These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Null is Broken, Hisec working as intended.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#121 - 2012-12-27 14:20:54 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
There is crap loads to mine in wormholes that you then have to compress and take to Hi-sec to use for manufacturing as well as the need for Hi-sec alts so you can mine the Hi-sec ores as moving huge volumes out of a WH is depressing at best.



is there really? ask a wormholler how much they mine.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#122 - 2012-12-27 14:39:36 UTC
Grimpak wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
There is crap loads to mine in wormholes that you then have to compress and take to Hi-sec to use for manufacturing as well as the need for Hi-sec alts so you can mine the Hi-sec ores as moving huge volumes out of a WH is depressing at best.



is there really? ask a wormholler how much they mine.


Wormhole mining can be pretty profitable, I'm told, but it's all about the gas clouds rather than the ore these days.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Rick Banning
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#123 - 2012-12-27 15:04:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Rick Banning
Perhaps I am slightly late to the party, but couldn't a lot be solved by simply giving nullsec something unique? For example, you give nullsec a small group of items that can only be found there, and allow them to have an effect on high sec space. It could potentially be interesting to have such resources be able to be controlled by alliances or small corporations to a certain degree. The effect such resources could have could range from affecting high sec corporations and their stations or their production queues to something entirely new.

The way it is right now makes it seem like high sec has better resources that null is jelly of, so null needs something to make high sec jelly.

Personally, I have only played in high sec, but that is just because I am starting out. All I am trying to say is that there are other alternatives to just simply nerfing or buffing something.
janzzen
unfair pleasure
#124 - 2012-12-27 15:30:48 UTC
Rick Banning wrote:
Perhaps I am slightly late to the party, but couldn't a lot be solved by simply giving nullsec something unique? For example, you give nullsec a small group of items that can only be found there, and allow them to have an effect on high sec space. It could potentially be interesting to have such resources be able to be controlled by alliances or small corporations to a certain degree. The effect such resources could have could range from affecting high sec corporations and their stations or their production queues to something entirely new.

The way it is right now makes it seem like high sec has better resources that null is jelly of, so null needs something to make high sec jelly.

Personally, I have only played in high sec, but that is just because I am starting out. All I am trying to say is that there are other alternatives to just simply nerfing or buffing something.



You mean something like technetium i guess?


I rest my case
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#125 - 2012-12-27 15:40:11 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Decrease war declaration costs, increase NPC corp tax and and make it apply to LP as well as bounties then limit highsec POSes to medium and small towers and I think you'd go a long way to making highsec much more reasonable space.

it's all good and refreshing.

However would anyone describe to me why the hell CONCORD pays for killing rats in 0.0? Who the hell would even care about them infesting spaces which belongs to noone? Remove CONCORD payouts from killing NPC in 0.0 and it will be more reasonable space Cool

It would be no skin off my nose. But unlike you my intention in posting was to suggest things that would make highsec less terrible not to make stupid rhetorical arguments to try and further the advantage that bad game design gives me personally.

1. you gave to high-sec status "terrible". Your job to prove it first. And only if you can succeed at it then we will speak about fixes.

2. I asked really interesting question. Outside of ISK source for 0.0 bears i don't see any reasons for these payouts.

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#126 - 2012-12-27 15:42:38 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
No, you just proved my point with an excellent example. That risk exists & should be compensated for.

ok.

- Any numbers please?
- Any reasons why it should be CCP's job to compensate risks PROVIDED BY PLAYERS?

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Miri Amatonur
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#127 - 2012-12-27 16:16:59 UTC
Thomas Gore wrote:

People who don't want to PvP will rather leave the game than be forced to PvP.


Yes, there once was a browser game called Neveron. It had a similar learning curve as EVE, industry, PvP and so on. One day the Devs thought that there should be more fights.

At first they introduced NPC attacks in large volume. This drove away the casual players.

At second they introduced forced wars. That drove away the industrialists and the last casual players.

TLDR:
Force all to pvp and you can kiss EVE good bye.
Some Rando
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#128 - 2012-12-27 16:20:45 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Some Rando wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
If CCP nerfs hisec, what have the hisec dwellers/industrialists got left

A lot of other space to do business in. High-sec should be left to new players and the little coddled children who can't handle conflict in a PvP game.

You reak of e-machismo and e-bravery. You must be, like, a dragon slayer in real life.

Down with the e-cowards! Am I doing it right?

Not bad, but not great. You should have also put in something about how you started playing in 2004 and, ideally, a complaint about the parlous state of solo PvP and a self-serving mock complaint about how so few people these days prefer not to fight in "blobs".

Solo PvP is alive and well, I have no idea what you're on about.

CCP has no sense of humour.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#129 - 2012-12-27 16:32:37 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
No, you just proved my point with an excellent example. That risk exists & should be compensated for.

ok.

- Any numbers please?
- Any reasons why it should be CCP's job to compensate risks PROVIDED BY PLAYERS?


