These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

You CANT Nerf HighSec!

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bump Truck
Doomheim
#101 - 2012-12-16 20:17:04 UTC
Gillia Winddancer wrote:
Bump Truck wrote:
Gillia Winddancer wrote:
In a way I find it amusing that people want more high sec dwellers in null-sec, in particular industrialists and at the same time want more activity of the pew-pew kind. These two wishes simply cannot mix in EVE's current state regardless of how you end up balancing sources of ISK anywhere in the game.

We all know why industrialists avoid low and null-sec. We all know why null-sec (and low-sec) wants more people and activity.

So yeah, it is very amusing indeed. All these wishes that at the same time clash against each other yet everyone seem completely oblivious considering these arguments have been ongoing for who knows how long now.



Thanks for the input.

I discuss this in point 2 in my list. There are loads of industrialists in Null, just not enough to make the Null alliances autonomous.

IMO this attitude is a big problem ATM, trying to split the game down the middle into the safe industrial zone and the pvp arena. I want to go the other way and mix everyone up.



Well, finally someone who at least recognizes where the actual problem lies.

Now an extra cookie to you if you can list the exact current EVE mechanics which prevents this mixture from happening. We all know that "risk is too high" is the dominant reason but what causes it to be just that?


Ooh cookie.

Um I think to hold sov you need to play a very competitive game. You need to have a lot of people in your alliance and you need to keep them as happy as possible.

This means you can't really ask them to build an industrial base in null on principle when you could just ISK up in high sec and import everything you need. Moreover you would be at a huge disadvantage to those who did import, and they would take your space for your foolishness.


There's a whole array of game mechanics that contribute to this, mostly it's mining in null, manufacturing and trading and ratting which need to be buffed and made the obvious thing to do if you live in null. When this is done making it harder to trade with highsec and nerfing highsec a bit would complete the changes.
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#102 - 2012-12-16 20:23:17 UTC
Bump Truck wrote:

2) "Null players" just want to kill us all, that’s the only reason they bring up a nerf.

- Many players who live in null are involved in trade and industry, many of them have allies and friends, they don’t just shoot everyone they see for no reason.


I read up to this point and knew you don't have a clue of what you are talking about.
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Yorg Brazen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#103 - 2012-12-16 20:24:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Yorg Brazen
Bump Truck wrote:
In an effort to fix the risk reward balance in EVE it is possible CCP may need to apply a nerf to high sec, here are the most common arguments people use to say that idea is “impossible”, I don’t think any of them are reasonable and I think a Highsec Nerf needs to be on the table.




Apparently you have trouble reading your own posts. If it is only a "possibility" then why does it NEED to be on the table? A better word would be "may" or "possibly". And why exclude a nullsec buff?

Bump Truck wrote:


Apparently you have difficulty in reading my post.
I'm not calling for a nerf,



Um, your own post below states otherwise.

Bump Truck wrote:

I don’t think any of them are reasonable and I think a Highsec Nerfneeds to be on the table.
Helena Russell Makanen
DRRUSSEL
#104 - 2012-12-16 20:27:58 UTC
Bump Truck wrote:
Blah blah blah.... "This is what CCP need to protect for the long term health of the game and overall profitability, not pandering to an irrational few."


TL;DR, High Sec may need to be nerfed in the future, as it is too rewarding for how risky it is. The evidence of this is that 71% of players choose to live there when it is 1/7th of the space in the game. The arguments that this is impossible aren’t very strong.


Sooooo first high sec'ers are 'an irrational few' then suddenly you state 71% of folks live and play there. You went on and on and onnnnnn only to contradict yourself lol? Roll

"If a miner needs to go to the bathroom, for instance, I ask that they dock up first, or at the very least ask the Supreme Protector for permission to go."  -  James 315 - aka - the miner bumper

Gillia Winddancer
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#105 - 2012-12-16 20:34:27 UTC
Bump Truck wrote:
Gillia Winddancer wrote:
Bump Truck wrote:
Gillia Winddancer wrote:
In a way I find it amusing that people want more high sec dwellers in null-sec, in particular industrialists and at the same time want more activity of the pew-pew kind. These two wishes simply cannot mix in EVE's current state regardless of how you end up balancing sources of ISK anywhere in the game.

