These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#121 - 2012-07-06 15:37:11 UTC
Well you're just full of dumb ideas, aren't you?

Tell me more about that pve supercarrier idea you had.
TotalCareBear
Doomheim
#122 - 2012-07-06 15:40:25 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
TotalCareBear wrote:
You make it safe, thanks to the game mechanics.

So the players make it safe, because the game mechanics make it safe.

Nice.


Highsec players make good isk, because the game mechanics allow them to make good isk. Quite nice indeed. So stop whining about highsec?

No highsec carebear argues against risk vs reward, but there seems to be a lack of risk in 0.0. Goons seems to make sound like arguing for nerfing rewards is a good thing, but arguing for increasing risks in 0.0 space is stupid...
TotalCareBear
Doomheim
#123 - 2012-07-06 15:41:08 UTC  |  Edited by: TotalCareBear
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
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?


I agree, let's do that.

edit:

Also, before that, major nerfs to defensive infrastructure.

By the way, I am not arguing 0.0 is totally safe - of course afking in 0.0 is more dangerous than in highsec. Obviously no one will suicide gank your faction fit highsec mission runner, but any non-afk 0.0 PvEr enjoys about as much safety as they do in highsec, while having far higher rewards. Now, mining is more dangerous in highsec(because local is of no help). Time to add some risk to the 0.0, to balance things out.
Taurich Vorsel
#124 - 2012-07-06 15:41:19 UTC
Cebraio wrote:
Oh hello, nice alt. Roll

Taurich Vorsel wrote:

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.

It is a nice alt isn't it? I'm surprised you were able to figure it out, I figured that listing my mains name in my sig and having the same avatar as my main but facing the other way with black hair might have been a tad subtle for most.
You sir are in line for detective of the year.

Really, your argument for why this won't work is because gankers will bring a counter?
Have you some magical tactic that gankers won't bother to counter?
Of course you don't

No, I'm not going to grind my sec status positive again and skill for a hulk just so I can prove to you that ECM functions as intended.
It's game mechanics, I already know it works.
Feel free to name some midslot modules that would be more likely to save your ass than ECM burst please.

Copine Callmeknau disappeared one day now we are left with Taurich Vorsel AKA BIZARRO COPE!
TotalCareBear
Doomheim
#125 - 2012-07-06 15:45:09 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Well you're just full of dumb ideas, aren't you?

Tell me more about that pve supercarrier idea you had.



Tell me more about, why it was necessary to add Sov4, sov upgrades, JB, Cynojammers into the game.

Tell me more about the complex game mechanics behind watching local channel.

Tell me more about the fact, that TEST alliance can lose every asset they have in 0.0 space.
Alaya Carrier
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#126 - 2012-07-06 15:47:37 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


Or, to read it in practice, you setup the warn utility to beep when any neutral enters in local and when it happens either you stop watching dirty videos and alt tab and warp to safe or a macro will do it for you.

Got it.
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#127 - 2012-07-06 15:50:24 UTC
I love highsec. especially trade hubs like Hek. noone watches local as often as they do in nullsec. makes an easier time to surprise victims.
Narcan Pandora
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#128 - 2012-07-06 15:53:42 UTC
You should not remove the safety of high-sec. You should put more rewards in low and nul sec. Get them to come out.
TotalCareBear
Doomheim
#129 - 2012-07-06 15:58:54 UTC
Narcan Pandora wrote:
You should not remove the safety of high-sec. You should put more rewards in low and nul sec. Get them to come out.


This topic is about adding risk to 0.0.
InternetSpaceship
State War Academy
Caldari State
#130 - 2012-07-06 16:07:45 UTC  |  Edited by: InternetSpaceship
Hey, let's make some more threads about goons! I saw a goon the other day! He got shot and cried all over the forums about it. No, I don't have any links.

Goons sure are irrelevant, let's post more threads about them to really drive that point home. Literally everyone in this thread who isn't in goonswarm is a goon alt.

I think that should take care of this thread, go ahead and close it now, ISD.

Official Recruiter for GoonSwarm Corporation.

If you paid isk to get into GoonSwarm, you were probably scammed.  If you had the foresight to save the name of your scammer, let me know and I'll do what I can to help you.
Cebraio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#131 - 2012-07-06 16:12:36 UTC
Taurich Vorsel wrote:

It is a nice alt isn't it? I'm surprised you were able to figure it out, I figured that listing my mains name in my sig and having the same avatar as my main but facing the other way with black hair might have been a tad subtle for most.
You sir are in line for detective of the year.

Thanks, I'm honored. But actually it was easier than that: Your portrait did not show up when you posted. It only shows now. Cool

Taurich Vorsel wrote:

Really, your argument for why this won't work is because gankers will bring a counter?
Have you some magical tactic that gankers won't bother to counter?
Of course you don't

Fit hulk with shield extenders, invulns and deployed ECM drones. Have support with shield transporters (orca and /or logis).
I think gankers won't bother to counter that, if there are weaker targets around.

Taurich Vorsel wrote:

No, I'm not going to grind my sec status positive again and skill for a hulk just so I can prove to you that ECM functions as intended.
It's game mechanics, I already know it works.

You don't have to grind, since you have this alt. But this shows, you are making a suggestion that clearly doesn't work in many cases and that you never have tried.

Taurich Vorsel wrote:

Feel free to name some midslot modules that would be more likely to save your ass than ECM burst please.

See above.

