 2012-07-06 15:03:01 UTC
Oh hello, nice alt. Roll

Taurich Vorsel wrote:
Cebraio wrote:
Copine Callmeknau wrote:

Also confirming that CONCORD will destroy you for ECM bursting people agressed to you Roll

Of course CONCORD does not act in that case. But only in that unlikely case that you jam nothing neutral. It would be hilariously easy to trap miners with ECM bursts by warping a neutral, not aggressed, alt with the attackers. So yes, still a brilliant advice.

Regarding the alignment, it was not specifically directed towards you. Just wanted to point it out.

PS: "miners with ECM bursts" shall be my next corp name.

Oh I'm sorry, is it common practice for gankers to bring neutral alts with them?

In cases where they expect valuable loot drops, yes. In cases like Hulk ganks, probably not.

Taurich Vorsel wrote:

Then use the damn tactic...

No thanks. Why would I listen to you anyway? I'm not a miner and I'm not that stupid. I just like to point out when people make silly suggestions and present them as solutions for surviving a gank. These kind of suggestions happen a lot on that topic.

There are many ways to avoid ganks or increase survivability. This one is probably the worst.
Also, as soon as miners would use this tactic (lol), gankers would surely bring neutral alts.

Taurich Vorsel wrote:

Seems worth it to me for a chance to evade otherwise certain death

Then go ahead and prove to us that it works. Good luck.
Joe Skellington
Sarz'na Khumatari
#113 - 2012-07-06 15:04:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Skellington
It's only safer in Nullsec if you have good people in your alliance, otherwise your in deep hocky doodoo. So, in essence... if you suck at EVE, you're not safe anywhere. This thread is pointless.

Please note that ASCII art is not permitted in the forum signatures. Spitfire
Shameless Avenger
Can Preachers of Kador
#114 - 2012-07-06 15:06:23 UTC
If you don't know how to blow up ships in empire, you are doing it wrong.

"This is the Ninja. He will scan you down; he will salvage your wrecks and there shall be no aggro"
TotalCareBear
Doomheim
#115 - 2012-07-06 15:06:24 UTC
Valek Noor wrote:
this age old long winded argument basically comes to one thing if you stand far enough back

the ability to go AFK

folks in empire seem to think they should be safe as houses if they leave there PC for a while, carry on mining/hauling AFK while they go do something else, CCP and the game should protect them while they make ooodles of isk risk free

Null sec folks know different- leave PC while not safe = death

Stupid enough not to warp when red comes into local when mining = death

null sec folks ganking in empire are merely trying to help educate those in empire to the higher aspects of the game.........

It really is as clear as mud when you look at it


As the topic creator, I never asked for any buffs to highsec. What I did ask for, was serious nerfs to 0.0 carebears.

0.0 always talk stories about "REAL EVE" and "harsh 0.0 spaceship sandbox" - however, when you look at the actual mechanics, you can see that these stories are simply not true, and far too many game mechanics protect them from anything dangerous from happening to them. Yes, AFKing in 0.0 space is more dangerous, but that is about it.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#116 - 2012-07-06 15:12:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
make all of highsec into 0.0 so everyone can be as safe as us nullsec dwellers
let all of the autopiloting freighters see how safe it is
TotalCareBear
Doomheim
#117 - 2012-07-06 15:30:30 UTC
that beast wrote:
Alrighty, so, ignoring the big mess of c*** going on in Delve right now (which yes, is a war by the way), there are plenty of other 0.0 regions/systems.

So why doesn't OP and everyone with him go down to 0.0 and mine (after all, it's where the slightly more expensive minerals are) and then we'll see how safe it really is?

People who currently live in null will have, at some point or other, carebeared and lived in high sec, if only because it's where everyone starts. But people who live in highsec haven't necessarily lived in null, and so, on the scale of things, the people who are more likely to be the best informed about various areas of the game, are the ones who live in null.

I'm not saying either side is right, but I would like to see some of the highsec carebears coming down to mine in null because we could all do with a few more kills. And if you say "Blah but it's not the same for us because we don't have all the POS's and infrastructure and intel" then your original argument becomes a little bit moot with the yno "Null is just as safe". Arguing that the "nullbears" have made it safe for themselves is perfectly valid, and it's fine for them to have done it. It's not really using game mechanics other than that incredibly basic mechanic of "There are players in the game, other plays can interact with them". However, regardless of whether or not they've made it safe, that's still only a localised safety net. It is still dangerous, if you get my drift.

Anyway, if OP is right, then he can come down to null and start mining and make lots more money than he currently is, because he won't die, he won't even get suicide ganked, and he'll get the more valuble ores. So why doesn't he? OP your argument is fundamentally flawed.

TB


Please, tell me, how do you counter this:

Quote:

event 1. neutral/red jumps into 0.0 system
event 2. every hulk/raven/cnr/vindicator/maradeur/carrier click on "Warp to POS/SS/DOCK."


Local is a problem, remove it from the game.


As to the "we make it safe ourselves" - yeah, you do, because EVE 0.0 sov mechanics(and local) make it too easy and too safe to do so. When CCP started adding some "cool" sov mechanics such as Sov 4, JB or Cynojammers - This made 0.0 even safer for alliances, even though, it was quite obvious there were major flaws in 0.0 mechanics before those changes. I never saw any 0.0 far easier and safer.
TotalCareBear
Doomheim
#118 - 2012-07-06 15:31:49 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
make all of highsec into 0.0 so everyone can be as safe as us nullsec dwellers
let all of the autopiloting freighters see how safe it is


remove local from game, let's see all the 0.0 bears see what unconsensual pvp is then.
TotalCareBear
Doomheim
#119 - 2012-07-06 15:32:35 UTC
Joe Skellington wrote:
It's only safer in Nullsec if you have good people in your alliance, otherwise your in deep hocky doodoo. So, in essence... if you suck at EVE, you're not safe anywhere. This thread is pointless.


Looking at local takes great skill and great allies. c/d?
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#120 - 2012-07-06 15:36:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
TotalCareBear wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
make all of highsec into 0.0 so everyone can be as safe as us nullsec dwellers
let all of the autopiloting freighters see how safe it is


remove local from game, let's see all the 0.0 bears see what unconsensual pvp is then.

Sure, turn all of EVE into sov 0.0 and turn off local
should be fun

but I mean really, if we're all so safe like you've been claiming, you should have no problem with all of highsec being turned into 0.0 and thus everyone enjoying equal safety, right?