EVE General Discussion

See, thats one major difference between (perhaps?) you and most other people who play games.

Not at that level. Keyboards react too slowly (will never survive as a WASD turner in arena, for example). Have to move and respond by mouse keys (or a game controller) to keep up. It's at the point of Naga 10 button mice with macros.

Sorry but using the metric of number of subscriptions to measure pilot income is wrong. How many of those subs don't even make isk? How many of them are 3rd, 4th, or 5th alts? I have several accounts and I only make money on one of them...running incursions. Your 0.4% number will go up pretty quickly when you start looking at the real numbers.

I'm not the only one that does it.

At the end of the day high sec incursions are the single best moneymaker in the game....for individual pilots that is. You can make an argument for moon goo and null anoms, but read my past posts. Good moon goo isk is unlikely to ever see the inside of an individual pilot's wallet, and good anom ISK is very chance based, and is limited by several other factors.

It really doesn't take a genius to tell the balance is a bit off. EVE is a sandbox and nullsec is the space that players can actually claim. If players can't provide for themselves in this space then what's the point.

The point is to keep feeding into the high sec economy we're enslaved to while being forced to listen to the same high sec players who are benefiting from our null sec existence tell us how much we suck for being in null sec.

CCP, fix industry, FREE NULL SEC!

Your point? Do you think a fleet like that is out of the ordinary? Because it's not.

ISN HQ fleets are only 2 manned? No? Bad example then. Your 2 man anom running team is equaling the amount of isk that 1 pilot sharing with 40 people are getting (or how many are in the HQ fleet).

That lends to the fact that your 2 man op in null is doing better than the highsec incursion fleet is.

So you're saying that the incursion fleet you joined has nothing to do with the coordination of X amount of pilots as opposed to dual boxing and roaming around doing plexes that should theoretically take 5 people to do, as a 2man crew, to make the same amount of money? Because you just click and F1 the broadcasted target and maybe keep at range of the tank.

You're making my eyes misty.

To use a different perspective....

It takes 40 people in an incursion killing all those rats for countless hours to be able to match your 2 ships in null running anomalies.

Clearly highsec is better when it takes 40 people to provide for you what it takes you to dual box in null.

o/

It took you, as a part of a large fleet, to make as much money as when you fly 2 ships by your lonesome.

5 people? When does it take 5 people to do any null sec anom, in the history of null sec anoms.

i'm talking anomalies, not 10/10 DED plexes.

If you had any experience with null sec PVE, you would have known that.
[/quote]

You know, the typical nullsec asshattery; 2 runners, 2 scouts, 1 obg blah blah blah.

I think you have an issue with the word "obtuse". You seem to think it means something that it doesn't. In fact, your statement is showing you to be the obtuse one in comparing the incursion fleet in highsec to your 2man op.


"And Im not talking about making the same money as an entire incursion fleet. a 40 man shiney incursion HQ fleet makes 40 x 150 mil an hour. Dual boxing isn't normal permitted or encourage, but if I could dual box in an incursion fleet like I do doing null sec anoms, i would (as an individual) make 300 mil per hour (ie twice what the same dual boxing of ships would make me in null sec)."

You said, if I recal correctly, you made as much money as a 2man op running sites in null, as you do as 1/40 fleet running highsec incursions. Right?

let me focus on one thing here.... 1 pilot, out, of, 40. To accomplish a goal you are getting paid for.

You didn't clear that MOM by yourself.

Stop being obtuse. You said so yourself... it's your "cut" by being a part of the 40 man fleet.

EVERY one pilot is as important. FC, logi, dps. All have to help. Or they get replaced. All have shiny ships because specific fits are NEEDED in order to make it worthwhile and lucrative.

Some FCs will take smaller bling/T1 fits, and some FCs will scramble to fill those dps slots. Beats waiting 45 min for a fleet. Let alone if its VG (I know we talkin HQ here).

Point being... all 40 of those pilots are making that money together. You need those others to make your highsec share.

I'm not going to touch on incursions or exploration in null in this post because I have insufficient experience to compare the two. I however am going to touch on a couple of ideas that I think would drastically change the dynamic of null/low versus highsec and where I see the major imbalances are.

---

On Low Sec

First and foremost, irregardless of how prosperous low sec is, care bears with teeth aren't really ever going to choose to live there. I'd love to live in low, but the inability to preemptively defend yourself is an extremely limiting facot. What I mean by this is if player A comes into the system and has a security status below 0 concord has officially recognized them as a threat. However, player B has to wait for player A to aggress and give themselves a suspect or criminal flag prior to being able to engage them.

This fact alone is the single biggest factor preventing low sec mining ops. Defenders have to be willing to aggress first in order to protect an operation from low sec status players so pickets and gate patrols are somewhat useless if you don't have pirates to defend you as they are usually the only ones willing to tank security status.

Additionally, I feel security status penalties are far too low for engaging in lowsec, especially once you have higher level positive values of security status. I feel that if I were to run around in low sec with positive 2 security status and start killing people I should lose security status much quicker than someone who is already negative. The "Positive security status murder buffer" is too big, in my opinion.

My thoughts would be to keep it so -5 sec status can get your ship blown up and you podded as it is now. However you then make it so -0.01 through -4.99 security allows your ship to be destroyed in low sec only. Consider it permission from concord to preemptively defend yourself or your operations from pirates and criminals.

Doing this change would also make a more clearly defined line between "Pirate" and "Pirate Hunter".

---

On Null Sec

My nullsec experience is admittedly rather limited as I only lived in null for about a week as part of a pet alliance renting corporation. With that said, my opinions on null should be taken with a grain of salt.

My hands down opinion on null sec is that POS' are currently the most limiting factor for industrialists to contribute and prosper on a personal level. This is mainly due to problems like a lack of personal storage at a POS, the Factory Manager role and of course POS refining facilities being vastly inferior to NPC station refineries. However something tells me these problems will be fixed, or at least reduced, in Odyssey.

The second and even bigger problem in my opinion is the nature of the power bloc alliances. I have yet to actually try to create a foothold for a corporate in nullsec.. however my biggest fear in doing so is simply getting stomped out by a power bloc just because "they can".

Someone else in this thread mentioned tiered increases to the amount sov costs based on the amount of systems owned. I tend to agree with this. The large power blocs who own enormous amounts of space just because they can is a little silly, in my opinion. The current implementation leaves smaller alliances with little to no space to realistically claim for their own. Or at least that is how it feels from the outside, looking in.

Another problem is blob warfare but I honestly can't think of ways to change or reduce that. I for one have no desire to be part of a blob, let alone be victimized by one.