These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What would happen if Null Sec had no Local?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Aubrey Addams
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#201 - 2012-08-14 11:06:00 UTC
removing local from the whole game would be the best thing in the history of EVE
Gabrielle Lamb
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#202 - 2012-08-14 18:01:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Gabrielle Lamb
Tomiko Kawase wrote:
Gabrielle Lamb wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
[quote=Big Bossu]
The only alteration which needs to be done is either nerfing hisec, or buffing nullsec/lowsec.

If you buff nullsec, then I wouldn't be surprised if CCP ended up having to increase various taxes etc in hisec to make sure the economy doesn't get too much monetary inflation.


Why is such a buff needed? Outside of a buff to 0.0 mission running. 0.0 alliances not making enough? Don't make me laugh... You can already make significantly more doing pure belt ratting in 0.0 then you can in hisec. Add in plexes, anoms and other exploration and you blow hisec out of the water.



Removing local would buff large alliance while hurting small ones. The larger the alliance the less dependence it has on small forms of income like ratting. Alliances that gain wealth through moons, renters, or other large-scale projects will suffer a lot less from a lack of local.


And you're quoting me because? I'm strongly against removing Local, would make nullsec borderline uninhabitable. Only thing you'd be able to do there would be holding moons and PVPing. All normal PVE would die
James 315
Experimental Fun Times Corp RELOADED
CODE.
#203 - 2012-08-14 18:25:48 UTC
Aubrey Addams wrote:
removing local from the whole game would be the best thing in the history of EVE

Is local spam really that awful? Sad

MinerBumping.com
The Djentleman Paulson
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#204 - 2012-08-14 18:49:24 UTC
NO LOCAL ?



NO



LOCAL?






NO LOCAL SPAM?






DOES NOT COMPUTE









.
...................▄▄ ▄▄
...▀▀▀▀▀███▄███
....▓█ ▀ █████████▄
▓████████▀▀▀▀██
▓█████▀▄▄████▄
▓█▀▀▀▄█▓▓▓▓▓█▀
▒█ ███▓▓▓▓▓█▀..TEST
▒▒██▓▓▓▓▓▓█.....ALLIANCE
▄▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▀▄......BEST
...▀▀██░█░█▀....ALLIANCE
..........▀░█░▀
YuuKnow
The Scope
#205 - 2012-08-15 03:56:59 UTC  |  Edited by: YuuKnow
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
I have never seen anyone suggest the total removal of Null.

Okay, what would CCP use to advertize their game with, then?

"Come mine for days on end. There's no risk to it whatsoever now that we've fixed the mining barges because the general public couldn't fit it properly to save their lives, but don't worry, you don't have to touch it much for 45 minutes at a time so it's really, really exciting!

Oh, and buy expensive digital pants!"

YuuKnow wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
YuuKnow wrote:
Humor me. Lets see your reasoning since your proclaining that you have your finger on the pulse of the entire playerbase.

It's simple, the effort to reward ratio is higher in hisec. Increase the effort of keeping safe, without either increasing the rewards in nullsec, or reducing the rewards in hisec, and people would be dumb to bother with actually living in nullsec.


Quoting someone that thinks that Level 4 missions compare to null sec Technetium moons.

Quoting someone who thinks grunts get personal wealth from the technetium moons, as opposed to just getting new ships to fight with subsidized.


Quoting someone that *ACTUALLY* does think that level 4 missions are comparable to Technetium moons. Not to mention the trillions that null sec alliances make on null sec resources, and ratting. Your not going to win a "we are poor in null sec" argument, try something else.

On a side note, there's an pretty impressive 3 Goon Filibuster displayed here. Zim on some 4 hour long thread spamming streches here.

