These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The Hypocrisy of High Sec

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Erad Stomper
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#421 - 2012-11-04 12:04:47 UTC
not a bad idea but if you remove some ore in high sec i think it would be fair to remove tritanium and pyerite from low sec and 0.0

This way those in low sec and 0 will get what they want, total control over rare ore, and carebear would get what they want also, total control over tritanium and pyerite.

This way it would be fair for everyone.
Keno Skir
#422 - 2012-11-04 12:08:49 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:
Robert De'Arneth wrote:
Like my daughter told me me when she was 6, lifes hard Daddy, get a helmet.



This is an awesome post Big smile



Agreed, i laughed through breakfast :D

Black Lanterns Blog <- Read my ramblings -.-

250,000 Bonus SP when you start an Alpha Clone HERE <---
Frying Doom
#423 - 2012-11-04 12:10:21 UTC
In all honesty Null is now so out of whack with the rest of the game they should really assign a team to it for a year, completely scrap what is there and come up with something better and more balanced.

Otherwise we will just get more of the same, a region covered in band-aids so badly that it no longer fits the rest of the game.

How many times have supers been re-balanced now?

Now much time have the CSM's wasted suggesting more band-aids?

How much is wrong with it? Ask Lord Zim, I bet he could come up with a page full.

It needs putting out of its misery and a reworked security area needs to be made. One that fits between Lo-sec and Wormholes like it should.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Keno Skir
#424 - 2012-11-04 12:20:18 UTC
Tarvos Telesto wrote:
How about hipocricy of null bears and pvprs ? They need stuf to pvp - kill and gank other, but they hate carebears who mining ore and bulid ships for them, also zero logic... In theory more they hate miners, more they pay for ice - ore and higer cost of ships and other stuf, because less people mining or is just hard to get ore due to risk, populations needs etc.

I hear EvE is santbox, please dont force people to play like you want, you got own vision of gaming but you are wrong.
Empire is basic game content and part of EvE same like null space and both places got own rules and purpose.

Your vision of ore in empire is totaly wrong, people who love mining or industry need a lot specific ores and stuf to do, imagine if here only tritanium in empire to mining, sorry but this is EvE not pacman, universe it self should be rich and offer even more type of ores - minerals than existed in game, like in real universe.


If this were like the real universe i'd have eaten you a long time ago and buggered off before concord wandered over a week later. If i was having a bad day i'd pack you into my ships hostage container and use you as a bartering chip to trick your family into a fake exchange meeting, where i'd have them enslaved and made to toothbrush clean my FIRE button while you watch forever.

Luckily this is a game and sometimes a game mechanic cannot reflect the real world. I think it makes perfect sense that rarer ores come from a harder to reach place, this is after all a game.

Black Lanterns Blog <- Read my ramblings -.-

250,000 Bonus SP when you start an Alpha Clone HERE <---
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#425 - 2012-11-04 12:28:40 UTC
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
You're underestimating the power of wardec system+bounty+crimewatch under Concord applauds

No, they aren't.

Bounties won't do any good, and as far as I can tell, Crimewatch 2.0 is *not* going to encourage pvp.


Bounties will make miner ganks profitable again and wardec system as it stands is not far from trapping null sec entities in it to make of high sec a slug fest party null sec is asking for ages.

At least I can only hope, I'm absolutely not sure this will ever happen. Blink

brb
Natasha Liao
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#426 - 2012-11-04 15:15:14 UTC
I'll post my usual of maybe a buff to null is the answer. Nerf HS =/= fixing null. All you null folks complaining about how boring null is: stuff you folks do *does* change things. At least your actions actually have a consequence or a lasting effect ( however long or short ) in null. I know from experience that I accept a mission and Zor or the Seven or that damn Informant is going to be there for me. The Damsel is going to be slumming it in the pleasure hub. Just like they were yesterday and they'll assuredly be there tomorrow. Maybe even later in the day. My Agent will be pretty much oblivious to anything that's happened in the past. The 4 empires will still control the exact same space and the same stations. And sure: exploration sites, W-space entrances and other 'little things' change. But over-all: nothing changes.

My game in HS is pretty much static, boring and monotonous. Nothing I do changes anything. Making the part of Eve where I play even more tedious doesn't fix null.

You're using logic on an internet discussion forum. A rookie mistake, but one you'll soon learn to avoid. -Destiny Corrupted
Urgg Boolean
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#427 - 2012-11-04 16:54:47 UTC
My system crashed as I was posting this, so if this is a duplicate post, my apologies.

I would agree that PvP destruction creates a huge need for newly built stuff. And combat in general is a good source for consumables. But these are not the only economic drivers in a fake game economy. So sales would not entirely cease as you state.

