EVE General Discussion

There is no hard data its just null sec players complaining less people are going through there gate so that they can gank them.
If anything the Income would be less then years ago as a lot of the Blitz that used to happen was put to an end.
Most missions used to have Spawn triggers based on one kind of ship on grid.

You used to kill these triggers until you got the result needed to complete the mission now a lot of these missions spawn triggers include clearing the entire spawn.
You have to be careful with forums and know that most people post A LOT of bulls%$t based on what they would like the game to be. 60-90 M an hour from lvl 4s just doesn't happen. They are fine the way they are these people really don't care about the income lvl and how they can't make that in Null when in really null ratting blows lvl 4s out of the water for a sorce of income and we won't even talk about low sec plexing vs lvl 4s or the income from LVL 5s that are low sec only.

I've said it before and I will say it again the Hi sec income is fine CCP will not be implementing any "choke points" or "phasing out" of Hi sec or the living you can make there. It would be a complete disaster and make even less targets for these gankers they are just to stupid to realize that.
Getting rid of Hi sec means Higher mining prices less miners less ore less manufacturing
less players in turn means higher price to pvp and in the end less pvp targets because some people will simply not be able to afford to pvp. CCP loses HI sec subs they lose Null sec players do to less players for them to gank they start losing money and then CCP closes the Doors on EVE.

And that is why no matter how many tears you shed HI sec will always be a place were a living can be made.

Yeah, it's pretty annoying when people are camping, trying to catch you with their probes and d-scan.

[Edit: apparently n a z i is a word to be censored...]

There was a finnish sketch comedy show in the 90's, in which a neo-n a z i from rural area complained how neo-n a z i s in large cities are priviledged of having more immigrants to bully. When the "reporter" asks the neo-n a z i, what would he do if he got some immigrants to settle in his village, the neo-n a z i replies "I'd drive them away."

Well, that is pretty much how the nullbears behave. Hisec is too safe, according to the nullbears, because alliance-mates would prefer to spend their time running missions in hisec than attending compulsory CTAs in nullsec. Thus hisec must be nerfed to punish the people who mission or mine for their ISK rather than doing productive things in nullsec like structure bashing or going on three hour tours where nothing is killed.

So what will the nullbears do when more sheep are lead into their alliance? Bully them out of the alliance through techniques such as endless paperwork (just how many Teamspeak, Ventrilo, Mumble and Skype servers are required to run an Alliance effectively?) continually issuing CTA and demanding that blues caught ratting, mining or ship spinning be kicked from corp/alliance, requiring people to turn up for X% of activities, even when activities are done during work/sleep hours (no, I will not turn up for a three hour structure bash when I am supposed to be at work or asleep).

The culture of nullsec alliances is, in general, anathema to the casual player (where by 'casual' I mean, 'plays for fun, in spare time').

The nullsec folks will be along shortly to explain that mandatory CTAs and attendance are myths, while also making a point of how they kick out under performing corporations in order to keep their alliances healthy.

That's why we chose to return to high-sec: too many members with children, etc., to answer CTAs.

No, the real problem is that there's no incentive to fight back against the assholes in low/null while there's every incentive to grind isk in highsec. The real problem is that the people who pvp in null have no incentive to do anything but pvp there so long as there's highsec to take care of their PVE and manufacturing needs.

On other MMOs with world pvp (and even WoW's pvp servers back before pvp there became instanced cross-server bullshit gear grinds), when someone screwed with enough people's attempts to PvE, they got together and beat the tards down, or at least chased them out of the area (doesn't matter how l337 you are when you have 30+ bears zerging your ass).

Griefers in game (and IRL) tend to give up fairly quickly when it becomes obvious their prey is working together and there's a risk they'll get their face punched in. This pattern is in every single game and it's true for EVE whenever a small griefer corp learns the hard way that the carebear alliance they just decked is going to come looking for them with every available member every time they log in rather than just sitting back to let them pick off mission/miners. Yes, with insta-undocking cloakies they can't be killed, but if enough time goes by without them getting tears/ransoms/kills they'll move on to an easier target.

It's not a matter of "could be", but "is in". Constant CTAs, "kill x people pr month" etc are the death throes of a dying alliance, I should know since I've been in a few of those before I got into goons. Coincidentally, they're all dead now.

But don't let that stop mara from claiming that all of nullsec alliances are like that, though, it's a better soundbite than "a dying alliance would start demanding mandatory CTA attendance".

Yep, gigantic blue blobs, and then the grunts start crying about lack of targets.

NullSec, BestSec.

Correct. They are the same.



The difference between a nerf and a buf is mainly on the impact on peoples existing wallets. If its a buff that represents inflation, and the rich suffer, as the poor can close the gap faster.



the purpose of HS,LS,NS is to allow players to choose the risk reward balance. The main problem is the risk gradient is not smooth enough, and the second problem is (as you said) that the rewards don't scale properly with the risk. It particularly applies to solo players and small gang players, because casual play in 0.0 is very hard in comparison to HS. Therefore casuals tend to stay in HS, and even NS dwellers keep a HS alt for when there's **** all going on and they may as well make isk in low risk, high pay activities.

It would be an interesting experiment to ban alts and clone jumps and see how that affects populations in null.

Remind me what the meaningful difference between 1.0 and 0.5 space is? Oh there isn't one, what a waste.