These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why does nullsec care so much about what highsec is doing?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#21 - 2012-12-11 13:45:43 UTC
Silath Slyver Silverpine wrote:


First, let me thank you for at least attempting an intelligent and decent response. It is appreciated.

Now the 'However . . .'
So simply because we enjoy playing the game in a different manner than you, we should not play it at all? If my post was 'bad logic', I can't imagine how one might begin to describe yours.


What form of brain damage turns EVERYTHING I say to a high sec person into "you must play the Jenn aside way or else"? I have never once said that to anyone.
.

I don't care how you play. If you wanna play my way, run lvl 5 missions, null sec anoms and high sec incursions lol.

Quote:

Personally, I've never asked that CCP make highsec safer. I enjoy the fact I can be and sometimes am blown up in highsec, it's one of the reasons I play EVE.
As far as risk/reward being off, I agree, but this applies to nullsec as well in some cases. I don't really consider that a particularly valid argument.


Just how does this apply to null sec. you are supposed to make more money the farther from safety you go, it's a corner stone principle of the game. And it's been destroyed.

Quote:

In the end, your post reminds me of a sort of gradeschool mentality.
Kid quietly sitting in the corner of the playground, alone, minding his own business. A group of kids sees him and wonders why he's not participating. "Man, what a loser!" one of the kids in the group declares, prompting them to go and harass the loner.
He wasn't affecting them in any way, shape, or form; but his preference for being alone to being in a group is cause enough for him to be singled out and harassed.
Judging from your post, the two scenarios seem eerily familiar.


There it is, and thank you for exposing yourself. This is nothing more than a "why won't you leave me alone to do what I want" thread.

Your analogy is off. It's not some kid in a corner minding his own business, it's a kid on a swing , STAYING on the swing so no one else can use it (basically affecting the whole play ground) then wondering why his ass got knocked off the swing "when he wasn't doing nothin to no one".

If you don't like interacting with other kids on a playground (something that WILL and MUST happen at a public school), go get you some Home Schoolin (ie play a single player game where no one else CAN play) and leave those of us who understand that we are in a social/interconnected situation alone.
Pandora Barzane
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2012-12-11 13:47:04 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:


This is an example of the bad logic coming out of high sec people, and the main reason why many of us dislike them. It amounts to another "why won;t you leave us alone" post.

You want to be left alone, log off.

Most of those "high sec people" are "single player game people in a multiplayer game" solo types that don't care about anything (like voting for the csm lol), even though the whole game is one complex organism with lots of moving parts. EVERYTHING everyone does just about affects everyone else, and people who have ventured out from under CONCORD's skirts know this.

So no, we won't leave you alone, CCP won't trammel-shard the servers to keep you away from us, you have more than enough tools like safeties and CONCORD to keep you "safe" in a game with no safety. And Yes, we will continue to point out to CCP and all that the risk/reward balances of the game are off, and that being able to sit in the most protected space and (as an individual shotin red Xs) still make as much isk as you could in the most dangerous space is wrong.


she wasnt asking to be left alone, she only wondered why nullsec people are caring this much about what people in high sec are doing. If I browse the forum the general consensus is that "highsec is breaking Eve", the mildly amusing part is when asked what it is that highsec people are breaking you get blanket statements like : "Maybe when you ask things that aren't all underpinned by a fundamental ignorance of the game dynamics then I'll respond"

I dont want to be left alone, people can visit me always when Im doing L4's, mining or exploration, I dont mind, and I have cookies ;)
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#23 - 2012-12-11 13:53:03 UTC
Pandora Barzane wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


This is an example of the bad logic coming out of high sec people, and the main reason why many of us dislike them. It amounts to another "why won;t you leave us alone" post.

You want to be left alone, log off.

Most of those "high sec people" are "single player game people in a multiplayer game" solo types that don't care about anything (like voting for the csm lol), even though the whole game is one complex organism with lots of moving parts. EVERYTHING everyone does just about affects everyone else, and people who have ventured out from under CONCORD's skirts know this.