There are always new players who will need to buy stuff. There are players who like to build up a huge stash of "tangible goods" or piexles giving the appearance of tangible. Many players buy alt accounts and/or build alts on their current accounts - creating further need for goods. The bigger the game's player base, the more this kind of thing happens, expecially the need for consumables (which you stated as ammo only). To a lesser extent, you need goods to upgrade or refit so you can adapt to changing game mechanics or to utilize alternate strategies.

Also, this game does not have permenent damage to objects. Everything is perfectly repairable or it vaporizes. Some games utilize this as a means to create onoing needs - planned obsolescence if you will.

So there are actually lots of ways to build a fake economy that does not depend totally on PvP destruction. Look at real economies. Nobody blows up my car forcing me to buy a new one. But it wears out and I have to soend money at some point. But companies like Haliburton sure made oodles of cash off the US government via military contracts - and they don't makufacture tanks, trucks of planes. They do provide a lot of consumables like operating the food services.

So, if you engage in PvP, then your expenses are based in equipment replacement. But that does not mean the economy would dry up totally if PvP stopped.
Teebling
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#428 - 2012-11-04 17:09:07 UTC
Better industrial infrastructure in null sec please, CCP.

More rewards for Industrialists willing to take the risk, and more farms/fields for invaders to pillage.
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#429 - 2012-11-04 22:18:16 UTC
Vincent Athena wrote:


PvPers do get one reward that industrialists do not get: the Adrenaline Rush. For them it feels good. For the typical industrialist the stress involved in PvP combat is just a pile of stress without any euphoria, and maybe with a feeling of being drained.


I don't care either way, but:

PvP - joy from destruction
Industrialist - joy from creation
Moonlit Raid
Doomheim
#430 - 2012-11-05 02:07:08 UTC
Geligdio Khan wrote:
A lot of players who live exclusively in high sec like to say “stop pushing us around, we don’t want to play the game like you do, stop telling us what to do and leave us alone. We don’t tell you how to play so you can’t tell us how to play”.

I think this is not a fair argument.

Consider a situation where all PVPers in the game agreed to fight each other until one entered structure, at that point a killmail would be generated and the loser, who had entered structure, would be obliged to return to a station and not to use that ship again for 24 hours.

Under this arrangement PVP would continue but industrial activity, in all but ammo manufacturing, would cease to exist. All pilots would buy one or two copies of each ship in the game and would not need to buy ships again. It would be a PVP paradise, with no need to grind money to pay for ships you could fight and fight forever.

Now obviously nobody wants this but it illustrates the point, all industrial activity in EVE is built on risk. It is founded on people taking a risk, screwing up and getting blown up. This creates the opportunity to build a new ship. It is very rare people undock wanting to get blown up and when they do get blown up it is because they were taking a risk to achieve something they want and it went wrong.

Of course there is the expansion of the subscriber base, when new players want new ships, but expansion also creates new industrialists so overall it’s effect is small.

So this means if you want to mine or make ships or trade what you are doing is profiting off someone who took a risk and got blown up and now has to replace their ship. So saying you want to do any of these things but not have anything to do with those nasty PVPers is completely hypocritical. Every industrial activity relies on PVPers, you must interact with them to be an industrialist, so you can’t say “leave us alone” because if they did no industrialist would have anything to do.

So saying, “I want to be safe in high sec and just to be an industrialist” is inherently creating a two tier system, where the PVPers take all the risk and then industrialists get all the rewards. It’s unbalanced. It’s like PVPers asking for ships that respawn, it just distorts the game in the favour of one specific group.

Industrialists who seek great rewards should have to take great risks to get them. This feeds the system with risk and allows those rewards to be generated. It is fair, everyone in the game takes risks to get rewards.

I don’t think anyone should be allowed to play a communal game and get rewards without risk while others take extra risks to compensate. The risk of mining and manufacturing and trading in high sec is too low, it is very close to zero, yet the rewards are high. This is unacceptable.

High sec needs to be balanced. If you want to be safe you must put up with being poor, if you want to be rich you should take risks.

So no wonder people say “leave us alone, we like it as it is”.

So all these ships you get blown up in your PvP are only as cheap as they are because high secers dont have massive amounts of risk building and transporting them. As you suggest manufacturing slots should cost more, will anyone sell anything they've manufactured in those slots for a loss?

If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.

Please Note: Any advice given comes with the caveat that nothing will be suitable for every situation.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#431 - 2012-11-05 02:12:59 UTC
Moonlit Raid wrote:
So all these ships you get blown up in your PvP are only as cheap as they are because high secers dont have massive amounts of risk building and transporting them. As you suggest manufacturing slots should cost more, will anyone sell anything they've manufactured in those slots for a loss?