We all know why industrialists avoid low and null-sec. We all know why null-sec (and low-sec) wants more people and activity.

So yeah, it is very amusing indeed. All these wishes that at the same time clash against each other yet everyone seem completely oblivious considering these arguments have been ongoing for who knows how long now.



Thanks for the input.

I discuss this in point 2 in my list. There are loads of industrialists in Null, just not enough to make the Null alliances autonomous.

IMO this attitude is a big problem ATM, trying to split the game down the middle into the safe industrial zone and the pvp arena. I want to go the other way and mix everyone up.



Well, finally someone who at least recognizes where the actual problem lies.

Now an extra cookie to you if you can list the exact current EVE mechanics which prevents this mixture from happening. We all know that "risk is too high" is the dominant reason but what causes it to be just that?


Ooh cookie.

Um I think to hold sov you need to play a very competitive game. You need to have a lot of people in your alliance and you need to keep them as happy as possible.

This means you can't really ask them to build an industrial base in null on principle when you could just ISK up in high sec and import everything you need. Moreover you would be at a huge disadvantage to those who did import, and they would take your space for your foolishness.


There's a whole array of game mechanics that contribute to this, mostly it's mining in null, manufacturing and trading and ratting which need to be buffed and made the obvious thing to do if you live in null. When this is done making it harder to trade with highsec and nerfing highsec a bit would complete the changes.


No, when I talk about game mechanics, I mean the core gameplay itself. The way flying works, the way docking works, the way combat works etc etc. Then as an extreme example, imagine yourself being a solo industrialist that want to mine in null-sec. You are perhaps a relatively new player who wants to make it on your own or with a small group of friends and not rely on existing groups. Or perhaps earn some quick cash the industrial way. (Once again, going back to player retention, I wouldn't be surprised if many newer players have this exact mentality, despite knowing at the same time that EVE is a harsh game)

You are in a high-sec system bordering to low-and then from there null with a mining ship of the more expensive kind. Maybe you have a friend or two alongside. The area has a moderate traffic.

With the current mechanics, what problems do you see here? What problems do you see if you end up all the way in null-sec or half-way there?
Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#106 - 2012-12-16 20:38:15 UTC
Helena Russell Makanen wrote:
Bump Truck wrote:
Blah blah blah.... "This is what CCP need to protect for the long term health of the game and overall profitability, not pandering to an irrational few."


TL;DR, High Sec may need to be nerfed in the future, as it is too rewarding for how risky it is. The evidence of this is that 71% of players choose to live there when it is 1/7th of the space in the game. The arguments that this is impossible aren’t very strong.


Sooooo first high sec'ers are 'an irrational few' then suddenly you state 71% of folks live and play there. You went on and on and onnnnnn only to contradict yourself lol? Roll

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MZD6-vGQms - Fan Fest presentation on the economy. 71% is wrong. Also "players" is wrong - the only information we have comes from CCP, and they've never (to the best of my knowledge) performed a census. So these are snapshots of where *someone* was logged in on a character - it conveys *no information* on how the actual players "self identify".


For example, of my three accounts (currently logged in) all three are in hi-sec at the moment. NONE of them is a "hi-sec" dweller.

So those numbers can't show where "players" live/work/fight.


Just an FYI.

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#107 - 2012-12-16 21:02:24 UTC
Bump Truck wrote:
There's a whole array of game mechanics that contribute to this, mostly it's mining in null, manufacturing and trading and ratting which need to be buffed and made the obvious thing to do if you live in null. When this is done making it harder to trade with highsec and nerfing highsec a bit would complete the changes.


Not enough checks on the banking system.

Restrict the movement of iskies between null and empire, and I'll bet things change. Not that it's going to happen as multiple accounts are good for CCP, but it would make empire income less attractive and increase the relative value of null ratting, etc at the same time. This adds value to the prime spots and drives conflict. Many ways to skin a cat.