So no, we won't leave you alone, CCP won't trammel-shard the servers to keep you away from us, you have more than enough tools like safeties and CONCORD to keep you "safe" in a game with no safety. And Yes, we will continue to point out to CCP and all that the risk/reward balances of the game are off, and that being able to sit in the most protected space and (as an individual shotin red Xs) still make as much isk as you could in the most dangerous space is wrong.


she wasnt asking to be left alone, she only wondered why nullsec people are caring this much about what people in high sec are doing. If I browse the forum the general consensus is that "highsec is breaking Eve", the mildly amusing part is when asked what it is that highsec people are breaking you get blanket statements like : "Maybe when you ask things that aren't all underpinned by a fundamental ignorance of the game dynamics then I'll respond"

I dont want to be left alone, people can visit me always when Im doing L4's, mining or exploration, I dont mind, and I have cookies ;)



Read further, yes she is basically asking to be left alone. You can see this with the standard high sec cookie cutter "why must I play your way" responses to me comments.

The thread starts with a lot of sepreate assertions, as if EVe were some divided thing. I could understand if EVE were sharded and the shards had nothing to do with each other and people from the null sec shard keep going to the high sec shard simply to grief them, but EVE is ONE BIG THING.

Asking why null people would care about what goes on in high sec is like asking the heart why it's concerned when the lungs stop breathing lol. One EVE, one Economy, one universe.
Silath Slyver Silverpine
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2012-12-11 13:53:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Silath Slyver Silverpine
Bump Truck wrote:

And then there is this other area, this other game, Highsec. And in Highsec people are protected from this reality by the all powerful concord. And they make stuff. They have VAST amounts of ore and HUMONGOUS quatities of manfucaturing slots and ELITE protection, so they can churn out industrial goods at an insane rate, dragging the prices right through the floor.

(In one of my previous threads and industrialist said they sold t1 frigs at a loss just to make money on the fittings, that's how low the price is).


Moreover you would think the null blocks wouldn't care, they would just get on with their thing and leave Highsec alone, but again, apparently (I can't prove this), there aren't enough manufacturing slots in all of Deklein to provide ammo for a single coalition sized fleet.

Which means anyone who lives in Null is slaved to the Highsec industrialists. Null economies are like African civil wars, they export any valuable natural resources they have and import nearly all of their finished goods.

This is how HighSec affects Null, directly and massively every day.



If this is the case, wouldn't it be more logical to be angry at CCP, than at highsec players? I don't think we highsec players would complain if nullsec got a boost to manufacturing capability. I know I could not care less if that happened, personally. Nonetheless thanks for the response, I'll give those links a glance.

It's not necessarily the dichotomy between null/highsec in practical terms that bothers me, but the player-directed anger that stems from it.

Destination SkillQueue wrote:

ISK generation has different issues. While you can earn a ton in null, it has different problems. Mainly that the income isn't generated at the player level and that it's limited in supply. What this means is it can be very hard to generate an income as an average grunt in null, since the activities aimed at fattening your personal wallet are limited. They simply can't feed everyone unlike mission running can. This leads to an odd thing, where players wanting to play in null are forced to earn their daily bread grinding ISK in highsec. Changing this here doesn't mean highsec has to be nerfed, but it does mean, that in general where people play and spend their time is closely tied to the income making balance between the different areas. There are very few pure nullsec players.


This strikes me as particularly interesting, and it seems like more of a problem with how nullsec corporations and alliances operate (IE, distribution of wealth) than necessarily a problem with any single mechanic.
*Edit* Actually that might be disingenuous on my part, if the ISK goes directly into the corp wallet. It may well indeed be another problem in the way highsec mechanics work as opposed to nullsec, which is where a lot of this seems to stem from.

I've also often heard of nullsec players having an alt or four in highsec to make money, which is a reason I find it strange they often cry for highsec nerfs. Again though, as I said above, it seems like an issue of misdirected hate. I don't necessarily deny that there are significant problems with EVE balance (though exactly what, I'm not well versed enough to say in depth).
Thank you for your response as well, always appreciated.
Pandora Barzane
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2012-12-11 13:54:31 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:


If you don't like interacting with other kids on a playground (something that WILL and MUST happen at a public school), go get you some Home Schoolin (ie play a single player game where no one else CAN play) and leave those of us who understand that we are in a social/interconnected situation alone.


oh I see, we must leave you alone.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#26 - 2012-12-11 13:59:40 UTC
Pandora Barzane wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


If you don't like interacting with other kids on a playground (something that WILL and MUST happen at a public school), go get you some Home Schoolin (ie play a single player game where no one else CAN play) and leave those of us who understand that we are in a social/interconnected situation alone.


oh I see, we must leave you alone.




