These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Nerf Moaning Null Bears PLS

Author
TripStarrR
4S Corporation
The Initiative.
#401 - 2012-11-09 11:04:26 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Oopsy Bear wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Except we're not asking to make highsec "suck" - the problem is that certain aspects are way wayyyy too good. Balancing them so they're not ridiculously brilliant isn't making it "suck", it's making it reasonable.


Null needs a fun buff way more than hisec needs an isk nerf.

Yes, it does, but that doesn't change the fact that hisec needs some moderation.


Hi sec got a plethora of nerfs already (me being one of the top nerfs proponents both for L5 then for L4 and finally for incursions, see the flames I got the past years in the missions forum).

But what I keep reading in this thread is not just about "nerfing" but downright removing functionality, like stripping a place of its features is going to mathematically improve another that is lacking.

This is wishful thinking. It does not help that any dimwit can move around endless amounts of ISK by buying PLEX. This has broken the old and functional "wallet segregation" mechanism that let the ISK owners have a lot of money while not causing disasters in the economy.

Finally, nullsec potential ISK is not just abundant, it's absurdly huge. When I was in there, we had PvP ships replacement programs covering both sub caps and caps. That is, you could die in a fire in a carrier and get a new fitted one back, no questions asked.

So, the complaints have to do with people going around outside corp / alliance operations time and losing their ships say to a roaming gang.
It'd be still possible to cover those losses as well - as long as the individuals are not completely BAD.

But the megacorps directors confiscated moons, impose taxes that rival hi sec and so on.
When corp thievery happens, we read those reports: "stolen 3 supercaps and half trillion".

This means that instead of distributing wealth, they were holding half trillion in the pocket, doing nothing for the "grunts".
But I don't see any null-seccer saying anything about the predatory practices of their directors.

It's so much easier to blame the other side of the universe than those commanding in your home, eh?


totally agree with this.


Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#402 - 2012-11-09 11:15:18 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
But what I keep reading in this thread is not just about "nerfing" but downright removing functionality, like stripping a place of its features is going to mathematically improve another that is lacking.

Which means you're apparently just skipping what I'm talking about, then, since I'm not talking about removing any functionality.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Finally, nullsec potential ISK is not just abundant, it's absurdly huge. When I was in there, we had PvP ships replacement programs covering both sub caps and caps. That is, you could die in a fire in a carrier and get a new fitted one back, no questions asked.

I have access to what I believe is the best ship replacement program in the game, and a large majority of that is financed through moons. I want this to change into being financed by people living in the alliance's space.

If I want to make my own isk, not that I really need to but if I wanted to, I'd do PI extraction on the nullsec char, and then I'd go to hisec to spend the rest of my game time making almost as much isk as I would in nullsec, with no risk, no need to pay attention to anything or anyone.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
So, the complaints have to do with people going around outside corp / alliance operations time and losing their ships say to a roaming gang.
It'd be still possible to cover those losses as well - as long as the individuals are not completely BAD.

You could do that, and spend a lot more effort and risk having to spend more isk replacing ratting ships etc, or you could go to hisec, spend more or less the same time with much less effort and risk. You can't sit and watch a movie while doing this in nullsec, which means it's more tedious.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
But the megacorps directors confiscated moons, impose taxes that rival hi sec and so on.
When corp thievery happens, we read those reports: "stolen 3 supercaps and half trillion".

This means that instead of distributing wealth, they were holding half trillion in the pocket, doing nothing for the "grunts".
But I don't see any null-seccer saying anything about the predatory practices of their directors.

Huh, so what you're saying is, you've no grasp of the concept of "a war chest", and instead are focusing squarely on the isk value. Not exactly all that surprising, really. You're also confusing alliance-level income to individual-level income. Alliance-level income is used in a myriad of ways, this includes such things as JBs, supercaps and caps fuel, POSes all over the place, POSes, etc etc etc, and one of the most important part of all this is ... the warchest. Yes, it might have "half a trillion isk", but that's "half a trillion isk" which can be spent supporting a heightened ship replacement program to sustain fighting for longer, or you could be a complete idiot and **** away that isk so the wallet is closer to 0, and the instant a war breaks out you go bust and you're back in hisec.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
It's so much easier to blame the other side of the universe than those commanding in your home, eh?