I suppose that someone who knew about such things could query the database about how many stations have changed hands, butare you seriously disputing your own example?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#130 - 2012-12-27 16:47:30 UTC
Some Rando wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
As I said elsewhere , many people play EVE to relax, manufacture stuff, hang out with friends, not to have an FC yelling at them for allegedly making the team lose a PVP match. If forced to PVP, many would rather leave.

That's fine, live in high-sec if you think the rest of space is like that.

The problem is that high-sec is just too good compared to the rest of.K-space. It needs to be nerfed to bring it in line. After that, a buff to null industry and maybe some slight improvements in null and low individual income would help balance the game, IMO.



High sec is not too good, high sec was much better a couple years ago and this didn't changed the fact many players took over null and did stuff over there.
Problem is with time, several nerfs to high sec hurt also null sec by extent at the point it's now better to run poor isk reward missions than sites in null, you can thank all the mighty nerfs to anoms for a start.

You can nerf high sec as much as you want, this will not change a dime about null sec but make it so high sec is as uninteresting as null has become.

Many smart monkeys come up with comments about nef high sec yada ya, none, and I clearly say it: NONE of them comes with decent arguments what's going wrong with high sec and specially what's so wrong with null sec that makes high sec a better place to be despite all the nerfs across the time and many many players loss -alt accounts never loging in are not an argument, real players leaving the game is and CCP will never ever make public these numbers, so forget it.

Buff null sec to what it should be, make it interesting being there, rewarding enough to accept the risks involved, make it so more casual players have their place over there and want to fight for at their log in.
But to do this, there's only one and a single manner to do it, it's to start putting to pieces "economic arguments" unable to adapt to the size of the problem or to the state where it is.
Or simply make all the game pvp everywhere, get rid of concord and finish the game once and for all so a couple nerds with their dozen alts can have fun and everyone else just go somewhere else give their money for something worth of some fun.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Sean Parisi
Blackrise Vanguard
#131 - 2012-12-27 16:57:07 UTC
Some Rando wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
As I said elsewhere , many people play EVE to relax, manufacture stuff, hang out with friends, not to have an FC yelling at them for allegedly making the team lose a PVP match. If forced to PVP, many would rather leave.

That's fine, live in high-sec if you think the rest of space is like that.

The problem is that high-sec is just too good compared to the rest of.K-space. It needs to be nerfed to bring it in line. After that, a buff to null industry and maybe some slight improvements in null and low individual income would help balance the game, IMO.


Nerf Isn't needed for Highsec, Null Sec needs a complete change from the ground up to make it more worthwhile for industry and smaller organizations.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#132 - 2012-12-27 17:05:53 UTC  |  Edited by: March rabbit
Malcanis wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
No, you just proved my point with an excellent example. That risk exists & should be compensated for.

ok.

- Any numbers please?
- Any reasons why it should be CCP's job to compensate risks PROVIDED BY PLAYERS?


I suppose that someone who knew about such things could query the database about how many stations have changed hands, butare you seriously disputing your own example?


i guess you missed the point of my question. I asked about your numbers for compensation for risks of bold part. Not for number of outposts people lose/capture every day.

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#133 - 2012-12-27 17:14:51 UTC
janzzen wrote:
Rick Banning wrote:
Perhaps I am slightly late to the party, but couldn't a lot be solved by simply giving nullsec something unique? For example, you give nullsec a small group of items that can only be found there, and allow them to have an effect on high sec space. It could potentially be interesting to have such resources be able to be controlled by alliances or small corporations to a certain degree. The effect such resources could have could range from affecting high sec corporations and their stations or their production queues to something entirely new.

The way it is right now makes it seem like high sec has better resources that null is jelly of, so null needs something to make high sec jelly.

Personally, I have only played in high sec, but that is just because I am starting out. All I am trying to say is that there are other alternatives to just simply nerfing or buffing something.



You mean something like technetium i guess?


I rest my case
Tech moons are in lowsec as well. Also the vast majority of nullsec lacks tech moons.
Sean Parisi
Blackrise Vanguard
#134 - 2012-12-27 17:57:13 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
janzzen wrote:
Rick Banning wrote:
Perhaps I am slightly late to the party, but couldn't a lot be solved by simply giving nullsec something unique? For example, you give nullsec a small group of items that can only be found there, and allow them to have an effect on high sec space. It could potentially be interesting to have such resources be able to be controlled by alliances or small corporations to a certain degree. The effect such resources could have could range from affecting high sec corporations and their stations or their production queues to something entirely new.

The way it is right now makes it seem like high sec has better resources that null is jelly of, so null needs something to make high sec jelly.

Personally, I have only played in high sec, but that is just because I am starting out. All I am trying to say is that there are other alternatives to just simply nerfing or buffing something.



You mean something like technetium i guess?


I rest my case
Tech moons are in lowsec as well. Also the vast majority of nullsec lacks tech moons.