You don't have to, but it would be nice. Some of us actually like EVE.
Randolph Rothstein
whatever corp.
#27 - 2012-12-11 14:01:22 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:



Your analogy is off. It's not some kid in a corner minding his own business, it's a kid on a swing , STAYING on the swing so no one else can use it (basically affecting the whole play ground) then wondering why his ass got knocked off the swing "when he wasn't doing nothin to no one".

If you don't like interacting with other kids on a playground (something that WILL and MUST happen at a public school), go get you some Home Schoolin (ie play a single player game where no one else CAN play) and leave those of us who understand that we are in a social/interconnected situation alone.


so your first action would be violence?

how about asking if you could swing with the kid together?

that kid might be homeschoolin...but you should be locked down on medication,that violent part in your post is really disturbing
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
#28 - 2012-12-11 14:01:55 UTC
We sit in highsec, and slowly the world we are living in is getting smaller, and all we say is,'Please, at least leave us alone in our stations. Let me have my raven and my missions and my mining and I won't say anything. Just leave us alone!' Well, I'm not gonna leave you alone! I want you to get MAD! I don't want you to protest. I don't want you to riot - I don't want you to write to your developer because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do about the ganking and the inflation and the Russians in the south. All I know is that first you've got to get mad! You've got to say, "I'm a human being, goddammit! My life has value!"

Not today spaghetti.
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2012-12-11 14:04:48 UTC
HVAC Repairman wrote:

Hisec players on average (not every case, but on average) have little to no understanding of the big picture, only care about isk/hour, do not believe in risk vs. reward, cry about everything they do not like, make the most god awful game suggestions, boggle down the petition system with the most inane drivel, complain incessantly about representation on the CSM, make the most god awful posts, are nearly universally incapable of deductive reasoning, start the most ridiculous tinfoil conspiracy theories, believe that suicide gankers should be banned for griefing, want hisec to be completely safe, and generally want to see EVE die in the same way that Ultima Online did.

I don't begrudge people who play the game in the style they prefer, I begrudge people who don't want other players to be able to play theirs.


I wish there was a way to give a post more than one like.

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#30 - 2012-12-11 14:05:24 UTC
Randolph Rothstein wrote:


so your first action would be violence?


EVE is violence.

Quote:

how about asking if you could swing with the kid together?


Because he's ********.

Quote:

that kid might be homeschoolin...but you should be locked down on medication,that violent part in your post is really disturbing


You mean to tell me you play EVE, a game where EVERY interaction (many that don't even require you to undock) is competition, created by mostly Icelandic Sociopaths who WANT you to lie, cheat, steal from, kill and scam everyone you can, and somehow MY violence is disturbing to you?????
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#31 - 2012-12-11 14:06:39 UTC
De'Veldrin wrote:
HVAC Repairman wrote:

Hisec players on average (not every case, but on average) have little to no understanding of the big picture, only care about isk/hour, do not believe in risk vs. reward, cry about everything they do not like, make the most god awful game suggestions, boggle down the petition system with the most inane drivel, complain incessantly about representation on the CSM, make the most god awful posts, are nearly universally incapable of deductive reasoning, start the most ridiculous tinfoil conspiracy theories, believe that suicide gankers should be banned for griefing, want hisec to be completely safe, and generally want to see EVE die in the same way that Ultima Online did.

I don't begrudge people who play the game in the style they prefer, I begrudge people who don't want other players to be able to play theirs.


I wish there was a way to give a post more than one like.


I'm with you.
Rordan D'Kherr
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#32 - 2012-12-11 14:06:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Rordan D'Kherr
Sexy Cakes wrote:
We sit in highsec, and slowly the world we are living in is getting smaller, and all we say is,'Please, at least leave us alone in our stations. Let me have my raven and my missions and my mining and I won't say anything. Just leave us alone!' Well, I'm not gonna leave you alone! I want you to get MAD! I don't want you to protest. I don't want you to riot - I don't want you to write to your developer because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do about the ganking and the inflation and the Russians in the south. All I know is that first you've got to get mad! You've got to say, "I'm a human being, goddammit! My life has value!"