Interesting to see you blaming null over things you've obviously no real grasp of how works. The moons require alliance-level coordination to take, its income is used to fund all alliance-level programs such as SRPs, warchests, investments in supercaps and capitals, POSes, jumpbridges, etc etc etc etc. Holding a region takes alliance-level coordination to take and hold, and its income is used to fund the alliance-level programs. I could go on listing things which nullsec does with that money which frankly is necessary to stay competitive in nullsec, but I'm thinking it'd be a waste of time.

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

RIP Vile Rat

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#403 - 2012-11-09 12:09:38 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


Maybe my combat ships are overpowered (no, I only have 2 Drakes, not my main ship) but they can be finely tuned at how much tank vs gank vs agility vs electronic warfare flavour you want to have. They don't become totally useless when fitting a tank. Many have multiple roles ('canes, I am talking about you - before CCP will make you CRAP X) that may be fulfilled

Exhumers were clumsy and filmsy to begin with, 2 low slots vs 6+ of some other ships and in order to have any hope to survive they had to fail fit all out tank, losing a lot of their only role.


All you needed to do was tank it enough to not be profitable to kill. You had more than enough room for an MLU, rock scanner and a tank on all three exhumers.

Quote:
Exhumers - unlike combat ships - are played in a most, most boring gameplay that induced botting.
Which is why I am confused over why you think it was a good thing to get rid of the risk of ganking. Miners want a less boring pastime yet fight to be left alone...

Quote:
So they got more tank and / or more cargo space. The first gave them back their role, even when using a "no nonsense" tank, the latter greatly contributed to literally phase out the bots.


Miners never lost their role and the ore bays have made bots lives so much easyer.


Rordan D'Kherr
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#404 - 2012-11-09 12:20:02 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


[...]
But the megacorps directors confiscated moons, impose taxes that rival hi sec and so on.
When corp thievery happens, we read those reports: "stolen 3 supercaps and half trillion".

This means that instead of distributing wealth, they were holding half trillion in the pocket, doing nothing for the "grunts".
But I don't see any null-seccer saying anything about the predatory practices of their directors.

It's so much easier to blame the other side of the universe than those commanding in your home, eh?


Sov costs, reimbursements, POSes etc. are not paid by grunts.

Don't be scared, because being afk is not a crime.

Natasha Liao
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#405 - 2012-11-09 14:44:35 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Except we're not asking to make highsec "suck" - the problem is that certain aspects are way wayyyy too good. Balancing them so they're not ridiculously brilliant isn't making it "suck", it's making it reasonable.

Or do you just consider that reducing anything in any way at all for the sake of balance makes it terrible and "suck" and bloo bloo tears tears

I wouldn't have figured you to pull a Zim Gunslinger, but I'll just quote Vaerah here. They sum it up quite well. And since they aren't a month old forum Alt it might be more believeable ( even though I too got tagged by E-banks melt down and Ray's BS ):
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Hi sec got a plethora of nerfs already (me being one of the top nerfs proponents both for L5 then for L4 and finally for incursions, see the flames I got the past years in the missions forum).

But what I keep reading in this thread is not just about "nerfing" but downright removing functionality, like stripping a place of its features is going to mathematically improve another that is lacking.

And if you've been paying attention to what I've been saying it's not some huge 25% fee increase or anything. It's all of these small. incremental. changes. Those changes are cumulative. Death by a thousand paper cuts, all those little things, etc., etc.

