These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#341 - 2012-12-31 00:35:24 UTC
Thomas Gore wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Thomas Gore wrote:
That's a great attitude there. Ultima Online's greatest strength was that there were so many different paths you could take. Many of them completely doable with zero PvP experience.

Which is exactly what EVE should NOT be.
Reading this makes me angry.

Thomas Gore wrote:
CCP will need to start adding meaningful content in their game soon. Tweaks and fixes are only going to keep people playing a while. And by content I mean sandbox content. Tools for the players to create their own content.

"People enjoy doing missions" = missions are meaningful content, apparently.
No.


If I want to force you to PVP, I will, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. This is a PVP game.
The only thing you can do to prevent PVP in this game is not undock or buy anything on the market, ever.


You need to train up your reading comprehension skills and/or understand first how UO worked. It had very similar aggression methods and the world was likewise divided into "safe" zones and unsafe ones. Anyone could attack anyone, anywhere, but in safe zones "unlawful" aggression was punished with a quick death. Sound familiar? You could be a crafter and never leave the safe zones, but everything else carried a risk of being "ganked". However, my main point is UO was not just a PvP game. It was much more and it's exactly what EVE needs to be too, in order to survive.

Yes you can force me to "PvP" in Highsec and I agree that ability should never be taken away from you. In fact, I think highsec currently is a very safe place and there is no need to increase its safety, nor is there a reason to bring those safety methods to low or null sec. You just need to realize there is and needs to be more to EVE than just PvP. Darkfall is a game that also has similar aggression methods and safe and unsafe areas, but it lacks any meaningful PvE content and is basically just a big FFA Full Loot PvP arena. It's not doing well. In fact, the creators just redesigned the whole game and are relaunching it early next year, adding more safe areas and stuff to do for players who don't enjoy PvP all the time.

Finally, I don't know where you got '"People enjoy doing missions" = missions are meaningful content, apparently.'. That's not what I said at all. I said that meaningful content should be sandbox content. It could be anything from people being able to build secret bases in high sec deadspace pockets, to giving tools for null players to make their Empires more worth living in and more organized. In fact, I really don't want to see more ready-canned PvE content such as Incursions in EVE. They are exactly the wrong direction for a sandbox game.

Hope I cleared things up for you a bit.


You refer to UO as was and yet you state that EVE needs to be like it in order to survive. There is something wrong with that logic if you don't mind my saying so.
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#342 - 2012-12-31 02:44:06 UTC
Mars Theran wrote:
You refer to UO as was and yet you state that EVE needs to be like it in order to survive. There is something wrong with that logic if you don't mind my saying so.


"UO is dead, therefore eve online should be a ****** welfare MMO"

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Peter Raptor
Galactic Hawks
#343 - 2012-12-31 09:38:06 UTC
I for one would love to see new content in Null that'll inspire me to go there, at the moment theres None, unless i wanna go there to get instapopped, after flying through dozens of empty systems

. Inspire us Hisec dwellers with something CCP.

Evelopedia; 

The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion  †  
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#344 - 2012-12-31 10:17:26 UTC
Peter Raptor wrote:
I for one would love to see new content in Null that'll inspire me to go there, at the moment theres None, unless i wanna go there to get instapopped, after flying through dozens of empty systems

. Inspire us Hisec dwellers with something CCP.


I'm pleased to see that you're finally on the same page as those of us who live there. The foundation of a lively, interesting and diverse sov 0.0 is the viability of lots of different niches in the player ecology. Manufacturing, R&D, invention and resource gathering are the base of that ecological pyramid.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Frying Doom
#345 - 2012-12-31 10:34:36 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
I for one would love to see new content in Null that'll inspire me to go there, at the moment theres None, unless i wanna go there to get instapopped, after flying through dozens of empty systems

. Inspire us Hisec dwellers with something CCP.


I'm pleased to see that you're finally on the same page as those of us who live there. The foundation of a lively, interesting and diverse sov 0.0 is the viability of lots of different niches in the player ecology. Manufacturing, R&D, invention and resource gathering are the base of that ecological pyramid.

*clears throat*
You mean the top of the pyramid standing over the bodies of those they supply surely.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Zaraz Zaraz
Zontik Paraphernalia Inc
#346 - 2012-12-31 10:57:42 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
I for one would love to see new content in Null that'll inspire me to go there, at the moment theres None, unless i wanna go there to get instapopped, after flying through dozens of empty systems

. Inspire us Hisec dwellers with something CCP.


