These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Specific Examples of Where Risk Should Be Inserted Successfully Into High-sec

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#81 - 2012-10-09 05:09:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Hecate Shaw wrote:
Conversely, I also do think that CCP is pandering a bit to the risk-adverse, simply to broaden the subscriber base. Some people may not be thrilled by that, but CCP does need to turn a profit, and I seriously doubt they could do it by hardcore PvP'ers alone without pay-to-win microtransactions. I may be wrong, but I am entitled to my opinion. Besides, all the richest probe sites, complexes, and belt-rats are in low and null, as well as the pirate corps that one can run missions for. It often seems to some of us that people who want high sec nerfed are sitting on the more lucrative areas themselves.
Who exactly plays EVE for its terrible PvE content when they have better options, like nearly every MMO out there?

EVE's appeal is the presentation of legitimate challenge generated by other players, whether it's something big like a nullsec region or something small like a packed veldspar belt, or something subtle like EVE's complex player-generated market. Not some sort of foam-padded theme park - CCP loses so many new players because it gives them the 'safe' option of pointlessly grinding as much as they like for as long as they like until their eyes drip out of their head with boredom and they unsub, never experiencing the true thrill of the game that is stepping outside one's comfort zone. Despite this, it pushes for clunky websites rather then simply removing things like NPC corps.

CCP's game design of giving gross advantages to doing one's PvE and industry in highsec over 0.0/low, and their low estimation of highsec players' willingness to handle the addition of any adversity, has warped and deformed EVE in a number of unpleasant ways for both highsec and nullsec players alike that, in the interest of a more enjoyable experience for everyone, should be fixed.
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#82 - 2012-10-09 05:12:57 UTC
Gogela wrote:
Get the NPC money out of empire. Level 3 and 4 missions all move to low and null, only veldspar available in .5+ systems, etc...

Will solve *most* problems.


I don't know if moving the missions and all the mining out of Highsec is a great idea. Missions are tedious enough already, without having to dodge all sorts of people in Lowsec. Mining would see a serious drop too, with only Veldspar and Ice being mined in Highsec, and not much else. Fact is, Highsec doesn't have a lot of selection anyway, and you probably see the price of Mex and Pyerite shoot through the roof more than they already have.

I did a level 2 last night and had to go through 5 Lowsec systems to get to the site, then back out. Took me almost 3 hours to complete, although I did stop to try out Plexing along the way. (FW Mission).

Moving Ice to Lowsec might be a step in the right direction, and you might as well do the same with Kernite. I never see anyone mining there anyway, and Amarr space is the only place in Highsec you can find it. Maybe Omber too, though I think people mine that.

Missions though.. Level 5s I've heard people have a lot of trouble with as they are too easy to target, being in only select areas, and often require Heavy, slow ships to complete. Aside from FW players in those areas that have them, and Pirates, I think you'd see a near end to people progressing in Mission running. Nobody is going to permanently grind level 2s; it isn't worth it, and is only barely worth doing long enough to get level 3s.

Put the lot in Lowsec and you'd see a drastic decline in Mission runners, mostly because of the time requirement to do it successfully. Add Pirates and hazards in the area, and the Mission time climbs drastically while you're commiting to evasive action, fitting stealth over pwnage, etc.. 

zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Herping yourDerp
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#83 - 2012-10-09 05:23:59 UTC
Gogela wrote:
Get the NPC money out of empire. Level 3 and 4 missions all move to low and null, only veldspar available in .5+ systems, etc...