I keep harping about L4's because it's a part of the game I've done since '09, so I've seen the cumulative result of all these little nerf's, sorry -> 'adjustments in risk/reward values', over the years. I just re-subbed a couple months ago after leaving during Monoclegate. While I don't have detailed, exact notes: I swear there are some items on the LP store that now require ISK in addition to the LP cost. I call that 'adjustment in value' a nerf.

And just to address all the 'No risk/AFK missioning' crap: I don't fly a Domi, so AFK doesn't apply. I also don't fly Amarr, so there's an ammo expense. Even with skills at 4 & 5 where it matters I could still blow a trigger or something and loose a ship. You see newbies hopping in ships they can't fit properly loose them all the time.

I also bring up PI in places because I did that one too. That new and improved extractor head is one of my sore spots. While moving those heads around is kinda nice, when I had to drop a couple extractors off an installation ( loosing a product or 2 in the process ) my ultimate assessment was: 'Well this sucks." After a while I just stopped doing PI. Before I got to the 'meh' point I made some wetware mainframes, so I got lots of practice with multiple planets, import/export and shuffling products around.

Lord Zim wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
But what I keep reading in this thread is not just about "nerfing" but downright removing functionality, like stripping a place of its features is going to mathematically improve another that is lacking.
Which means you're apparently just skipping what I'm talking about, then, since I'm not talking about removing any functionality.

I guess Vaerah and I are the only ones reading everything and commenting on it. Sorry Zim, it's not All About You...

You're using logic on an internet discussion forum. A rookie mistake, but one you'll soon learn to avoid. -Destiny Corrupted

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#406 - 2012-11-09 16:08:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Zim
Natasha Liao wrote:
And if you've been paying attention to what I've been saying it's not some huge 25% fee increase or anything. It's all of these small. incremental. changes. Those changes are cumulative. Death by a thousand paper cuts, all those little things, etc., etc.

I guess you haven't paid attention to the nerfs nullsec has gotten, then.

Natasha Liao wrote:
And just to address all the 'No risk/AFK missioning' crap: I don't fly a Domi, so AFK doesn't apply. I also don't fly Amarr, so there's an ammo expense. Even with skills at 4 & 5 where it matters I could still blow a trigger or something and loose a ship. You see newbies hopping in ships they can't fit properly loose them all the time.

I haven't said "AFK", I've said "don't need to pay as much attention". In nullsec you have to pay attention at all times, or you will get ganked. This does not apply in hisec, in fact I could watch movies or tv series while doing whatever I pleased, and still get roughly the same type of payout, and not get ganked or have my ship popped. As for having to spend ammo, so? It's not as if that's special for hisec. In fact, it's easier to resupply yourself with ammo in hisec, so I've no idea why you're even bringing that up.

And as for newbies hopping in ships they can't fit properly, that's not risk, that's stupidity. There are so many good guides to how to run each and every mission type, it's not risky in any way shake or form.

As for PI, I guess you preferred the old method where you had to literally spend 20 minutes doubleclicking every extractor pin to reactivate them every x hours, just because you got a little bit more output that way.

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

RIP Vile Rat

Natasha Liao
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#407 - 2012-11-09 16:22:46 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Zim once again taking things apart for his purposes

The It's not all about you comment still applies. But please keep trolling. I enjoy the Lutz.

Lord Zim wrote:
As for PI, I guess you preferred the old method where you had to literally spend 20 minutes doubleclicking every extractor pin to reactivate them every x hours, just because you got a little bit more output that way.

Actually I prefer the 'set extractor for 1 and 1/2 days so I don't have to **** with it' approach. Keep assuming, trolling and/or trying to assign some play style to me...

You're using logic on an internet discussion forum. A rookie mistake, but one you'll soon learn to avoid. -Destiny Corrupted

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#408 - 2012-11-09 17:23:38 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:

Which means you're apparently just skipping what I'm talking about, then, since I'm not talking about removing any functionality.


Sorry to seem to lack of respect for you saying this but... you are not the only EvE player, I am commenting to pages and pages off multiple people, not necessarily directly repyling just to you.