I'm pleased to see that you're finally on the same page as those of us who live there. The foundation of a lively, interesting and diverse sov 0.0 is the viability of lots of different niches in the player ecology. Manufacturing, R&D, invention and resource gathering are the base of that ecological pyramid.



You mean the plankton, right?

And in this game mostly made up of the masochists who also provide the entertainment for the sadists higher up them in the 'food chain'.
Ivana Twinkle
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#347 - 2012-12-31 11:07:41 UTC
Peter Raptor 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.


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.


Not every FC is Makalu.
FDIC Agent
Doomheim
#348 - 2012-12-31 11:11:30 UTC
It is people that act immature that keeps everyone mostly out of null space. After all who would put up with this. What you get in null space.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#349 - 2012-12-31 11:15:26 UTC
Zaraz Zaraz wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
I for one would love to see new content in Null that'll inspire me to go there, at the moment theres None, unless i wanna go there to get instapopped, after flying through dozens of empty systems

. Inspire us Hisec dwellers with something CCP.


I'm pleased to see that you're finally on the same page as those of us who live there. The foundation of a lively, interesting and diverse sov 0.0 is the viability of lots of different niches in the player ecology. Manufacturing, R&D, invention and resource gathering are the base of that ecological pyramid.



You mean the plankton, right?

And in this game mostly made up of the masochists who also provide the entertainment for the sadists higher up them in the 'food chain'.


Thanks for providing a meaningless cliche. It really helped to move the discussion along, wasn't an ignorant generalisation and didn't insult anyone's intelligence.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#350 - 2012-12-31 11:16:47 UTC
There are multiple aspects to this situation, they all need resolving seperately,fixing just one of them isn't going to solve anything, and rebalancing them is going to be delicate and difficult.

(1) Sov 0.0 simply does not and cannot have sufficient manufacturing capacity to supply itself with the current outpost mechanics. There simply aren't the available production lines. Thus, simply "nerfing hi-sec" won't solve the problem. Even if CCP deleted hi-sec tomorrow, sov industry still wouldn't be viable. It would just move to lo-sec or NPC 0.0. Player built outposts need a complete rebalance.

(2) Hi-sec is virtually "perfect"; there is only one constraint to manufacturing and industry in hi-sec and that is the requirement to purchase Zydrine, Megacyte and Mercoxit from 0.0 or W-space sources. As these minerals are the ones with the lowest physical volume, they're also by far the easiest to transport, so even here, hi-sec has the advantage. With the sole exception of high end minerals, hi-sec is currently either better than anywhere else or else unbeatable (assuming we don't advocate silliness like 110% refine rates) for manufacturing, R&D, Invention, trading and so on. Even if 0.0 was "good" for these activities, hi-sec is arguably too good at all of them.

(3) Productive activity in sov 0.0 operates with some intrinsic costs that mean it has to be "better" than hi-sec to be viable; the productive output of a 0.0 station has to be better than that of a hi-sec system by at least the cost of the sov bills in order for that production to be competitive. To make this clear: let's imagine that CCP make sov outposts have the same number of production lines as a good hi-sec station, and both can make, say, 100 battleships a month. If the sov bill for the 0.0 system to 750M ISK per month, then the cost of producing those battleships needs to be at least 7.5M ISK less in the sov outpost for its production to be competitive.

Whether this difference is best achieved by making hi-sec stations less efficient or sov outposts more efficient is a matter for the economists to decide. And in practice there are quite a few other 'hidden' costs to operating productive activities in 0.0; delays caused by hostile presence, increased losses from same, additional transport overhead due to the 1 station per system limit, the actuarial cost of the possibility of losing the station and the space, plus the (very significant) sunk costs of building the station in the first place and of establishing the sov structures.

So it's easy to imagine that after taking all these into account that our imaginary sov outpost would actually need a 15M or 20M ISK production cost per battleship or BPC run or invention job efficiency advantage to be viable in the long run.

Please bear in mind that the numbers I have used are purely for example purposes, and the actual percentages might be lower or higher. However my instinct is that the real number will be at least ~15%.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Frying Doom
#351 - 2012-12-31 11:20:06 UTC
FDIC Agent wrote:
It is people that act immature that keeps everyone mostly out of null space. After all who would put up with this. What you get in null space.

Old Old Old news that was blown out of the water to remove a certain chairman.

Nothing to see here move along people.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#352 - 2012-12-31 12:24:28 UTC
Who are you trying to convince? You, us, or CCP?