It won't be at a loss, unless CCP decide to go from 2k for making a maelstrom, to 20 million for making a maelstrom (in case you're getting frothy at the mouth at those numbers, sod off, they're numbers pulled out of my ass) in one go. If they increase the costs gradually, manufacturers will just increase their prices to match and the purchasers will just deal with it.

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

RIP Vile Rat
Moonlit Raid
Doomheim
#432 - 2012-11-05 02:16:56 UTC
Exactly, My general point being OP's post may as well just say "make everything more expensive." Easiest way to do that: increase industrialists costs, whether that be in manufacturing charges or higher probability of being blown up.

If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.

Please Note: Any advice given comes with the caveat that nothing will be suitable for every situation.
Lady Katherine Devonshire
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
#433 - 2012-11-05 05:52:10 UTC
Uh-huh. And let's say that the null-bears found a djinni bottle and wished hi-sec out of existence. The entire galaxy is now null-sec only. What happens next?

First, CCP loses a significant chunk of subscribers.

Second, all four major empires cease to exist. Instead, there will be four major NPC ship design companies in the service of the two major empires in the game: Test and Goons.

Third, all new and old players would be forced to join one of these two remaining factions on day one. Permanent "NBSI" combat-bots in front of all the newbie starter stations would enforce this policy.

On the plus side, all mining and production would be entirely bot-driven, so all the tedious aspects of the game would be gone and 100% of the playerbase could focus on PvP all day long. On the down side, every player would be required to have a second account for mining botting in order to maintain the required membership standards of the two empires. Those who do not would be effectively barred from the game by the combat bots (see "newbie stations" above).


Personally, I could think of better things you could wish for.

The sound of the Amarrian heart
Geligdio Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#434 - 2012-11-05 10:09:19 UTC
Moonlit Raid wrote:
Exactly, My general point being OP's post may as well just say "make everything more expensive." Easiest way to do that: increase industrialists costs, whether that be in manufacturing charges or higher probability of being blown up.



Firstly I really don't think how much stuff costs in ISK matters at all.

When ships fall into our bubble camp we get excited if they took a lot of effort to obtain, and we kind of don't care if they were easy. So if ships cost a lot more effort to get it would just make killing frigs exciting, and battleships thunderawesome.

I think most PVPers just want to compete, it doesn't matter if it's BC vs BC or Frig vs Frig, it's just being able to compete.


Secondly the cheapness of everything is what keeps industry in low and null down (that and the lack of infrastructure), if things were more expensive in HIgh Sec it would make it more worth making things in Null and that would be really great for the game.

I, personally, think Null Empires should be self sufficient, they should have the whole tree, miners, manufacturers, traders, PVEers and PVPers because then there's something to defend and something for others to attack.

Sov right now is pretty much just bragging rights.

Thanks
Azrael Dinn
Imperial Mechanics
#435 - 2012-11-05 10:34:25 UTC
I'm kinda failing to see the point in all of this...

You want to nerf highsec so that people would come to lowsec or null to do industry (and something else?) there so that the majority of the playerbase would be in lowsec and null. Am I even close to right or?

After centuries of debating and justifying... Break Cloaks tm
Geligdio Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#436 - 2012-11-05 10:37:32 UTC
Azrael Dinn wrote:
I'm kinda failing to see the point in all of this...

You want to nerf highsec so that people would come to lowsec or null to do industry (and something else?) there so that the majority of the playerbase would be in lowsec and null. Am I even close to right or?



Yeah pretty much, I think the regions should balanced so a third of players live in each one (or maybe if a region is 1/nth of the total number of systems then 1/nth of the total player should live there).

I think High Sec has way too many players at the moment and that shows it is too good.

Thanks
Norrin Ellis
Doomheim
#437 - 2012-11-05 10:41:40 UTC
Oh, you were finished? Well, allow me to retort...

Geligdio Khan wrote:
Firstly I really don't think how much stuff costs in ISK matters at all.

If you don't care about costs, then you also shouldn't care about the scale of rewards. Rewards are merely a means of affording things of higher costs.

Quote:
When ships fall into our bubble camp we get excited if they took a lot of effort to obtain, and we kind of don't care if they were easy. So if ships cost a lot more effort to get it would just make killing frigs exciting, and battleships thunderawesome.

Everything was awfully expensive in the beginning. EVE's free market made things cheaper and more plentiful. Yay economics!