Also, with the advent of PLEX calls to nerf income for one area have real world implications as well.
Yorg Brazen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#108 - 2012-12-16 21:05:16 UTC
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
71% is wrong. Also "players" is wrong - the only information we have comes from CCP, and they've never (to the best of my knowledge) performed a census. So these are snapshots of where *someone* was logged in on a character - it conveys *no information* on how the actual players "self identify".


For example, of my three accounts (currently logged in) all three are in hi-sec at the moment. NONE of them is a "hi-sec" dweller.

So those numbers can't show where "players" live/work/fight.


Just an FYI.



I think you have missed the point of her post. The actual percentage is irrelevant, although I suspect it is close. She was pointing out, correctly, how the OP has clearly contradicted himself, calling hi sec dwellers an "irrational few" then turning around and stating they are 71% of the population.

Similarly, he called for a highsec nerf, then denied calling for one. Rather silly.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#109 - 2012-12-16 21:18:49 UTC
Bump Truck wrote:
Um I think to hold sov you need to play a very competitive game. You need to have a lot of people in your alliance and you need to keep them as happy as possible.

Nonsense, we all know blobs are trivial to put together and blue lists are basically what is killing null.

If it was that hard, why nullsec wouldn't be all blue, that's what GD told me, and I trust GD's elite NPC corp alts.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
#110 - 2012-12-16 21:19:35 UTC  |  Edited by: corestwo
Power projection in nullsec is too easy. It encourages mega-empires and means people have to travel really far to find fights. If we removed jump bridges and titan bridges and cynos, empires would be smaller and more localized and people wouldn't have to travel far.

Of course, the same could be said for highsec. You can safely autopilot almost anywhere you want Let's have each race's space bordered by lowsec so you have to go through at least one lowsec system to get anywhere. In fact, lets make it so each region works this way. It would encourage people to live locally and there would be more hubs instead of everything running out of Jita.

This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

fofofo
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#111 - 2012-12-16 21:28:06 UTC
Skydell wrote:

If I were you?
I'd have a POS deep in the heart of Deklein and it would have a Capital Ship Maintenance array and assembly and I would push it so every other POS had one too. Good luck figuring out what ones are actually making titans and what ones are decoys.

it is trivially easy to discover which csaas are active as long as you can get a single character in the alliance, you don't even need roles

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#112 - 2012-12-16 21:47:23 UTC
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MZD6-vGQms - Fan Fest presentation on the economy. 71% is wrong. Also "players" is wrong - the only information we have comes from CCP, and they've never (to the best of my knowledge) performed a census. So these are snapshots of where *someone* was logged in on a character - it conveys *no information* on how the actual players "self identify".

For example, of my three accounts (currently logged in) all three are in hi-sec at the moment. NONE of them is a "hi-sec" dweller.

In the Q&As towards the end of that presentation that point is specifically raised. I'm the one standing up and raising it.

The answer given is...not exactly satisfactory

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.
Sal Landry
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#113 - 2012-12-16 22:10:42 UTC
corestwo wrote:
Power projection in nullsec is too easy. It encourages mega-empires and means people have to travel really far to find fights. If we removed jump bridges and titan bridges and cynos, empires would be smaller and more localized and people wouldn't have to travel far.

Of course, the same could be said for highsec. You can safely autopilot almost anywhere you want Let's have each race's space bordered by lowsec so you have to go through at least one lowsec system to get anywhere. In fact, lets make it so each region works this way. It would encourage people to live locally and there would be more hubs instead of everything running out of Jita.

What an original plan you have there.
Ginger Barbarella
#114 - 2012-12-16 22:57:36 UTC
Stopped reading at "null player"... WTF is a "null player"?!?!? Are you talking about nullbears?!? Or those l337 null sec'ers who never talk about the brigade of high sec alts that make all their money?

Oh, and wall of text blah blah blah Search Function blah blah nerf blah blah...

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#115 - 2012-12-16 23:03:17 UTC
Highsec, truly the sacred cow. If you harm it, there will be stuffs for people to have.