Because CCP has already said its not working as intended.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#353 - 2012-12-31 15:43:13 UTC
Garreth Vlox wrote:
Peter Raptor 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.


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.



No one said they have to PVP, what they are saying is if you aren't going to work for it you shouldn't get free access to the best processing, research facilites and production in the game for almost no cost and next to no risk.



Why not? Everyone gets it from day one. Some choose to leave it willingly. And it isn't like those same people can't come back, or don't.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#354 - 2012-12-31 15:55:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Malcanis wrote:
There are multiple aspects to this situation, they all need resolving seperately,fixing just one of them isn't going to solve anything, and rebalancing them is going to be delicate and difficult.

(1) Sov 0.0 simply does not and cannot have sufficient manufacturing capacity to supply itself with the current outpost mechanics. There simply aren't the available production lines. Thus, simply "nerfing hi-sec" won't solve the problem. Even if CCP deleted hi-sec tomorrow, sov industry still wouldn't be viable. It would just move to lo-sec or NPC 0.0. Player built outposts need a complete rebalance.

(2) Hi-sec is virtually "perfect"; there is only one constraint to manufacturing and industry in hi-sec and that is the requirement to purchase Zydrine, Megacyte and Mercoxit from 0.0 or W-space sources. As these minerals are the ones with the lowest physical volume, they're also by far the easiest to transport, so even here, hi-sec has the advantage. With the sole exception of high end minerals, hi-sec is currently either better than anywhere else or else unbeatable (assuming we don't advocate silliness like 110% refine rates) for manufacturing, R&D, Invention, trading and so on. Even if 0.0 was "good" for these activities, hi-sec is arguably too good at all of them.

(3) Productive activity in sov 0.0 operates with some intrinsic costs that mean it has to be "better" than hi-sec to be viable; the productive output of a 0.0 station has to be better than that of a hi-sec system by at least the cost of the sov bills in order for that production to be competitive. To make this clear: let's imagine that CCP make sov outposts have the same number of production lines as a good hi-sec station, and both can make, say, 100 battleships a month. If the sov bill for the 0.0 system to 750M ISK per month, then the cost of producing those battleships needs to be at least 7.5M ISK less in the sov outpost for its production to be competitive.

Whether this difference is best achieved by making hi-sec stations less efficient or sov outposts more efficient is a matter for the economists to decide. And in practice there are quite a few other 'hidden' costs to operating productive activities in 0.0; delays caused by hostile presence, increased losses from same, additional transport overhead due to the 1 station per system limit, the actuarial cost of the possibility of losing the station and the space, plus the (very significant) sunk costs of building the station in the first place and of establishing the sov structures.

So it's easy to imagine that after taking all these into account that our imaginary sov outpost would actually need a 15M or 20M ISK production cost per battleship or BPC run or invention job efficiency advantage to be viable in the long run.

Please bear in mind that the numbers I have used are purely for example purposes, and the actual percentages might be lower or higher. However my instinct is that the real number will be at least ~15%.



Is this to say that CCP needs to change things around to fit the logistic needs of people who decide to leave the benefits they already provide?

Just seems to be too much "to be competitive" here. I think what needs to be reiterated and kept in mind... is that people who choose to live in null were not kicked out of high sec. Also, as it is just "one world" (shard) and no server seperation, players can freely interact and move between both sides. Which I understand they already do.

If anything needs to be buffed or nerfed, it should be something that equally affects everyone (mechanic), not a logistic need of a few who don't want to make the trek, or see it as "unfair" to someone else who chose a different path to play on.

Highsec vs nullsec competition is just.... well, wrong.

EDIT- Just to clarify, the reason I'm posting this is because it is obvious it will be affecting some others more so than everyone equally, so if there is a mechanics problem, I'm all for the change. If it isn't working as intended, I'm all for the change. If it's to satisfy someone's agenda... well, that I don't agree with.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#355 - 2012-12-31 16:15:43 UTC
What you're saying is that it's OK for hi-sec to be grossly overpowered because anyone can use hisec and no-one is forced to stop using it. In other words, why should CCP waste time and resources enabling playstyles you personally are not interested in?

I will give you credit in that you are frank and open about your indifference to game balance and the enjoyment of the game of people who do different things than you in it. It saves a lot of tedious arguing about what you really meant, and for that I'm sure we all thank you.

However, those of us taking a larger view are definitely going to disagree with you on this fundamental principle

"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
#356 - 2012-12-31 16:17:49 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
What you're saying is that it's OK for hi-sec to be grossly overpowered because anyone can use hisec and no-one is forced to stop using it. In other words, why should CCP waste time and resources enabling playstyles you personally are not interested in?

