These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Eve's Death Knell

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Paul Oliver
Doomheim
#41 - 2012-09-03 02:42:37 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Paul Oliver wrote:
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:


This, as always, is simply inaccurate PVP zealot propaganda. Lo and 0.0 sec have ALWAYS had better rewards. That the inhabitants of these places have made it so uninhabitable that the risk-to-reward ratio is simply unappealing to anyone other than someone looking for PVP is a problem that those inhabitants themselves need to fix, instead of killing/driving all the prey away to extinction.

You can continue to advocate the nerf of hi sec. All it means that it will take longer to make a profit; unlike lo sec, where the average "carebear" is likely to run in the red.


I totally agree with this, nerfing one's ability to earn isk in highsec isn't going to force anyone into the jungles that low/nullsec players have built for themselves, because the issue isn't about risk vs reward, it's about the fact that the predatory nature of low/nullsec does not appeal to everyone who plays EVE, nerfing highsec won't change that.

Statistically, these are incorrect claims.
Every change in the risk/reward relations between highsec and other sec has resulted in corresponding population distribution changes. Every nerf to nullsec and every buff to highsec has resulted in increased highsec population. The one buff to nullsec (Dominion anomalies) resulted in a large buff to nullsec population. The claim that risk and reward relative to other regions in EVE doesn't affect people's decisions of which sec-status to play in is simply an uninformed one.

Did nerfing the rewards of incursions change people's willingness to run them?

Statistically, people who say statistically without actually providing statistics and their source are making stuff up. Also from what I understand about incursions that had to do with the amount of isk incursions paid out, and had nothing to do with how the predatory nature of low/nullsec does not appeal to everyone who plays EVE. 
Its good to be [Gallente](http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1209/QEQlJ.jpg).
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#42 - 2012-09-03 03:15:19 UTC  |  Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Paul Oliver wrote:
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:


This, as always, is simply inaccurate PVP zealot propaganda. Lo and 0.0 sec have ALWAYS had better rewards. That the inhabitants of these places have made it so uninhabitable that the risk-to-reward ratio is simply unappealing to anyone other than someone looking for PVP is a problem that those inhabitants themselves need to fix, instead of killing/driving all the prey away to extinction.

You can continue to advocate the nerf of hi sec. All it means that it will take longer to make a profit; unlike lo sec, where the average "carebear" is likely to run in the red.


I totally agree with this, nerfing one's ability to earn isk in highsec isn't going to force anyone into the jungles that low/nullsec players have built for themselves, because the issue isn't about risk vs reward, it's about the fact that the predatory nature of low/nullsec does not appeal to everyone who plays EVE, nerfing highsec won't change that.

Statistically, these are incorrect claims.
Every change in the risk/reward relations between highsec and other sec has resulted in corresponding population distribution changes. Every nerf to nullsec and every buff to highsec has resulted in increased highsec population. The one buff to nullsec (Dominion anomalies) resulted in a large buff to nullsec population. The claim that risk and reward relative to other regions in EVE doesn't affect people's decisions of which sec-status to play in is simply an uninformed one.

Did nerfing the rewards of incursions change people's willingness to run them?


May I ask where these statistics were pulled out of?

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#43 - 2012-09-03 03:21:18 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Paul Oliver wrote:
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:


This, as always, is simply inaccurate PVP zealot propaganda. Lo and 0.0 sec have ALWAYS had better rewards. That the inhabitants of these places have made it so uninhabitable that the risk-to-reward ratio is simply unappealing to anyone other than someone looking for PVP is a problem that those inhabitants themselves need to fix, instead of killing/driving all the prey away to extinction.

You can continue to advocate the nerf of hi sec. All it means that it will take longer to make a profit; unlike lo sec, where the average "carebear" is likely to run in the red.


I totally agree with this, nerfing one's ability to earn isk in highsec isn't going to force anyone into the jungles that low/nullsec players have built for themselves, because the issue isn't about risk vs reward, it's about the fact that the predatory nature of low/nullsec does not appeal to everyone who plays EVE, nerfing highsec won't change that.

Statistically, these are incorrect claims.
Every change in the risk/reward relations between highsec and other sec has resulted in corresponding population distribution changes. Every nerf to nullsec and every buff to highsec has resulted in increased highsec population. The one buff to nullsec (Dominion anomalies) resulted in a large buff to nullsec population. The claim that risk and reward relative to other regions in EVE doesn't affect people's decisions of which sec-status to play in is simply an uninformed one.

Did nerfing the rewards of incursions change people's willingness to run them?


May I ask where these statistics were pulled out of?


I know!!! I will also give you a hint

His ass! Big smile

"Little ginger moron" ~David Hasselhoff 

Want to see what Surf is training or how little isk Surf has?  http://eveboard.com/pilot/Surfin%27s_PlunderBunny
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#44 - 2012-09-03 03:26:18 UTC
Those stats are well known fact to most EVE players, as evidenced by experience, dev blogs and EVE economic reports.