0052: Alavaria Fera
0123: Andski
0155 Andski
0208 Alavaria Fera
0212 Alavaria Fera
0221 Alavaria Fera
0228 Andski
0244 Alavaria Fera
0255 Alavaria Fera
0307 Andski
0310 Alavaria Fera
0315 Andski
0317 Alavaria Fera
0330 Andski
0553 LORD ZIM
0611 Andski
0612 Alavaria Fera
0623 Alavaria Fera
0629 Alavaria Fera
0713 LORD ZIM
0840 Andski
0849 Andski
0854 Andski
0856 LORD ZIM
0900 Andski
0903 LORD ZIM
0912 LORD ZIM
0934 LORD ZIM
0938 LORD ZIM
0940 LORD ZIM
0948 LORD ZIM
1058 LORD ZIM
1102 LORD ZIM
1110 LORD ZIM
1117 Andski
1129 Andski
1132 LORD ZIM
1134 Andski
1136 LORD ZIM
1144 LORD ZIM
1153 Alavaria Fera
1155 Andski
1155 LORD ZIM
1157 Andski
1207 Andski
1212 Andski
1213 LORD ZIM
1220 LORD ZIM
1230 LORD ZIM
1237 Andski
1241 Andski
1242 LORD ZIM
1259 LORD ZIM
1349 Andski
1350 LORD ZIM
1911 Andski
1913 Andski
1913 LORD ZIM
1920 LORD ZIM
1944 LORD ZIM
2016 LORD ZIM
2025 LORD ZIM
2031 LORD ZIM
2044 LORD ZIM
2202 LORD ZIM
2204 LORD ZIM
0718 LORD ZIM

Goons...2% of the Eve population, but 30% of the forum bullShocked. Seems natural given that a more difficult to police null sec means a dramatic shift in power, terrifying to those that currently hold it. Personally I like the thought that the null sec power-brokers are threatened by this. Time for CCP to stop playing favorites, remember that 97% of their player-base are non-Goon, and throw a wrench into the status quo to mix it up.

yk
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#206 - 2012-08-15 04:24:25 UTC
goons posting a lot
must be a conspiracy
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#207 - 2012-08-15 06:06:23 UTC
You know someone's lost the case and their cool when they start posting posts like YuuKnow just did.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Riall
Doomheim
#208 - 2012-08-15 06:59:47 UTC
I kind of expected this thread to end once someone said "wormholes without sleepers".

[center] "Buy PLEX, don't be a space butt"[/center]

[center] Keepin' it... me.[/center]

Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#209 - 2012-08-15 07:01:58 UTC
YuuKnow wrote:
What would happen if Null Sec's local were removed and made like WH space?

1. Would it effect the big alliances? Sovereignty?
2. How would it change fleet combat? What fleet combat tatics would change?
3. How would it change small gang/solo combat? Would small gang tatics change?
4. How would it effect hot drops and capital ship combat?
5. Would null sec be more fun or less fun? Would it attract more players or less players?

yk


How would you feel about capturing sov in a wh that had a station and living there forever?

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
knobber Jobbler
State War Academy
Caldari State
#210 - 2012-08-15 07:13:03 UTC
It would probably be quite boring. It would certainly slow down null sec when it comes to big engagements, in some ways even a worm hole style local might kill off those big fleet battles.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#211 - 2012-08-15 07:50:38 UTC
The big battles would still be there, since the time and the place would be set by timers. I don't think there'd be that big of an effect on those fights, except maybe necessitating more intel gathering.

No, the main sufferers would be those who try to live there, and those who try to roam around killing those who live there. And, of course, those who try to defend those who live there. Except they won't be living there anymore, so there won't be anyone to defend, and there won't be anyone to kill, so there won't be any reason to defend.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Marconus Orion
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#212 - 2012-08-15 08:38:38 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
No, the main sufferers would be those who try to live there, and those who try to roam around killing those who live there. And, of course, those who try to defend those who live there. Except they won't be living there anymore, so there won't be anyone to defend, and there won't be anyone to kill, so there won't be any reason to defend.

Bullshit.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#213 - 2012-08-15 08:39:59 UTC
Marconus Orion wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
No, the main sufferers would be those who try to live there, and those who try to roam around killing those who live there. And, of course, those who try to defend those who live there. Except they won't be living there anymore, so there won't be anyone to defend, and there won't be anyone to kill, so there won't be any reason to defend.

Bullshit.