I will give you credit in that you are frank and open about your indifference to game balance and the enjoyment of the game of people who do different things than you in it. It saves a lot of tedious arguing about what you really meant, and for that I'm sure we all thank you.

However, those of us taking a larger view are definitely going to disagree with you on this fundamental principle

Who cares about game balance, ~my highsec experience~ is something you can all enjoy.

AFKing a mackinaw on ice in highsec is easy, low risk and fun. Try it.

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 ?
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#357 - 2012-12-31 16:19:04 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Zaraz Zaraz wrote:
You mean the plankton, right?

And in this game mostly made up of the masochists who also provide the entertainment for the sadists higher up them in the 'food chain'.

Thanks for providing a meaningless cliche. It really helped to move the discussion along, wasn't an ignorant generalisation and didn't insult anyone's intelligence.

My intelligence being insulted on GD, no way...

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 ?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#358 - 2012-12-31 16:22:18 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
What you're saying is that it's OK for hi-sec to be grossly overpowered because anyone can use hisec and no-one is forced to stop using it. In other words, why should CCP waste time and resources enabling playstyles you personally are not interested in?

I will give you credit in that you are frank and open about your indifference to game balance and the enjoyment of the game of people who do different things than you in it. It saves a lot of tedious arguing about what you really meant, and for that I'm sure we all thank you.

However, those of us taking a larger view are definitely going to disagree with you on this fundamental principle

Who cares about game balance, ~my highsec experience~ is something you can all enjoy.

AFKing a mackinaw on ice in highsec is easy, low risk and fun. Try it.


Agreed, if there's one thing that should be discouraged in a sandbox game, it's incentivizing players to move out of the starter areas and create their own idea of a community. That sort of thing needs to be harshly discouraged, and CCP have done a good job of that. Let's hope they continue to quell any dangerous, subversize and destructive notions that any of us should do anything differently to any of the others!

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#359 - 2012-12-31 16:40:25 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
What you're saying is that it's OK for hi-sec to be grossly overpowered because anyone can use hisec and no-one is forced to stop using it. In other words, why should CCP waste time and resources enabling playstyles you personally are not interested in?

I will give you credit in that you are frank and open about your indifference to game balance and the enjoyment of the game of people who do different things than you in it. It saves a lot of tedious arguing about what you really meant, and for that I'm sure we all thank you.

However, those of us taking a larger view are definitely going to disagree with you on this fundamental principle



I think you are taking a bit too much of a passive aggressive approach assuming what I want because I asked you a question.

You seem to think I'm defending highsec. I actually spend about equal amount of time in all 3 securities (would rather spend more time in w-space but alas not at this time).

And I'm not indifferent to game balance. I firmly believe it doesn't exist, nor should it. Balance is a word used for carebears. It's a mentality used for people who think not only can do what they want, it should be given to them.

Eve is MEANT to be unbalanced. That's the point! It's a paper rock scissors game.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#360 - 2012-12-31 16:49:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Malcanis wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
What you're saying is that it's OK for hi-sec to be grossly overpowered because anyone can use hisec and no-one is forced to stop using it. In other words, why should CCP waste time and resources enabling playstyles you personally are not interested in?

I will give you credit in that you are frank and open about your indifference to game balance and the enjoyment of the game of people who do different things than you in it. It saves a lot of tedious arguing about what you really meant, and for that I'm sure we all thank you.

However, those of us taking a larger view are definitely going to disagree with you on this fundamental principle

Who cares about game balance, ~my highsec experience~ is something you can all enjoy.

AFKing a mackinaw on ice in highsec is easy, low risk and fun. Try it.


Agreed, if there's one thing that should be discouraged in a sandbox game, it's incentivizing players to move out of the starter areas and create their own idea of a community. That sort of thing needs to be harshly discouraged, and CCP have done a good job of that. Let's hope they continue to quell any dangerous, subversize and destructive notions that any of us should do anything differently to any of the others!



Why? If it's a sandbox and you're given choices, then why should you be incentivized to leave? If anyone/thing wants you away and gone, why have that there in the first place? There's already rules about terrorizing newbie pilots, but nothing saying it's wrong to do incursions/lvl 4 missions, manufacture or have trade hubs in highsec.


So now you are indeed taking the sandbox element out of the picture thinking that high/low/null is a set value of "level" of gameplay.

Guess what, it isn't.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.