Lord Zim wrote:

I have access to what I believe is the best ship replacement program in the game, and a large majority of that is financed through moons. I want this to change into being financed by people living in the alliance's space.


You are deluding yourself, the very reason why huge alliances exist and function is because they can make you depending on them for your needs. CCP will never give "grunts" means of reasonable self survival else the alliances would crack and pilots would basically stop accepting being treated like warm meat and would go each on their own.
You are a cog in a system, you will remain a cog. Realistic game means being like RL even in these details.


Lord Zim wrote:

You could do that, and spend a lot more effort and risk having to spend more isk replacing ratting ships etc, or you could go to hisec, spend more or less the same time with much less effort and risk. You can't sit and watch a movie while doing this in nullsec, which means it's more tedious.


You are in the dominant alliance of all. How can you find it harder than me (who I played in a now defunct alliance) who I just freely roamed inside sov territory facing no threat, sometimes even going across 3-4 systems? We had gates secured (rotation, some days I was guard too) for most of the day and local is an easy mode intel tool vs neuts who happen to arrive from WH and similar.


Lord Zim wrote:

Huh, so what you're saying is, you've no grasp of the concept of "a war chest", and instead are focusing squarely on the isk value. Not exactly all that surprising, really. You're also confusing alliance-level income to individual-level income. Alliance-level income is used in a myriad of ways, this includes such things as JBs, supercaps and caps fuel, POSes all over the place, POSes, etc etc etc, and one of the most important part of all this is ... the warchest.


Well, considering the persistent and never ending complaints we get from the likes of you vs the never ending "scoops" posted on the Internet about huge sums stolen, I'd say that this "war chest" is held so tight that you are not satisfied and so it stays accumulating for years, "just in case". Then an alliance split happens and guess what, you will NEVER see a nickel off that war chest.
I really think you are talking out in good faith but you are really eating any food for simpletons the brass feed.


Lord Zim wrote:

Interesting to see you blaming null over things you've obviously no real grasp of how works. The moons require alliance-level coordination to take, its income is used to fund all alliance-level programs such as SRPs, warchests, investments in supercaps and capitals, POSes, jumpbridges, etc etc etc etc. Holding a region takes alliance-level coordination to take and hold, and its income is used to fund the alliance-level programs. I could go on listing things which nullsec does with that money which frankly is necessary to stay competitive in nullsec, but I'm thinking it'd be a waste of time.


You are repeating what you have been programmed to talk. Too bad I have been in null sec on several of my alts (including this one which was actually *logistics officer* so a bit inside the details). There are massive amounts of wasting and bad spending and even bad investing (see E-Bank) that go on at alliance level and I have yet to see a cancelled alliance where directors walk away poor.

But hey, keep blaming the 2 millions PI a day that you can make easier in hi sec while overlooking the billions a day used with maximum discretion in your home.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#409 - 2012-11-09 17:33:21 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

All you needed to do was tank it enough to not be profitable to kill. You had more than enough room for an MLU, rock scanner and a tank on all three exhumers.


As former and current owner of fleets of Orcas+ Macks and Hulks I disagree. Macks could not be made unprofitable to gank period. You curiously seem to forget how YOUR corps was tasked killing exhumers in an industrial way nor how YOUR alliance was making ships profitable to gank by providing a reward to gankers.

Hulks were possible to make hard to gank - a friend of mine survived a 3 catalyst gank on each of his 4 Hulks once - but he had to put *faction* shields and even then, he escaped in low hull and only because he was not AFK.


baltec1 wrote:

Which is why I am confused over why you think it was a good thing to get rid of the risk of ganking. Miners want a less boring pastime yet fight to be left alone...


Because if the mining mechanics had been less boring then it'd be worth staying not AFK. Sure if mining was like in other games then people would actually have to actively do it and maybe even getting some fun out of it. I know, "fun" and "mining" in the same sentence sounds alien to EvE but hey, other developers did it.


baltec1 wrote:

Miners never lost their role and the ore bays have made bots lives so much easyer.


