These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

i am disappointed in null sec people. (TL:DR talking about local chat.) read first post.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1421 - 2012-11-19 11:14:54 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
You're starting to dip into lore here.
Need I remind you that's really not a good justification for anything?

Actually when you are dealing with the benefits received in Empire space compared to benefits received in Non-Empire space, the Lore should be considered as it is the lore that gives us the differences between hi-lo and Null

Lore has nothing to do with it.
You change the lore to fit the game mechanics.
NOT the other way around.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Frying Doom
#1422 - 2012-11-19 11:17:24 UTC
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
You're starting to dip into lore here.
Need I remind you that's really not a good justification for anything?


It's not even good lore at that. Who says we don't have populations and big budgets and influence. We cornered the tech market. We got up to supplying 40% of the enriched uranium in Jita. I run colonies on over a dozen planets and so do hundreds of other goons.

This idea that we have to be poor out in nullsec is the reason why no one bothers trying to make isk out here. Nullsec is poor, highsec is wealthy, everyone just stay in highsec and enjoy civilization. After all, nullsec must always be gimped and broken and never as good as anywhere else because of lore.

Actually the difference should be that in Empire you are supplied with services from the empire while supporting the up keep of the empires while in Null you should not receive the services but reap the rewards like the old gold mining camps that sprung up, then became self governing towns. Till they got swallowed by a larger government.

So you should produce goods people in the cities (Hi-Sec) want and get lots of cash. Not services however.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Signal11th
#1423 - 2012-11-19 11:17:59 UTC
The loss of local can be mitigated by not being a complete tool.

Really I've spent nearly all of my time in EVE in 0.0 and really if you are not a complete tool (as mentioned above) it really is quite hard to lose a ratting ship.

Make all anon,plexe's etc need to be scanned and that will remove one of the only reasons I ever used local.

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!
Frying Doom
#1424 - 2012-11-19 11:18:35 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
You're starting to dip into lore here.
Need I remind you that's really not a good justification for anything?

Actually when you are dealing with the benefits received in Empire space compared to benefits received in Non-Empire space, the Lore should be considered as it is the lore that gives us the differences between hi-lo and Null

Lore has nothing to do with it.
You change the lore to fit the game mechanics.
NOT the other way around.

That way leads to the dark side.

Like flying elephants with blasters. You can change the lore to put them in.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#1425 - 2012-11-19 11:20:40 UTC
Signal11th wrote:
The loss of local can be mitigated by not being a complete tool.

Really I've spent nearly all of my time in EVE in 0.0 and really if you are not a complete tool (as mentioned above) it really is quite hard to lose a ratting ship.

Make all anon,plexe's etc need to be scanned and that will remove one of the only reasons I ever used local.

That would really just make Null to safe and as it is risk vs reward this game is based on, well you would not really need that big a reward.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Signal11th
#1426 - 2012-11-19 11:26:02 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Signal11th wrote:
The loss of local can be mitigated by not being a complete tool.

Really I've spent nearly all of my time in EVE in 0.0 and really if you are not a complete tool (as mentioned above) it really is quite hard to lose a ratting ship.

Make all anon,plexe's etc need to be scanned and that will remove one of the only reasons I ever used local.

That would really just make Null to safe and as it is risk vs reward this game is based on, well you would not really need that big a reward.



Checks and balances though, having no local and having the usual 0.0 isk making sites scannable with DS really would make a large swave of 0.0 pointless to be in and even though I would like to see local go even I couldn't agree to that.

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1427 - 2012-11-19 11:27:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Shepard Wong Ogeko
Frying Doom wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
You're starting to dip into lore here.
Need I remind you that's really not a good justification for anything?

Actually when you are dealing with the benefits received in Empire space compared to benefits received in Non-Empire space, the Lore should be considered as it is the lore that gives us the differences between hi-lo and Null


But in sov nullsec we get to make out own lore and our own narrative.

We (the goons) have locked up technetium in a cartel, choked off oxygen isotope mining, made Hulk ganking as professional sport, laid siege to Jita, engaged in all sort of other game shaking activities.