Will solve *most* problems.


yes, lets kill all lowsec pvp and what little highsec pvp remains.

nerfing highsec income won't do anything but make people take less risks, when little noobies is in highsec struggling to get 200mil there is no way he is going to risk a 50mil drake in lowsec for some pew, but if he can get 2bil in a reasonable time then maybe he will.

a few things can happen in and around highsec that will be good.

first put some nullsec islands linking to highsec in some places.
we have some small lowsec pockets that have some pew and some highsec players try to go there sometimes, put some npc null pockets in small areas too. the ratting and mining will be better and might attract players like the lowsec areas.

people with low sec status should be fair game in highsec and lowsec, pod and all. depending on sec status. Possibly at the same time, delayed concord response for these people? needs work but yea.

remove implant drops from story line missions, all learning implants should be from LP stores.

let players build outpost in highsec and lowsec, but with no ability to lock out others they can however set tax rates. highsec NPC stations are still invincible though, and a player outpost cannot be built if a station is in system already: this will give some people a reason to wardec/be wardecced, have something stupid to spend money on, and some people might want to run a station in a system without one nearby.
Kara Vix
Perkone
Caldari State
#84 - 2012-10-09 05:25:03 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Hecate Shaw wrote:
Conversely, I also do think that CCP is pandering a bit to the risk-adverse, simply to broaden the subscriber base. Some people may not be thrilled by that, but CCP does need to turn a profit, and I seriously doubt they could do it by hardcore PvP'ers alone without pay-to-win microtransactions. I may be wrong, but I am entitled to my opinion. Besides, all the richest probe sites, complexes, and belt-rats are in low and null, as well as the pirate corps that one can run missions for. It often seems to some of us that people who want high sec nerfed are sitting on the more lucrative areas themselves.
Who exactly plays EVE for its terrible PvE content when they have better options, like nearly every MMO out there?

EVE's appeal is the presentation of legitimate challenge generated by other players, whether it's something big like a nullsec region or something small like a packed veldspar belt, or something subtle like EVE's complex player-generated market. Not some sort of foam-padded theme park - CCP loses so many new players because it gives them the 'safe' option of pointlessly grinding as much as they like for as long as they like until their eyes drip out of their head with boredom and they unsub, never experiencing the true thrill of the game that is stepping outside one's comfort zone. Despite this, it pushes for clunky websites rather then simply removing things like NPC corps.

CCP's game design of giving gross advantages to doing one's PvE and industry in highsec over 0.0/low, and their low estimation of highsec players' willingness to handle the addition of any adversity, has warped and deformed EVE in a number of unpleasant ways for both highsec and nullsec players alike that, in the interest of a more enjoyable experience for everyone, should be fixed.


Many play for the PVE and most of your arguement, if not all, is unsubstantiated and purely subjective.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#85 - 2012-10-09 05:26:09 UTC
Herping yourDerp wrote:
nerfing highsec income won't do anything but make people take less risks, when little noobies is in highsec struggling to get 200mil there is no way he is going to risk a 50mil drake in lowsec for some pew, but if he can get 2bil in a reasonable time then maybe he will.

He can, with FW.

Newbie then buys 600mil+ plexes and ... oh wait.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#86 - 2012-10-09 05:33:45 UTC
There's no risk in hisec but I can make as many battleships as I want and sell them all in one day.

You know, from the huge influx of new players that have been steadily joining since incarna.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#87 - 2012-10-09 06:15:08 UTC
Thor Kerrigan wrote:
Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:
The sad fact of the matter is if all of EVE were created for the PVP player by the PVP player...EVE would die.


There is such a thing as a non-PVP character in EVE? Must have missed the button in the character creation screen. If only I could go back and select it, I too would enjoy the advantages of risk-free income and complete immunity. My buddies would love me as I would provide them with accurate intel on the enemy without risking my ship. I too would enjoy not playing the 0.01 isk game in trade hubs. I too would be able to haul 200 plexes in an ibis on autopilot from Jita to Amarr. I too would be perfectly immune to bumping. I too would not see scams in Jita local. I too would be able to fly a fully Estamel-Fit Tengu and leave it 23/7 AFK for all to see. I too could enjoy playing a game that could as well be playable offline.


I lolled.