10-12 minutes to fill ore bays enticed to bot but 1 hour to fill ore bays make (ice, the most botted of all) botting useless. Why bot when the ship is already chipping for 1 hour alone?
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#410 - 2012-11-09 17:38:07 UTC
Rordan D'Kherr wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


[...]
But the megacorps directors confiscated moons, impose taxes that rival hi sec and so on.
When corp thievery happens, we read those reports: "stolen 3 supercaps and half trillion".

This means that instead of distributing wealth, they were holding half trillion in the pocket, doing nothing for the "grunts".
But I don't see any null-seccer saying anything about the predatory practices of their directors.

It's so much easier to blame the other side of the universe than those commanding in your home, eh?


Sov costs, reimbursements, POSes etc. are not paid by grunts.


I or my alts have been in lo/null sec corps/alliances with not a single moon, where do you believe the money came out from?
Who do you think the PI tax goes to?

In some corps we even had "ISK make" days where they'd set tax to 100% and we had to grind L4 or bring out the Hulks and mine and the profit went to the corp.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#411 - 2012-11-09 17:46:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Lord Zim wrote:

I guess you haven't paid attention to the nerfs nullsec has gotten, then.


It might seem strange but not everybody in this game continuously looks at the others in search of something to complain about and to envy about.

Also, the nerfs you got are mostly tied to people super-farming stuff with super-oversized ships that should not even be allowed to enter certain places. Like it applies in hi sec BTW, where not only you can't enter with too "farm happy" ships but also, they are full of roids... that you can't mine because they don't let in barges.


Lord Zim wrote:

I haven't said "AFK", I've said "don't need to pay as much attention". In nullsec you have to pay attention at all times, or you will get ganked. This does not apply in hisec, in fact I could watch movies or tv series while doing whatever I pleased, and still get roughly the same type of payout, and not get ganked or have my ship popped. As for having to spend ammo, so? It's not as if that's special for hisec. In fact, it's easier to resupply yourself with ammo in hisec, so I've no idea why you're even bringing that up.


I dare you to AFK missions with my setup. It's true that you could make some very good ISK per hour but you'd melt in 20 seconds of being AFK. Despite the ships being deadspace fitted.
People like you think people make the 80M per hour in AFK total-donkey tanked Domis that magically have the same DPS of a tankless full glass cannon Machariel.


Edit: I have been in NPC nullsec (Stain) as well, that is the real risky place (not some endless blue ball like you live in) and guess what, I did L4 along with the others. I had very crappy ships at that time (being new to the game) but they had *officer fit marauders* out there.

Our neighbours and enemies were Brick Squad and their allies, not exactly some Ni Hao renters.
Wibla
Tactical Narcotics Team
#412 - 2012-11-09 17:55:52 UTC
Tell us more about where you rat with deadspace-fitted ships, so we can make them go splodey.

Also, you're dumb.

HTH.
Dramaticus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#413 - 2012-11-09 18:04:35 UTC
Guys let me tell you why the most financially successful 0.0 alliance in EVE history is wrong about how 0.0 works financially.

The 'do-nothing' member of the GoonSwarm Economic Warfare Cabal

The edge is REALLY hard to see at times but it DOES exist and in this case we were looking at a situation where a new feature created for all of our customers was being virtually curbstomped by five of them

Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#414 - 2012-11-09 18:18:31 UTC
Dramaticus wrote:
Guys let me tell you why the most financially successful 0.0 alliance in EVE history is wrong about how 0.0 works financially.



Put in [words] then add a couple [words] and counter with some other [words], all of this on GD Eve-O-Forums while you stay dock and only playing in (or with?) your head.

brb

Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#415 - 2012-11-09 18:23:14 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Rordan D'Kherr wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


[...]
But the megacorps directors confiscated moons, impose taxes that rival hi sec and so on.
When corp thievery happens, we read those reports: "stolen 3 supercaps and half trillion".