It would not surprise me if "goons" is mention in these forums as often as the NPC factions. And the NPC factions really don't do anything except sit there and provide backstory. Goons at least generate actual news.
Frying Doom
#1428 - 2012-11-19 11:36:49 UTC
Signal11th wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Signal11th wrote:
The loss of local can be mitigated by not being a complete tool.

Really I've spent nearly all of my time in EVE in 0.0 and really if you are not a complete tool (as mentioned above) it really is quite hard to lose a ratting ship.

Make all anon,plexe's etc need to be scanned and that will remove one of the only reasons I ever used local.

That would really just make Null to safe and as it is risk vs reward this game is based on, well you would not really need that big a reward.



Checks and balances though, having no local and having the usual 0.0 isk making sites scannable with DS really would make a large swave of 0.0 pointless to be in and even though I would like to see local go even I couldn't agree to that.

yeah just the current anoms scanable like the normal combat sites are in wormholes so there are places of safety like grav sites as well as having mag, ladar sites ect.. requiring scanning so there is risk but you can balance it if you wish.

Rather than just massive warning for all the sites.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1429 - 2012-11-19 11:42:38 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
You're starting to dip into lore here.
Need I remind you that's really not a good justification for anything?


It's not even good lore at that. Who says we don't have populations and big budgets and influence. We cornered the tech market. We got up to supplying 40% of the enriched uranium in Jita. I run colonies on over a dozen planets and so do hundreds of other goons.

This idea that we have to be poor out in nullsec is the reason why no one bothers trying to make isk out here. Nullsec is poor, highsec is wealthy, everyone just stay in highsec and enjoy civilization. After all, nullsec must always be gimped and broken and never as good as anywhere else because of lore.

Actually the difference should be that in Empire you are supplied with services from the empire while supporting the up keep of the empires while in Null you should not receive the services but reap the rewards like the old gold mining camps that sprung up, then became self governing towns. Till they got swallowed by a larger government.

So you should produce goods people in the cities (Hi-Sec) want and get lots of cash. Not services however.



How about people in highsec pay some high taxes to go with high society?

They never have to lift a finger to protect their stations because their stations can't be taken. They aren't going to find themselves homeless because some one forgot to pay the bills or no one defended the NPC empire's income source.

If we are going to follow lore that closely, living in highsec should be as expensive as living in a real world big city.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1430 - 2012-11-19 11:43:48 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Frankly to many things anchored in null now, link it to player usage so that way you dont have local in systems rarely used just because you paid some isk.

You are in the ass end of space with a miniscule (Compared to an Empire) budget, I think more things should be linked to player activity rather than just wallet size.

How do you propose you explain "if you don't kill 3000 rats per day in a system, you lose local" in a nonretarded manner? Having a structure you can shoot or hack to disable makes more sense, either it works or it doesn't. As for "paid some isk", personally I'd prefer it if we didn't have to pay anything directly to concord, since uh, it makes little sense why we should pay anything to concord when they do diddly squat there, but I'll deal with it since it's one of the few isk sinks still present in the game.

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

RIP Vile Rat
Frying Doom
#1431 - 2012-11-19 11:43:53 UTC
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
You're starting to dip into lore here.
Need I remind you that's really not a good justification for anything?

Actually when you are dealing with the benefits received in Empire space compared to benefits received in Non-Empire space, the Lore should be considered as it is the lore that gives us the differences between hi-lo and Null


But in sov nullsec we get to make out own lore and our own narrative.

We (the goons) have locked up technetium in a cartel, choked off oxygen isotope mining, made Hulk ganking as professional sport, laid siege to Jita, engaged in all sort of other game shaking activities.


It would not surprise me is "goons" is mention in these forums as often as the NPC factions. And the NPC factions really don't do anything except sit there and provide backstory. Goons at least generate actual news.

Possibly they are mentioned a lot and yes the empire npc factions should actually do incursions into Null to try and claim territory (this would make more sense than the current incursions making hi-sec loads of cash)

As to Goons making news, yes you have but it all seems to have happened after the tech welfare system so its sort of CCP sponsored news.