Nope.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#214 - 2012-08-15 11:54:56 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Marconus Orion wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
No, the main sufferers would be those who try to live there, and those who try to roam around killing those who live there. And, of course, those who try to defend those who live there. Except they won't be living there anymore, so there won't be anyone to defend, and there won't be anyone to kill, so there won't be any reason to defend.

Bullshit.

Nope.

Let's try it and see.

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 ?
Sakura Kasenumi
Danish Vikings
#215 - 2012-08-15 11:58:25 UTC
it would have pro's and cons.

Pro: AFK cloaking would be pointless, meaning that you actually hgave to be sat at your computer to have any effect in game.
Con: Finding fights would be much much harder.
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#216 - 2012-08-15 20:42:02 UTC
It wouldn't have any real effect on big fleets and sov warfare. Since that is all built around showing up at structures at a set time or camping stations/gates, the lack of local wouldn't have much effect. Also, alliances big enough to field thousands of players could spare a few characters to run probes and watch gates.


It will mean less people living in null. You can make about the same ratting income doing missions in highsec. Or you could make better income in wormholes with less risk than nullsec, because there are no cynos and you can close entrances to your wormhole if you know hostiles are on the other side. Can't close gates in nullsec, and cyno jamming every systems would hinder your own movement.


It won't improve nullsec for the gankers because there will be less targets. Most ratters and miners will leave, and those that stay will be those that can afford to multi-box with scouts, so gankers still won't catch them.


And, as usual, guys like Frying Doom let slip that the main reason they want this is just to hurt specific groups in nullsec that they don't like. Oh, they'll argue that it will improve things. But the facade always falls away at some point when they simply can't contain the glee they feel when actual nullsec dweller complain that this will impair their nullsec activities.


So don't listen to Frying Doom. If removing local depopulates nullsec and forces our grunts to grind highsec missions, he'll consider it a victory. When everyone else here realizes that it didn't make nullsec a better place to visit and had no effect on small alliances getting space, Frying Doom won't care, because this whole thing is just his person vendetta against goons.
Thomas Orca
Broski is ded
#217 - 2012-08-15 20:46:49 UTC
YuuKnow wrote:


Quoting someone that *ACTUALLY* does think that level 4 missions are comparable to Technetium moons. Not to mention the trillions that null sec alliances make on null sec resources, and ratting. Your not going to win a "we are poor in null sec" argument, try something else.

Hi. I live in null sec. I have made a grand total of a WHOLE 7 million isk from my alliance's vast amount of technetium. I know, you are jealous of my vast wealth.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#218 - 2012-08-15 20:47:57 UTC
ask me about my nullsec detorid tech income
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#219 - 2012-08-15 20:55:16 UTC
YuuKnow wrote:
Quoting someone that *ACTUALLY* does think that level 4 missions are comparable to Technetium moons. Not to mention the trillions that null sec alliances make on null sec resources, and ratting. Your not going to win a "we are poor in null sec" argument, try something else.

Oh hey so it turns out I missed this little gem. Listen, you little mongoloid, I haven't said "we're poor in nullsec", I've said "we'll go grind L4s in hisec to a larger degree than we do already".

It is known.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Mortimer Civeri
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#220 - 2012-08-15 21:29:41 UTC
I have to agree with Lord Zim. Null will turn into a wasteland. Sure there will be SOV fights with huge fleets still happening, but nobody will LIVE there. Null will turn into a desert. The effort to live in null with no local, will not be compensated by the rewards for doing so. Null alliance members will switch to making a living in highsec and logging in their "alt" when there is a fleet going to contest/defend SOV or a moon.

The only people advocating the removal of local are small gang roamers, who (as was so elegantly put forth earlier) are salivating at the thought of all the carebears they will gank, and those that don't see the implications of what removing local from null will do. Already, the rewards of living in null are few, and only cater to a few individuals, while the rest make a living in highsec and occasionally log in their nullsec PvP alt to do something fun with friends, or defend/contest sov or a money making moon.

"I don't know which is worse, ...that everyone has his price, or that the price is always so low." Calvin