This means that instead of distributing wealth, they were holding half trillion in the pocket, doing nothing for the "grunts".
But I don't see any null-seccer saying anything about the predatory practices of their directors.

It's so much easier to blame the other side of the universe than those commanding in your home, eh?


Sov costs, reimbursements, POSes etc. are not paid by grunts.


I or my alts have been in lo/null sec corps/alliances with not a single moon, where do you believe the money came out from?

Renters
Aryth
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#416 - 2012-11-09 18:23:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Aryth
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


You are deluding yourself, the very reason why huge alliances exist and function is because they can make you depending on them for your needs. CCP will never give "grunts" means of reasonable self survival else the alliances would crack and pilots would basically stop accepting being treated like warm meat and would go each on their own.
You are a cog in a system, you will remain a cog. Realistic game means being like RL even in these details.



I stopped reading here. You clearly are trying to equate an RMT alliance setup with all alliances. This makes it pretty obvious you don't have any idea how a big null alliance is ran, much less blocs. This means you also do not have a grasp on any of the financial details either. You are not remotely qualified to even be speaking about null or any of its structures. I am probably the most Lex Luthor personality and wield the most raw power of any null finance person in EVE, and none of this is remotely true for ourselves, or any of our allies. Nor would I want it to be.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#417 - 2012-11-09 18:24:19 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Rordan D'Kherr wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


[...]
But the megacorps directors confiscated moons, impose taxes that rival hi sec and so on.
When corp thievery happens, we read those reports: "stolen 3 supercaps and half trillion".

This means that instead of distributing wealth, they were holding half trillion in the pocket, doing nothing for the "grunts".
But I don't see any null-seccer saying anything about the predatory practices of their directors.

It's so much easier to blame the other side of the universe than those commanding in your home, eh?


Sov costs, reimbursements, POSes etc. are not paid by grunts.


I or my alts have been in lo/null sec corps/alliances with not a single moon, where do you believe the money came out from?

Renters

I laughed out loud.

It certainly didn't come from jacking the taxes up to 100% and the whole corp jumping in some Hulks. Roll

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#418 - 2012-11-09 18:34:38 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
You are deluding yourself, the very reason why huge alliances exist and function is because they can make you depending on them for your needs.

Pray tell, how do huge alliances "make [me] depend on them" when I don't have to do anything other than log in, join a fleet, shoot someone (or get blueballed), dock back up and log off and log back into my hisec chars and make money effortlessly?

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
CCP will never give "grunts" means of reasonable self survival else the alliances would crack and pilots would basically stop accepting being treated like warm meat and would go each on their own.
You are a cog in a system, you will remain a cog. Realistic game means being like RL even in these details.

Um. Nullsec is supposed to be where you go and take some space, shoot eachother in the faces (as groups), and make a living there. The past 3+ years CCP have continually nerfed nullsec to the point where the only things left, realistically, is to take space, occasionally shoot eachother in the face while doing so, and build supercaps. **** living there.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
You are in the dominant alliance of all. How can you find it harder than me

Here's a clue: nullsec isn't safe, and if you treat nullsec as if it is safe (by, say, watching movies etc while ratting, mining, moving minerals around etc), you will get ****** up. In hisec, I don't need to do any of this.

Is this hard to fathom?

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Well, considering the persistent and never ending complaints we get from the likes of you vs the never ending "scoops" posted on the Internet about huge sums stolen, I'd say that this "war chest" is held so tight that you are not satisfied and so it stays accumulating for years, "just in case". Then an alliance split happens and guess what, you will NEVER see a nickel off that war chest.

We get it, you don't understand the concepts of warchests.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
You are repeating what you have been programmed to talk. Too bad I have been in null sec on several of my alts (including this one which was actually *logistics officer* so a bit inside the details). There are massive amounts of wasting and bad spending and even bad investing (see E-Bank) that go on at alliance level and I have yet to see a cancelled alliance where directors walk away poor.