But then again it is nice to see players generating content, this is probably the best thing about this game, whether it be goons being goons or someone ripping someone else off. It still comes down to the fact that to make Null more vibrant it should really be based on player actions and not just cash, if they ever redo Null I do hope it is based on player activity in a system not isk.

Oh and without Local of course unless it is a bonus for high use sov space.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#1432 - 2012-11-19 11:45:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Frankly to many things anchored in null now, link it to player usage so that way you dont have local in systems rarely used just because you paid some isk.

You are in the ass end of space with a miniscule (Compared to an Empire) budget, I think more things should be linked to player activity rather than just wallet size.

How do you propose you explain "if you don't kill 3000 rats per day in a system, you lose local" in a nonretarded manner? Having a structure you can shoot or hack to disable makes more sense, either it works or it doesn't. As for "paid some isk", personally I'd prefer it if we didn't have to pay anything directly to concord, since uh, it makes little sense why we should pay anything to concord when they do diddly squat there, but I'll deal with it since it's one of the few isk sinks still present in the game.

yeah the pay concord is very strange and I was more thinking of over a week or 2 week period based on activity levels, for example a total of 200 hours of active use (flying around, mining, shooting ect..)

So 200 pilots could achieve this in an hour or 1000 pilots in 12 minutes. So the size of your alliance still helps you achieve and keep what you have.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1433 - 2012-11-19 11:47:44 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Frankly to many things anchored in null now, link it to player usage so that way you dont have local in systems rarely used just because you paid some isk.

You are in the ass end of space with a miniscule (Compared to an Empire) budget, I think more things should be linked to player activity rather than just wallet size.

How do you propose you explain "if you don't kill 3000 rats per day in a system, you lose local" in a nonretarded manner? Having a structure you can shoot or hack to disable makes more sense, either it works or it doesn't. As for "paid some isk", personally I'd prefer it if we didn't have to pay anything directly to concord, since uh, it makes little sense why we should pay anything to concord when they do diddly squat there, but I'll deal with it since it's one of the few isk sinks still present in the game.

yeah the pay concord is very strange and I was more thinking of over a week or 2 week period based on activity levels, for example a total of 200 hours of active use (flying around, mining, shooting ect..)

"call to flying around ops, guys, time to make sure we have local in these systems!"

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

RIP Vile Rat
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1434 - 2012-11-19 11:48:03 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

As to Goons making news, yes you have but it all seems to have happened after the tech welfare system so its sort of CCP sponsored news.


Goons made plenty of Eve news before they held tech moons. They were making news before tech was even the bottleneck.
Frying Doom
#1435 - 2012-11-19 11:49:20 UTC
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

As to Goons making news, yes you have but it all seems to have happened after the tech welfare system so its sort of CCP sponsored news.


Goons made plenty of Eve news before they held tech moons. They were making news before tech was even the bottleneck.

Yeah but most of the stuff I remember was how the little guy was taking on the giant.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#1436 - 2012-11-19 11:50:46 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Frankly to many things anchored in null now, link it to player usage so that way you dont have local in systems rarely used just because you paid some isk.

You are in the ass end of space with a miniscule (Compared to an Empire) budget, I think more things should be linked to player activity rather than just wallet size.

How do you propose you explain "if you don't kill 3000 rats per day in a system, you lose local" in a nonretarded manner? Having a structure you can shoot or hack to disable makes more sense, either it works or it doesn't. As for "paid some isk", personally I'd prefer it if we didn't have to pay anything directly to concord, since uh, it makes little sense why we should pay anything to concord when they do diddly squat there, but I'll deal with it since it's one of the few isk sinks still present in the game.

yeah the pay concord is very strange and I was more thinking of over a week or 2 week period based on activity levels, for example a total of 200 hours of active use (flying around, mining, shooting ect..)

"call to flying around ops, guys, time to make sure we have local in these systems!"