Truth is, you can choose to be a non PvP toon that can do all of that.... or if your too lazy not to bother and all you want to do is blow people up... well then... one can easily see why toons like you are the way you are...

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#88 - 2012-10-09 06:22:50 UTC
Highsec mining definatly needs some sort of risk injected into it. As it stands right now there is no real threat to them.
Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#89 - 2012-10-09 06:28:22 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Highsec mining definatly needs some sort of risk injected into it. As it stands right now there is no real threat to them.


Wardecs.

You aint using them.

Jihadding with bigger ships that push out more DPS (but you'd make a loss dying to concord)... you aint using that either.

Infact, I see plenty of risk..... but I see more nullsec whiners avoiding risk and the costs involved and crying about it...

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#90 - 2012-10-09 06:33:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Kara Vix wrote:

Many play for the PVE and most of your arguement, if not all, is unsubstantiated and purely subjective.

Pot meet kettle.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#91 - 2012-10-09 06:38:11 UTC
Asuka Solo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Highsec mining definatly needs some sort of risk injected into it. As it stands right now there is no real threat to them.


Wardecs.

lmfao
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#92 - 2012-10-09 06:50:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
Asuka Solo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Highsec mining definatly needs some sort of risk injected into it. As it stands right now there is no real threat to them.


Wardecs.

You aint using them.

Jihadding with bigger ships that push out more DPS (but you'd make a loss dying to concord)... you aint using that either.

Infact, I see plenty of risk..... but I see more nullsec whiners avoiding risk and the costs involved and crying about it...

Wars have been completely gutted. The whole mechanic is now completely unusable and entirely avoidable.

Ganking is no longer a risk due to the extreme cost attached to it due to the new EHP buffs. I can envision some miners still getting ganked on principle/loud mouths, but it's no longer viable to do this save for the rare exception.

Really, the only thing high-sec miners have to worry about now is how best to **** the market with their cheap, risk-free minerals.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#93 - 2012-10-09 06:51:52 UTC
Herping yourDerp wrote:
Gogela wrote:
Get the NPC money out of empire. Level 3 and 4 missions all move to low and null, only veldspar available in .5+ systems, etc...

Will solve *most* problems.


yes, lets kill all lowsec pvp and what little highsec pvp remains.

nerfing highsec income won't do anything but make people take less risks, when little noobies is in highsec struggling to get 200mil there is no way he is going to risk a 50mil drake in lowsec for some pew, but if he can get 2bil in a reasonable time then maybe he will.

a few things can happen in and around highsec that will be good.

first put some nullsec islands linking to highsec in some places.
we have some small lowsec pockets that have some pew and some highsec players try to go there sometimes, put some npc null pockets in small areas too. the ratting and mining will be better and might attract players like the lowsec areas.

people with low sec status should be fair game in highsec and lowsec, pod and all. depending on sec status. Possibly at the same time, delayed concord response for these people? needs work but yea.

remove implant drops from story line missions, all learning implants should be from LP stores.

let players build outpost in highsec and lowsec, but with no ability to lock out others they can however set tax rates. highsec NPC stations are still invincible though, and a player outpost cannot be built if a station is in system already: this will give some people a reason to wardec/be wardecced, have something stupid to spend money on, and some people might want to run a station in a system without one nearby.

The fallacy of this argument is that introducing risk into high-sec lowers income.

In fact, for successful miners, increased risk paid vastly better than decreased risk does.

Value = Demand / Supply.

So if demand is constant and supply decreases, value goes up.

I hope this clarifies the nature of risk in high-sec mining.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#94 - 2012-10-09 06:56:11 UTC
Vincent Athena wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
CCP will not, under any circumstances do anything that makes highsec more dangerous for carebears. It just won't happen regardless of how many well-meaning threads people make.

Any why should they? If a given player does not like high, they can fly elsewhere. No one is forcing you to live in high sec and deal with the players there. You may say "But low sec is undesirable due to reasons xxx and yyy". Well if high sec was turned into low sec, it would gain those exact same problems!