Can I have?

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#116 - 2012-12-16 23:06:53 UTC
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Most who post about nefring high sec are just bitter about life and want to upset and get a reaction from other folks.

That's all really.

.


yeah, IE that one corp that has more replies than any other here. Starts with G

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#117 - 2012-12-16 23:12:20 UTC
You know something is wrong when a single high sec system has more industry slots than entire regions of null.
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#118 - 2012-12-16 23:13:32 UTC
Ocih wrote:
Every fleet is judged by it's zerg power, Every Alliance is judged by its Blob potential. For a bunch of people that are all about fun, you spend an awful lot of time fixated on I-Win.


You're talking about the large alliances and coalitions, and there I agree. However there is a level where the smaller alliances can roam and fight each other in kitchen-sink fleets and have reasonably evenly matched and fun fights. Those are the ones we live for. Not the multi-region coalition-wide CTA's where you show up only in the standard, approved ship, and move your 300+ blob against someone else's 300+blob and try to figure out what the hell is happening thanks to TiDi. Those happen too, but they're not what we live for.

Good-fites are few and far between, but no one minds losing a ship in those. It's fun. Losing a ship to a blob/camp.... meh, it happens and you deal with it. It's part of the tax. We certainly don't have any mercy to the poor sucker who jumps into our 20+ fleet while it's sitting on a gate, and we expect none when the situation is reversed. That's just nullsec.

Unlike carebears who start screaming to CCP because they fail to understand the rules of the game they're playing and that their own action/inaction is what cost them their ship.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#119 - 2012-12-16 23:20:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
I find myself wondering if it is even possible to "nerf" highsec sufficiently to cause any significant player movement, since the reasons why people play in highsec in general have very little to do with reward and very much to do with risk and resource availability.

They moved L5 missions to lowsec because they were "too easy" in highsec and the payouts were too high, the players didn't follow, the L5 missions are still there and run by a few skilled and risk tolerant individuals.

Lowsec and NPC nullsec missions pay considerably more than highsec missions, yet people still stick to highsec.

Capital ships were moved out of highsec because they were too powerful for controlled space and people should need to accept some risk to play with the best toys in the game, still most players stick to highsec.

The best ores and mining opportunities are only available outside highsec, yet the highsec belts are stripped by downtime on a regular basis.

I therefore contend that it is *not possible* to nerf highsec sufficiently to cause a significant change in player behaviour without removing it entirely as a part of the game.


I don't see anyone talking ahout player movement here, if so, point me to their posts. High Sec people always default to that "you just want me to move to null sec/play your way" argument that is BS.

I'm definintately not talking about that at all. i don't care who goes to null and who doesn't. What i do care about is the overall balance and health of the game, which is why I and peole like me aren't asking for anything we do to be buffed, but rather CCP look at the Rsik/EFFORT/reward balance of the game.

So stop imagining you know what we want and listen to what we TELL you we want. You don't see us asking for more 10/10s or for ccp to get rid of the Anom Nerf that caused a lot of the current problem (while fixing another porblem).

We KNOW they can't buff null sec without screwing up the game for eveyone else (we saw it when every system was equally upgradeable) but we also know the status quo cannot be allowed to continue. High Sec People are just to narrow minded/greedy to see it.
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#120 - 2012-12-16 23:21:21 UTC
corestwo wrote:
Power projection in nullsec is too easy. It encourages mega-empires


I think mega-empires are a human condition. You see them everywhere, not just in EVE. Countries. Corporations. Family fortunes. They are part of the natural imbalance not only of materials, but also of talent to exploit, market and manufacture them. Even if "alliance A" had exactly the same numbers of people and resources as "alliance B", one would emerge as the victor simply because it's more organized, people put more time and thought into it, etc.

But empires collapse. Fortunes are lost. Countries are conquered or destroyed by internal strife, and corporations eventually go broke, either because they are ripped off, ripped apart, or simply lose focus. None of that has to do with power projection. That's just one factor in an ocean of variables.