If you wanted to keep local in inactive systems. yes. I personally do about that in a week with just my alts so it really should not be that hard with a huge alliance to keep a lot of systems active.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1437 - 2012-11-19 11:53:52 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Frankly to many things anchored in null now, link it to player usage so that way you dont have local in systems rarely used just because you paid some isk.

You are in the ass end of space with a miniscule (Compared to an Empire) budget, I think more things should be linked to player activity rather than just wallet size.

How do you propose you explain "if you don't kill 3000 rats per day in a system, you lose local" in a nonretarded manner? Having a structure you can shoot or hack to disable makes more sense, either it works or it doesn't. As for "paid some isk", personally I'd prefer it if we didn't have to pay anything directly to concord, since uh, it makes little sense why we should pay anything to concord when they do diddly squat there, but I'll deal with it since it's one of the few isk sinks still present in the game.

yeah the pay concord is very strange and I was more thinking of over a week or 2 week period based on activity levels, for example a total of 200 hours of active use (flying around, mining, shooting ect..)

"call to flying around ops, guys, time to make sure we have local in these systems!"



We'll have to add "local safaris" like we do sec safaris. Or when we did a ton of mining to get industry upgrades and grav sites when the drone poop nerf hit.


And there is nothing wrong with paying for stuff with isk. Especially if we can come up with more taxable activity for people in nullsec to engage in. I'd be fine with paying a bit more to stick local chat on the IHub. I already pay over 300mil a month in taxes. I wonder if any of the highsec afk ice miners pay anything close to that to get local and concord protection.
Frying Doom
#1438 - 2012-11-19 11:55:16 UTC
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:

How about people in highsec pay some high taxes to go with high society?

They never have to lift a finger to protect their stations because their stations can't be taken. They aren't going to find themselves homeless because some one forgot to pay the bills or no one defended the NPC empire's income source.

If we are going to follow lore that closely, living in highsec should be as expensive as living in a real world big city.

Actually I think Hi-sec should max out their refineries at 35% and as to the rest of the tax there is transaction tax plus the PI tax.

I personally believe that any player owned structure should be superior to any NPC corp one, just like private industry is always more efficient than governments.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1439 - 2012-11-19 11:58:05 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Frankly to many things anchored in null now, link it to player usage so that way you dont have local in systems rarely used just because you paid some isk.

You are in the ass end of space with a miniscule (Compared to an Empire) budget, I think more things should be linked to player activity rather than just wallet size.

How do you propose you explain "if you don't kill 3000 rats per day in a system, you lose local" in a nonretarded manner? Having a structure you can shoot or hack to disable makes more sense, either it works or it doesn't. As for "paid some isk", personally I'd prefer it if we didn't have to pay anything directly to concord, since uh, it makes little sense why we should pay anything to concord when they do diddly squat there, but I'll deal with it since it's one of the few isk sinks still present in the game.

yeah the pay concord is very strange and I was more thinking of over a week or 2 week period based on activity levels, for example a total of 200 hours of active use (flying around, mining, shooting ect..)

"call to flying around ops, guys, time to make sure we have local in these systems!"

If you wanted to keep local in inactive systems. yes. I personally do about that in a week with just my alts so it really should not be that hard with a huge alliance to keep a lot of systems active.

Let me put it another way: it makes no sense to link anything to activity. Same goes for mining and ratting upgrades, if anything they should go the opposite way, the more you use them the less you have left, because you use up a resource. Rats logically shouldn't want to go into a system where it's well-known that players are ... very enthusiastic in shooting them, but there you go.

It makes no sense to say "you must do activty X Y times in Z days to get jumpbridges", or just say "you get a jumpbridge the instant you do activity X Y times in Z days". It does make sense to say "you add module X to system Y, you now get Z, and people can shoot it up for Æ damage or hack it and it's unavailable until the people rep Ø HP or unhack it using module Å".

Making sense is good.

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

RIP Vile Rat
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1440 - 2012-11-19 11:59:57 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Yeah but most of the stuff I remember was how the little guy was taking on the giant.

There's more than enough players in nullsec alliances outside of the CFC to take us on and possibly win. They just don't want to ally with each other to do it.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)