Now you're just talking out of your ass. You have absolutely no idea how large nullsec alliances are run, and we see that especially when you talk about "make isk days" and "grind L4s or brin gout the hulks and mine and the profits went to the corp". That's the existence I'd expect from a renter, and that certainly doesn't match up in any way, shape or form with my experience the last three years while in goons.

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

RIP Vile Rat

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#419 - 2012-11-09 18:34:57 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
I or my alts have been in lo/null sec corps/alliances with not a single moon

Did those corps participate in region-wide conflicts? Did they hold down whole regions of space? Did they upgrade space? Did they run JBs in their space? Did they run SRPs for wartime and peacetime? Did they run tons of POSes? Did they fuel supercaps and caps when used offensively?

Did they, in fact, have any recurring costs at all?

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Who do you think the PI tax goes to?

The corp which owns the POCOs, and this is probably CCP's best step in literally years in making it possible for alliances to get bottom-up income instead of top-down income through moons, which means the alliances would be best served by actually incentivizing people into doing things with PI. And CCP should expand upon this, put more emphasis on living in nullsec. But they haven't.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
In some corps we even had "ISK make" days where they'd set tax to 100% and we had to grind L4 or bring out the Hulks and mine and the profit went to the corp.

This sounds very much like either a renter, a pet, or an alliance which is going to die very very soon, to me.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
It might seem strange but not everybody in this game continuously looks at the others in search of something to complain about and to envy about.

So you've got no concept of what state null is in. Okay then.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
I dare you to AFK missions with my setup. It's true that you could make some very good ISK per hour but you'd melt in 20 seconds of being AFK. Despite the ships being deadspace fitted.
People like you think people make the 80M per hour in AFK total-donkey tanked Domis that magically have the same DPS of a tankless full glass cannon Machariel.

Funny how you should say that, since I wasn't talking about being AFK, and the figure I was thinking of was 40M/h, not 80M/h.

So you're saying I can make 80M/h in total safety in hisec? Interesting.

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

RIP Vile Rat

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#420 - 2012-11-09 18:41:59 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


As former and current owner of fleets of Orcas+ Macks and Hulks I disagree. Macks could not be made unprofitable to gank period. You curiously seem to forget how YOUR corps was tasked killing exhumers in an industrial way nor how YOUR alliance was making ships profitable to gank by providing a reward to gankers.

Hulks were possible to make hard to gank - a friend of mine survived a 3 catalyst gank on each of his 4 Hulks once - but he had to put *faction* shields and even then, he escaped in low hull and only because he was not AFK.


Yes, MY corp tested the tanks on all of the barges to see what was profitable to gank and what wasnt. WE know exactly how to fit exhumers to not be profitable to gank. You did not need any faction at all to tank these things and doing so only ended up in making you a target in most cases. I posted the fits for months but it seems you simply ignored the free advice on fittings and tactics along with all the other bad miners. The skiff and hulk could around the same tank. The Mack could fit a smaller tank than the hulk but there was less profit to be made from it due to only having two strip miners, even so, it had enough of a tank to make not worth ganking.




Quote:



Because if the mining mechanics had been less boring then it'd be worth staying not AFK. Sure if mining was like in other games then people would actually have to actively do it and maybe even getting some fun out of it. I know, "fun" and "mining" in the same sentence sounds alien to EvE but hey, other developers did it.


So again, why is taking the only risk miners will face in high sec away a good thing?


Quote:


10-12 minutes to fill ore bays enticed to bot but 1 hour to fill ore bays make (ice, the most botted of all) botting useless. Why bot when the ship is already chipping for 1 hour alone?

So you can leave it run while you sleep/work. The only thing the bigger ore bays have done to bots is make it harder to tell if they are indeed bots and reduced the amount of commands the bot needs to run. If anything, this has boosted bot numbers.