Quote:
I think most PVPers just want to compete, it doesn't matter if it's BC vs BC or Frig vs Frig, it's just being able to compete.

Bullsh*t! Rarely do balanced fights even occur. Nobody wants to compete. Everyone wants to either win or avoid losing, and both of those goals necessitate superior numbers and firepower. PL supercap blob, anyone?

Quote:
Secondly the cheapness of everything is what keeps industry in low and null down (that and the lack of infrastructure), if things were more expensive in HIgh Sec it would make it more worth making things in Null and that would be really great for the game.

What keeps industry down outside of highsec is that people outside of highsec have other ISK faucets aside from industry and plenty of highsec alts to provide for all their shopping needs, allowing them to concentrate on the currency they value most: killmails and e-peen measurement.

Quote:
I, personally, think Null Empires should be self sufficient, they should have the whole tree, miners, manufacturers, traders, PVEers and PVPers because then there's something to defend and something for others to attack.

Sov right now is pretty much just bragging rights.

They do have the whole tree. They keep the vulnerable parts of the tree in highsec with the aforementioned alt brigade, however. The nullsec crowd is just as risk averse as anyone else when it comes to engaging in highly vulnerable activities.

Everything about the PvP side of the game is about bragging rights. Get rid of killmails if you want it to be about anything other than meta-game d*ckwaving.

CEO, Venture Racing

Manager, EVE Online Hold'Em
Herr Hammer Draken
#438 - 2012-11-05 11:20:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Herr Hammer Draken
Geligdio Khan wrote:
Azrael Dinn wrote:
I'm kinda failing to see the point in all of this...

You want to nerf highsec so that people would come to lowsec or null to do industry (and something else?) there so that the majority of the playerbase would be in lowsec and null. Am I even close to right or?



Yeah pretty much, I think the regions should balanced so a third of players live in each one (or maybe if a region is 1/nth of the total number of systems then 1/nth of the total player should live there).

I think High Sec has way too many players at the moment and that shows it is too good.


That is only because everybody that is in null also has one or more high sec toons. But not everybody that is in high sec has a null toon.

The assumption that high sec is too good is a red herring in this regard.

Because of the game mecahnics high sec will always be the industrial source for the game. It is the only place where a Jita type trade center can exsist. This is basic to the game design. Nothing CCP can do will change that ever except to make null like high sec. And that will not happen.

CCP already has worked to make Null more viable with rich resources. The T2 moon goo. It was made to exsist in only a small part of null so players would have reason to fight over it. But alliances have mitigated that aspect too much.

In the end anything CCP does to the game will get perverted from its intention by players. Then they will complain bitterly about how their space is no fun.

At the end of the day when all is said and done. If you play in null then you are confirming that null works good enough for you to be there. You could be in high sec. High sec could also be in null. If null is bad nobody would be there and that is not the case. Only a fool would handi cap themselves for no good reason. I assume that those in null are not fools.

Herr Hammer Draken "The Amarr Prophet"
Vanyr Andrard
VacuumTube
#439 - 2012-11-05 11:29:32 UTC
Herr Hammer Draken wrote:

At the end of the day when all is said and done. If you play in null then you are confirming that null works good enough for you to be there. You could be in high sec. High sec could also be in null. If null is bad nobody would be there and that is not the case. Only a fool would handi cap themselves for no good reason. I assume that those in null are not fools.


So, anyone who plays a single player game fps on anything but the easiest setting is a fool for handicapping themselves? Or do you agree "looking for a larger challenge" is a good reason to handicap yourself by setting a higher difficulty level on a single person fps? If you do, then that would also be a good reason for going to null, even if it is otherwise bad.
Herr Hammer Draken
#440 - 2012-11-05 11:40:46 UTC
Vanyr Andrard wrote:
Herr Hammer Draken wrote:

At the end of the day when all is said and done. If you play in null then you are confirming that null works good enough for you to be there. You could be in high sec. High sec could also be in null. If null is bad nobody would be there and that is not the case. Only a fool would handi cap themselves for no good reason. I assume that those in null are not fools.


So, anyone who plays a single player game fps on anything but the easiest setting is a fool for handicapping themselves? Or do you agree "looking for a larger challenge" is a good reason to handicap yourself by setting a higher difficulty level on a single person fps? If you do, then that would also be a good reason for going to null, even if it is otherwise bad.


You get to define what your good reason is. I assume that if you have a good reason you are not a fool. In that case then you choose to play in null for your good reason which is good enough for you to be there. Then you do not need any more reasons to play in null.
One only needs more reasons when nobody is willing to play in null any more. That is the game balancing itself.

Herr Hammer Draken "The Amarr Prophet"