If they made it more hands on as opposed to determined solely by Null Sec power holders (CEO's, Directors, etc). Then yes the Unique resources will stimulate the economy, make them required in high volume and provide more infrastructure needed for domestic industry.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#135 - 2012-12-27 18:03:05 UTC
Sean Parisi wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
janzzen wrote:
Rick Banning wrote:
Perhaps I am slightly late to the party, but couldn't a lot be solved by simply giving nullsec something unique? For example, you give nullsec a small group of items that can only be found there, and allow them to have an effect on high sec space. It could potentially be interesting to have such resources be able to be controlled by alliances or small corporations to a certain degree. The effect such resources could have could range from affecting high sec corporations and their stations or their production queues to something entirely new.

The way it is right now makes it seem like high sec has better resources that null is jelly of, so null needs something to make high sec jelly.

Personally, I have only played in high sec, but that is just because I am starting out. All I am trying to say is that there are other alternatives to just simply nerfing or buffing something.



You mean something like technetium i guess?


I rest my case
Tech moons are in lowsec as well. Also the vast majority of nullsec lacks tech moons.


If they made it more hands on as opposed to determined solely by Null Sec power holders (CEO's, Directors, etc). Then yes the Unique resources will stimulate the economy, make them required in high volume and provide more infrastructure needed for domestic industry.
the solution to technetium, the unique nullsec resource that is also located in lowsec, is to tighten the bottleneck by requring it in 'higher volume' to build things
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#136 - 2012-12-27 18:03:49 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
No, you just proved my point with an excellent example. That risk exists & should be compensated for.

ok.

- Any numbers please?
- Any reasons why it should be CCP's job to compensate risks PROVIDED BY PLAYERS?


I suppose that someone who knew about such things could query the database about how many stations have changed hands, butare you seriously disputing your own example?


i guess you missed the point of my question. I asked about your numbers for compensation for risks of bold part. Not for number of outposts people lose/capture every day.


You tell me. You built that station, and then you lost it. How much better would player built stations have to be than they are now for you to take a similar risk?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#137 - 2012-12-27 18:37:04 UTC
Nullsec's unique industry resource is supposed to be T2 production. Not necessarily the items used to manufacture it (moon goo), the end result should be ships and mods.

How much of this stuff do you see manufactured in nullsec and imported to empire?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#138 - 2012-12-27 18:43:41 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
Nullsec's unique industry resource is supposed to be T2 production. Not necessarily the items used to manufacture it (moon goo), the end result should be ships and mods.

How much of this stuff do you see manufactured in nullsec and imported to empire?



Or even manufactured in nullsec and used there.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#139 - 2012-12-27 18:47:52 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
No, you just proved my point with an excellent example. That risk exists & should be compensated for.

ok.

- Any numbers please?
- Any reasons why it should be CCP's job to compensate risks PROVIDED BY PLAYERS?


I suppose that someone who knew about such things could query the database about how many stations have changed hands, butare you seriously disputing your own example?

i guess you missed the point of my question. I asked about your numbers for compensation for risks of bold part. Not for number of outposts people lose/capture every day.

You tell me. You built that station, and then you lost it. How much better would player built stations have to be than they are now for you to take a similar risk?

Why can't CONCORD protect me~~~

Oh right, we rely on our friends rather than NPCs.

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 ?
Sean Parisi
Blackrise Vanguard
#140 - 2012-12-27 18:49:20 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Sean Parisi wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
janzzen wrote:
Rick Banning wrote:
Perhaps I am slightly late to the party, but couldn't a lot be solved by simply giving nullsec something unique? For example, you give nullsec a small group of items that can only be found there, and allow them to have an effect on high sec space. It could potentially be interesting to have such resources be able to be controlled by alliances or small corporations to a certain degree. The effect such resources could have could range from affecting high sec corporations and their stations or their production queues to something entirely new.

The way it is right now makes it seem like high sec has better resources that null is jelly of, so null needs something to make high sec jelly.

Personally, I have only played in high sec, but that is just because I am starting out. All I am trying to say is that there are other alternatives to just simply nerfing or buffing something.



You mean something like technetium i guess?


I rest my case
Tech moons are in lowsec as well. Also the vast majority of nullsec lacks tech moons.


If they made it more hands on as opposed to determined solely by Null Sec power holders (CEO's, Directors, etc). Then yes the Unique resources will stimulate the economy, make them required in high volume and provide more infrastructure needed for domestic industry.
the solution to technetium, the unique nullsec resource that is also located in lowsec, is to tighten the bottleneck by requring it in 'higher volume' to build things



You are reading what I said properly. I'm not even saying Technetium specifically, essentially you have resources available in both Low Sec and Null Sec that are needed for something in production (Tech 2, Tech3, Whatever) that require high volumes.

But the key is having it so it requires players to work together in order to harvest or obtain properly. As opposed to having one or two moon barons running one mine. Instead you have something like ring mining which encourages more players to occupy the space and use it in order to obtain this unique resource. You don't make it limited solely to specific systems either.

For example in order to create Tech 3 Items, we need players to work together within wormholes running sites. This encourages people to actually live and occupy their system. To bring more people on board in order to increase how much they can pull in.