Best adapted movie quote ever! Big smile

// EDIT


I'M AS MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE THIS ANYMORE!!!!

Don't be scared, because being afk is not a crime.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#33 - 2012-12-11 14:07:51 UTC
HVAC Repairman wrote:
Silath Slyver Silverpine wrote:
I'm quite honestly curious. The passion (for lack of a kinder word) shown by those who live primarily in nullsec towards those who live primarily in highsec is rather mind boggling. I'll leave lowsec players out of it for the most part, since they generally seem more interested in improving their own lot, and less interested in degrading someone elses.

I can't see any way in which high sec activity affects null happenings in any significant way. At most, the profits of activities in highsec affect market prices, which can affect nullsec players. If anything, though, nullsec players should see this as a boon, if it keeps material, module, and ship prices down. Although even then, from what I understand, larger nullsec corps and alliances manufacture many of their own materials anyway.

And considering that highsec dwellers make up quite a bit of the EVE player base, getting them to leave the game doesn't seem like a brilliant idea, since a loss of paying customers would hurt CCP, which in turn hurts EVE - including nullsec.
So, I'm at a loss. Do nullsec players feel that highsec players are taking dev time and effort away from null/lowsec and putting it towards highsec? I'll grant you that may be true to a certain extent, although blaming players for wanting their AO to be buffed seems not only silly, but hypocritical.

It's fairly obvious that many (Though certainly not all) nullsec players enjoy trolling and generally pissing off highsec players. I get that, even if I don't share the same mindset. In a world in which you are largely powerless, it's nice to feel powerful in a game. (It's ok to admit it, we're all in the same boat when it comes to real life. There's nothing inherently wrong with it; you're not hurting anyone IRL.) The fact that someone mining alone in some random belt can cause such a strong emotion as hate in a totally random and unrelated stranger is . . . well . . . bizarre, to say the least.

So is that it, then? Surely there must be a better reason for what I can only describe as 'unwarranted hate' than the aspect of trolling. I often hear talk of how "Carebears are destroying EVE!", however there is never an accompanying validating statement. I also hear a lot of talk about how highsec players should be forced into playing in low/nullsec conditions, however this fails to consider that many EVE players would simply quit the game if this were attempted, again, harming CCP and subsequently EVE.
Considering that most new players (Not alts or re-subs) start out as highsec players, then gravitate towards PvP or stay as highsec players, the statement that "Carebears are destroying EVE!" seems patently false. I suppose if your ideal version of EVE is one in which only those who live in nullsec exist, then this is true. Such a version, however, does not seem very sustainable.

(TL;DR) In short: please explain to me how the actions of those in highsec negatively affects nullsec players, since the two are largely separate worlds, with the exception of markets and allocation of dev time? If the actions of highsec players don't in fact affect nullsec, then please explain why many nullsec players feels such strong emotions towards highsec players?

Hisec players on average (not every case, but on average) have little to no understanding of the big picture, only care about isk/hour, do not believe in risk vs. reward, cry about everything they do not like, make the most god awful game suggestions, boggle down the petition system with the most inane drivel, complain incessantly about representation on the CSM, make the most god awful posts, are nearly universally incapable of deductive reasoning, start the most ridiculous tinfoil conspiracy theories, believe that suicide gankers should be banned for griefing, want hisec to be completely safe, and generally want to see EVE die in the same way that Ultima Online did.

I don't begrudge people who play the game in the style they prefer, I begrudge people who don't want other players to be able to play theirs.


I damn near bookmarked this so i can read it every damn day lol.
Captain Death1
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#34 - 2012-12-11 14:15:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Death1
well it is not up to null how i play the game them csm are anyone else might as well get use to it when null players talk money just rolls out of game a game run by plex just think how much money ccp would have made if they did not let players grift for ten years
tell you what gw2 knows this thats why they ban you faster then you can say grift it is a 2 server game poor null sec players
just don't get it high sec main server rest old server the sooner you understand this better off you will be and sound less bitter
Bump Truck
Doomheim
#35 - 2012-12-11 14:17:10 UTC
Silath Slyver Silverpine wrote:


If this is the case, wouldn't it be more logical to be angry at CCP, than at highsec players? I don't think we highsec players would complain if nullsec got a boost to manufacturing capability. I know I could not care less if that happened, personally. Nonetheless thanks for the response, I'll give those links a glance.