So do you dispute the validity of risk as a necessity in high-sec?

Just curious if you think that increased supply adds value. Shocked

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Pipa Porto
#95 - 2012-10-09 07:11:29 UTC
Asuka Solo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Highsec mining definatly needs some sort of risk injected into it. As it stands right now there is no real threat to them.


Wardecs.

You aint using them.


Wardecs are worthless unless the target has a POS.

Disband Corp -> Create Identically named Corp.

Quote:
Jihadding with bigger ships that push out more DPS (but you'd make a loss dying to concord)... you aint using that either.

Infact, I see plenty of risk..... but I see more nullsec whiners avoiding risk and the costs involved and crying about it...


Gankers are neither stupid nor randomly vindictive. Without the possibility (not guarantee, a tanked Hulk wasn't profitable pre-buff) of a profitable gank, industrialized ganking is impossible. Without industrialized ganking, suicide ganking is not a significant risk to miners.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#96 - 2012-10-09 07:20:21 UTC
Quote:


Wardecs.

You aint using them.

Jihadding with bigger ships that push out more DPS (but you'd make a loss dying to concord)... you aint using that either.

Infact, I see plenty of risk..... but I see more nullsec whiners avoiding risk and the costs involved and crying about it...

War decs are so easy to avoid they are useless and ganking them provides no gain for the attcker. Miners dont face any risk at all in high sec unless they manage to annoy someone enough that they are willing to take the hit to their wallet and sec status.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#97 - 2012-10-09 07:21:50 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Gankers are neither stupid nor randomly vindictive. Without the possibility (not guarantee, a tanked Hulk wasn't profitable pre-buff) of a profitable gank, industrialized ganking is impossible. Without industrialized ganking, suicide ganking is not a significant risk to miners.

It's not even that to be honest. A small loss, even a moderate loss, is alright. But now it either takes like a minimum of half a dozen Tornados (assuming optimal conditions) to kill the average barge, or two dozen people in destroyers. We could live with ganking not actually resulting in any profit, but dropping over half a billion or needing that many people is ridiculous.

The bears claim that it's still possible to gank, literally. Yes, it is. But the barriers to entry are so high that no one would bother aside from some special edge cases. CCP could buff barges to capital health levels tomorrow, and these people would still continue to say that it's possible to gank. They won't ever let go of that argument since they're so used to thinking in absolutes.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
darkenspace
Imperial AMARR White Kights
#98 - 2012-10-09 07:25:57 UTC  |  Edited by: darkenspace
in a game this old not sure i even care what they do i can play are not don't matter
as for game nerfing stuff that only happens when players run somthing in to the ground as all pvp players do
hulkageddon for months on end come on what you think would happen over time players in null with nothing to do
who use isk to buy plex to play go kill newer players who mine missions run who use ( Cash to buy plex )




if you want to fix the game remove plex that will fix the new players brings prices down
in the end i dont think it matters becase of plex most players dont have to work for anything in game when you blow it no real loss not like they spend weeks farming . As for moving to null 135mill sp players are upset 10mill sp players are not running to them they know it takes 2 years this game is not as much of a pvp are pve as it is a log in train log out play diff game why you wait
The Slayer
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#99 - 2012-10-09 07:28:22 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Dosnix
*snip*
fixed your not constructive post
ISD Dosnix
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#100 - 2012-10-09 07:28:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Kitty Bear
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Hear that guys? Sandbox means that I should be able to mine and mission run in peace without any unwanted interference.


No.
It means you should be able to mine and mission run.
It means someone else should be able to interfere.

You can do both with current mechanics
You can do both with proposed Winter Changes
The OP is proposing that the sandbox to be changed into a themepark.
The OP is stipulating that if you aren't playing the game his way, your doing it wrong.




ps
To the clueless moron that automatically assumed I'm an Empire Carebear
Locator Agent