But don't worry, nobody expects NPC corp members to know anything about EVE. We just wish you wouldn't be able to post outside New Players Q & A.

Carebears stay in hisec because L4s, 3/10s and 4/10s hand out so much ISK with no effort or risk.

.
Leisen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#45 - 2012-09-03 03:26:47 UTC
This thread is an elaborate ruse, likely on CCP's behalf! OP is a lying disinfo agent! The entire topic is pointless, he's just here to try to desensitize people to the idea of Eve shutting down.

MOVE ALONG PEOPLE.
Abel Merkabah
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#46 - 2012-09-03 03:32:48 UTC
Leisen wrote:
This thread is an elaborate ruse, likely on CCP's behalf! OP is a lying disinfo agent! The entire topic is pointless, he's just here to try to desensitize people to the idea of Eve shutting down.

MOVE ALONG PEOPLE.


And I would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for you damn kids...

James315 for CSM 8!
Volar Kang
Kang Industrial
#47 - 2012-09-03 03:33:45 UTC
James 315 wrote:

Sorry, don't buy it. It's the ratio of risk:reward that matters, not the fact that nullsec has slightly better ore or whatever. I also disagree with your premise that highsec is filled with people who refuse to take risks under any circumstances. The fact that nullsec folk have alts in highsec debunks this idea.


How do you even come up with this stuff? its like you are Snot Shots brother or something. How does the fact that some null players have highsec alts disprove the idea that some highsec players refuse to take risks? So you are saying that a null person who keeps a highsec alt in jita for price checking disproves the idea that there might be some players in highsec who refuse to take a risk? Its like saying that ice cream sales are directly related to shark attacks. When the beach vendors sell more ice cream, shark attacks increase. The truth is that both are totally unrelated and are caused by a third issue, heat. The hotter it is the more people are in the water increasing the chance of shark attack and the hotter it is the more likely people are to buy ice cream.

You are not fooling anyone, the rewards for null are 10 times the rewards for high. Better ore, better rats, better PI, Moon Goo. Seriously, how is mining in highsec for 30 to 40 mill an hour doing the most mind numbingly boring thing that Eve has to offer even compare to moon goo, where you make billions while not even playing?
Paul Oliver
Doomheim
#48 - 2012-09-03 03:37:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Paul Oliver
Roime wrote:
Those stats are well known fact to most EVE players, as evidenced by experience, dev blogs and EVE economic reports.

But don't worry, nobody expects NPC corp members to know anything about EVE. We just wish you wouldn't be able to post outside New Players Q & A.

Carebears stay in hisec because L4s, 3/10s and 4/10s hand out so much ISK with no effort or risk.
See it's people like you with your elitst attitude that I almost feel represent the nullsec player, and subsequently why I can't see myself enjoying nullsec gameplay.
Its good to be [Gallente](http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1209/QEQlJ.jpg).
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#49 - 2012-09-03 03:40:42 UTC
Roime wrote:
Those stats are well known fact to most EVE players, as evidenced by experience, dev blogs and EVE economic reports.

But don't worry, nobody expects NPC corp members to know anything about EVE. We just wish you wouldn't be able to post outside New Players Q & A.

Carebears stay in hisec because L4s, 3/10s and 4/10s hand out so much ISK with no effort or risk.


So many words just to say they were pulled out of his ass.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Abel Merkabah
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#50 - 2012-09-03 03:42:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Abel Merkabah
Paul Oliver wrote:
Roime wrote:
Those stats are well known fact to most EVE players, as evidenced by experience, dev blogs and EVE economic reports.

But don't worry, nobody expects NPC corp members to know anything about EVE. We just wish you wouldn't be able to post outside New Players Q & A.

Carebears stay in hisec because L4s, 3/10s and 4/10s hand out so much ISK with no effort or risk.
See it's people like you with your elitst attitude that I almost feel represents the nullsec player, and subsequently why I can't see myself enjoying nullsec gameplay.


He is right with his argument though.

Right now there is an increase in FW "play" because of the unbalanced rewards certain aspects of the FW experience are exploitable. This leads to an artifical increase in the number of players in lowsec systems. However, since they are only interested in ISK potential, they will leave once it gets balanced out.

It is safe to assume this same behavior occurs on a regular basis; as he pointed out with incursions. It does not take rocket surgery to recognize the pattern; however, you do need to be exposed to those portions of the game where these influxes of temporary players occur; hense, probably not highsec NPC corp members.

It's not fair to throw all highsec NPC corp members in the same boat, but I have a feeling, if you are in the forums posting, you are not the highsec NPC player he is referring too.

Edit: I stand corrected, he was referring directly to you. I take this whole post back; his argument was true, but the way he handled it was not right.

James315 for CSM 8!
ugh zug
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2012-09-03 04:24:35 UTC
pointless what if, eve will never end.

Want me to shut up? Remove content from my post,1B. Remove my content from a thread I have started 2B.
Webvan
All Kill No Skill
#52 - 2012-09-03 05:03:21 UTC
If EVE died, it would most likely be plunged deep into the eternal pit of smouldering hell, fire brimstone and and tormenting demons galore, where we would just log in with our SOE station access account.