It's not necessarily the dichotomy between null/highsec in practical terms that bothers me, but the player-directed anger that stems from it.




Yeah good call, only CCP can change things.

I think the reason people are angry with HighSec players is they keep lobbying for the game to be more Highsec friendly / centric. Moreover they threaten to quit if they don't get what they want.

What can CCP do? They're having their jobs held to ransom, it's not surprising they give in sometimes.

So I think we've answered your original question pretty thoroughly, Highsec and null are intimately connected and their fates are tied together. That's why people get angry over the "I just want this area my way do what you want over there" attitude.


Can I just say I'm not angry with Highsec players, I think CCP needs more vision but everyone who plays this game is ok by me.
Jaiimez Skor
The Infamous.
#36 - 2012-12-11 14:18:24 UTC
Mirime Nolwe wrote:
Because this game works in a single shard world and everything that any player does will have impact in the game. Kinda simple actually..

Economy!

It is true, the nature of the single shard means the slighest change in things in highsec, can affect the entire EvE universe, what is happening in highsec affects things in nullsec be it prices of stuff/availability of stuff. For example, the Gallente Ice Interdiction, stopp highsec miners mining Gallente Ice MASSIVELY affected the market Gallente capitals where having issues getting fuel easily so couldn't be used as much, gallente towers (which at the time where the main ones for industry) couldn't get ahold of fuel and some of them went offline lowing production.

Highsec massively affects all other parts of space.
Silath Slyver Silverpine
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2012-12-11 14:18:42 UTC
HVAC Repairman wrote:

Hisec players on average (not every case, but on average) have little to no understanding of the big picture, only care about isk/hour, do not believe in risk vs. reward, cry about everything they do not like, make the most god awful game suggestions, boggle down the petition system with the most inane drivel, complain incessantly about representation on the CSM, make the most god awful posts, are nearly universally incapable of deductive reasoning, start the most ridiculous tinfoil conspiracy theories, believe that suicide gankers should be banned for griefing, want hisec to be completely safe, and generally want to see EVE die in the same way that Ultima Online did.

I don't begrudge people who play the game in the style they prefer, I begrudge people who don't want other players to be able to play theirs.


I actually dislike those people too, just as much as I dislike nullsec players who demand that everything be their way. Two sides of the same coin, really. As a matter of principle I'm against any opinion in the line of 'We should be completely invulnerable in highsec.'

I think 'on average' is throwing it too far, though. To be fair, I think saying that 'on average' nullsec players have an absurd hatred for everyone else is a falsehood as well.
But you make an interesting point, in that it's sort of the same mentality that drives the hatred on both sides; that is, "This game should be the way I want it, and everybody else can go to hell!"

Which is quite saddening.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#38 - 2012-12-11 14:27:51 UTC
Changes to high sec impact null.

Some of you need to stop being so ignorant as to think that CCP can just change things in high sec and it only effect high sec. High sec doesn't exist on it's own server, indipendant of every other area of the game world. It's all EVE, and it's all on TQ.

Seems a lot of you can't get your heads around this, or willfully ignore that very simple concept.
Pandora Barzane
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#39 - 2012-12-11 14:31:31 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Changes to high sec impact null.

Some of you need to stop being so ignorant as to think that CCP can just change things in high sec and it only effect high sec. High sec doesn't exist on it's own server, indipendant of every other area of the game world. It's all EVE, and it's all on TQ.

Seems a lot of you can't get your heads around this, or willfully ignore that very simple concept.



woosh
Kinis Deren
Mosquito Squadron
D0GS OF WAR
#40 - 2012-12-11 14:33:56 UTC
OP, can I suggest you have a read of The Big Lie I think the reasons for the entrenched dogma (whichever side of the fence you lay claim to) can be found here.