To list the flaws in your theory: ECM burst does not work when..
- one neutral happens to be around
- one neutral is brought in by gankers (either from the beginning, or when they see the target uses lol ECM burst)
- one neutral is already cloaked there, as a warp in point (I guess ECM burst affects cloaked ships. Could be wrong though)
- gankers use ships that are out of burst radius (though unlikely against Hulks)
- Hulk runs out of capacitor (after aprox. 3 activations)
- ...
There are probably more fail situations.

Now please, admit it's a stupid idea and get over it. Either way, I'm done with this discussion.
Mithrantir Ob'lontra
Ixion Defence Systems
#132 - 2012-07-06 16:24:39 UTC
TotalCareBear wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
TotalCareBear wrote:
Someone, who smackstalks highsec players, yet wants the "sandbox" to be sized to their needs and doing that while game mechanics prevent risk in 0.0.


the game mechanics allow me to shoot literally anybody i want in nullsec without some arbitrary time window in which I have to kill them before I'm popped by ridiculously overpowered peacekeepers

ergo, nullsec is actually risky


1. Goons mine 0.0 in hulks.

2. Neutral/red jumps into system.

3. Goons warp to pos/ss/station.

What is the counter?

In 0.0 you can use local for 100% perfect defense, in highsec you cannot.

Keep telling yourself stories about arbitrary time windows, fact is 0.0 hulk safer than in highsec.

The same thing can happen in high sec too. If you pay attention to local you can't lose a ship in highsec too.
What's your point?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#133 - 2012-07-06 16:30:06 UTC
Taurich Vorsel wrote:



No, I'm not going to grind my sec status positive again and skill for a hulk just so I can prove to you that ECM functions as intended.
It's game mechanics, I already know it works.
Feel free to name some midslot modules that would be more likely to save your ass than ECM burst please.


A tank perhaps?
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#134 - 2012-07-06 16:35:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
TotalCareBear wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:


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?


I agree, let's do that.

edit:

Also, before that, major nerfs to defensive infrastructure.

Sure.
Quote:
Now, mining is more dangerous in highsec(because local is of no help). Time to add some risk to the 0.0, to balance things out.
if you fit a tank, then no catalyst poses a threat to your hulk. Many don't do this however.
However all hulks in 0.0 require tanks if only to suck up the damage from belt rats. All solo hulks do this. Thus, belt rats in 0.0 alone pose a greater threat to miners then suicide gankers do.
Chokichi Ozuwara
Perkone
Caldari State
#135 - 2012-07-06 16:37:39 UTC
Wormholes are much more dangerous than 0.0

Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#136 - 2012-07-06 16:38:28 UTC
Chokichi Ozuwara wrote:
Wormholes are much more dangerous than 0.0

Then why do they have the least amount of losses per player then every other region except for highsec?
TotalCareBear
Doomheim
#137 - 2012-07-06 16:54:19 UTC
Mithrantir Ob'lontra wrote:
TotalCareBear wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
TotalCareBear wrote:
Someone, who smackstalks highsec players, yet wants the "sandbox" to be sized to their needs and doing that while game mechanics prevent risk in 0.0.


the game mechanics allow me to shoot literally anybody i want in nullsec without some arbitrary time window in which I have to kill them before I'm popped by ridiculously overpowered peacekeepers

ergo, nullsec is actually risky


1. Goons mine 0.0 in hulks.

2. Neutral/red jumps into system.

3. Goons warp to pos/ss/station.

What is the counter?

In 0.0 you can use local for 100% perfect defense, in highsec you cannot.

Keep telling yourself stories about arbitrary time windows, fact is 0.0 hulk safer than in highsec.

The same thing can happen in high sec too. If you pay attention to local you can't lose a ship in highsec too.
What's your point?


Doesn't work because,

1. you only know if someone is hostile to you after they have ganked you.

2. there is random traffic, that doesn't affect you.

If Every alliance had every corp/alliance blue by default and if you could remotely join any local channel in the game, then maybe you would have a point. In fact, if they reversed the change of showing standings in local - that would be a good start.
Sarah Schneider
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#138 - 2012-07-06 16:54:25 UTC
TotalCareBear wrote:
Someone, who smackstalks highsec players, yet wants the "sandbox" to be sized to their needs and doing that while game mechanics prevent risk in 0.0.

Players and collective effort are what made it safe, not game mechanics.

"I'd rather have other players get shot by other players than not interacting with others" -CCP Soundwave
TotalCareBear
Doomheim
#139 - 2012-07-06 16:55:28 UTC  |  Edited by: TotalCareBear
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
TotalCareBear wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:


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?


I agree, let's do that.

edit:

Also, before that, major nerfs to defensive infrastructure.

Sure.
Quote:
Now, mining is more dangerous in highsec(because local is of no help). Time to add some risk to the 0.0, to balance things out.
if you fit a tank, then no catalyst poses a threat to your hulk. Many don't do this however.
However all hulks in 0.0 require tanks if only to suck up the damage from belt rats. All solo hulks do this. Thus, belt rats in 0.0 alone pose a greater threat to miners then suicide gankers do.


Funny how 0.0 rats pose a greater threat on 0.0 hulks than any 0.0 player does.
TotalCareBear
Doomheim
#140 - 2012-07-06 16:56:46 UTC  |  Edited by: TotalCareBear
Sarah Schneider wrote:
TotalCareBear wrote:
Someone, who smackstalks highsec players, yet wants the "sandbox" to be sized to their needs and doing that while game mechanics prevent risk in 0.0.

Players and collective effort are what made it safe, not game mechanics.


Tell me more about the collective effort of watching local channel.

edit: if you removed local, you would actually have to have collective effort - having intel, having semi-pve-pvp fit, having backup ready in station and what not - all of this would require teamwork, rather "oh, someone in local, within 15 seconds I have warped to pos/ss/station."