I'm in it for the money

Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F12
Ukonius
Freeport Eleven
#53 - 2012-09-03 05:34:39 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
James 315 wrote:
I don't think there's so much an issue of hate between the two groups as a problem with game imbalance that most of us recognize: There's too much reward for too little risk in highsec, and "carebear"-type players seem very eager to maintain or worsen the imbalance, to everyone's detriment. Cool


This, as always, is simply inaccurate PVP zealot propaganda. Lo and 0.0 sec have ALWAYS had better rewards. That the inhabitants of these places have made it so uninhabitable that the risk-to-reward ratio is simply unappealing to anyone other than someone looking for PVP is a problem that those inhabitants themselves need to fix, instead of killing/driving all the prey away to extinction.

You can continue to advocate the nerf of hi sec. All it means that it will take longer to make a profit; unlike lo sec, where the average "carebear" is likely to run in the red.




Well said and very true. ^

OP, most high-sec 'carebears' do not have comparable pvp skills to put up much of a fight. It would be exactly like it is now, a slaughter, only Concord wouldnt respond.
Josef Djugashvilis
#54 - 2012-09-03 06:26:25 UTC
Roime wrote:
Those stats are well known fact to most EVE players, as evidenced by experience, dev blogs and EVE economic reports.

But don't worry, nobody expects NPC corp members to know anything about EVE. We just wish you wouldn't be able to post outside New Players Q & A.

Carebears stay in hisec because L4s, 3/10s and 4/10s hand out so much ISK with no effort or risk.


May I ask for a rational explanation why NPC folk are presumed not to know anything about Eve.

My main has been active in Eve since early 2007 and has a reasonable working knowledge of how Eve functions.

Your statement seems to say more about your level of knowledge than mine.

This is not a signature.
Samoth Egnoled
Caldari Provisions
#55 - 2012-09-03 06:31:38 UTC
I would like to see, what would happen if they made all systems conquerable. A sort of Revolution. concord gets dumbed down and can be fended off, but they would also up their game and bring in the Caps.

Would be amusing.
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#56 - 2012-09-03 06:38:21 UTC  |  Edited by: DarthNefarius
James 315 wrote:
I don't think there's so much an issue of hate between the two groups as a problem with game imbalance that most of us recognize: There's too much reward for too little risk in highsec, and "carebear"-type players seem very eager to maintain or worsen the imbalance, to everyone's detriment. Cool


There is not too much reward.. gimme a break! There is too much NULL crying that there are not enough lambs for the slaughter & that people that enjoy a different part of the sandbox should suffer under thier thumbsAttention
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#57 - 2012-09-03 06:41:22 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
This, as always, is simply inaccurate PVP zealot propaganda. Lo and 0.0 sec have ALWAYS had better rewards. That the inhabitants of these places have made it so uninhabitable that the risk-to-reward ratio is simply unappealing to anyone other than someone looking for PVP is a problem that those inhabitants themselves need to fix, instead of killing/driving all the prey away to extinction.

You can continue to advocate the nerf of hi sec. All it means that it will take longer to make a profit; unlike lo sec, where the average "carebear" is likely to run in the red.



You getting popped on the Torrinos gate or whatever is not indicative of lowsec/0.0 being "uninhabitable," sorry.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Josef Djugashvilis
#58 - 2012-09-03 06:45:11 UTC
I run level 4 missions to pay for lo-sec pvp, which I enjoy but do very very badly.

I make about 30 mill per hour running missions.

If folk in null sec think this is a high income level, then the isk rewards in null sec must be simply awful.

This is not a signature.
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#59 - 2012-09-03 06:46:17 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:


. Every nerf to nullsec and every buff to highsec has resulted in increased highsec population.


So the Titan nerfs increased HI SEC population?!?!?!?! You are so full of it you must have brown eyes.
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
James Vayne
Section 9 SFU
#60 - 2012-09-03 06:46:51 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
[quote=James 315]

This, as always, is simply inaccurate PVP zealot propaganda. Lo and 0.0 sec have ALWAYS had better rewards. That the inhabitants of these places have made it so uninhabitable that the risk-to-reward ratio is simply unappealing to anyone other than someone looking for PVP is a problem that those inhabitants themselves need to fix, instead of killing/driving all the prey away to extinction.



This. Low/Nullsec is a more risky space to fly around in and, thusly, has more reward for those enterprising enough to take the risk. However highsec has had, by increments, more and more reward put into it and I thing that because the buildup of reward has been so incremental, it has largely gone unnoticed by CCP.

There is nothing wrong with lowsec or nullsec as it is save for the folk who live out there hunting everything for the sake of hunting it. While this is a perfectly valid use for the game (all things being sandbox), even the nullsec/lowsec players must recognise that over-hunting drives players back to safe space leaving them to float around hoping they'll get a bite.

The only thing I would suggest is that CCP redress the balance between high/null sec and provide more incentive for nullsec enterprise by reducing incentive in highsec.