EVE General Discussion

It does make sense if the idea of nullsec is for players to create their own empires. Possibly even empires to rival those in highsec.

But if nullsec is to be stuck in the archetype of being wilderness, or some gold-rush wild-west, then people expecting small gang PvP in nullsec are just going to have to give it up. Wildness by definition is unpopulated, so no one should be expecting targets out there. Nor should people complain that alliances hold huge swaths of territory if that territory is supposed to be sparsely populated by design. If you only expect a few players per system, then an alliance of a few thousand players should hold thousands of systems.


But people are complaining about this design from all sides. Day-tripping PvP'ers can't find targets. Aspiring sov holders can't find a patch of nullsec worth claiming for their own. Curent sov holders won't give up any sov because they need as much as possible for strategic and revenue reasons. Nullsec players get bored and play on highsec alts. Highsec complains of nullsec cartels and nullsec alts screwing with them for fun and profit.

1. I have played WoW even when it was actually (more of) a PvP game (Tarren Mill times, no godlike guards etc.) but it's not really a PvP game. PvP games generally involve being able to level up end even earn something by pure PvP, WoW did not do that for most of its age. Then they even tried a "PVP lake" but if I recall correctly, it failed (I stopped playing it before the last expansions). Whereas PvP games have large PvP lakes.

WoW has like 1% of the commodities being player made, it's economy cannot work in a realistic way, most stuff is bind on pickup, comes from drops and whatever.

2. Now it's you :foxnewsing: around. Ices (as I have written) are some of the most highly liquid markets and thus harder to crack than most. Harder, not impossible, just look what 1 player has done to the whole top liquid nitrogen ice market some days ago.

3. I suppose you are American? Then you should know that lobby <> "conspiracy". You dramatize yourself way too much.

4. I am not a GS intern (for now ), therefore I have only a partial view of what happens in there. There had been an active exploit however, you can't deny that.

5. I have addressed the hi sec risk vs reward with my hands in the past, search for 2010 threads on the mission forum, keyword Kerfira and you'll see how between him and me we managed *3* L4 nerfs. And then feel free to look at the GD nerf incursion threads where once again I was in the first line FOR the nerfs. That is the two of two main hi sec ISK faucets.
After those 3 nerfs, there came some more.
Now let's agree to disagree on this, but I think that *now* we are at a good compromise. You don't, but only CCP can know at this point if the current ISK faucets are OK or not.

6. You have to bring in empirical evidence about how you can prove that providing THE ONE HOLY PATH hi sec >> null sec is the sandbox philosophy compliant way to go.

7. Even normal people can read the past pages.

8. I have been *alone* in a C2 WH, in low sec and, for some brief periods of time, NPC null sec. It might be hard to believe but you can live in EvE without a superblob and handy cynos. Could also go *alone* in sov null sec as a renter but it'd be pointless, I am not there to bot anoms or belts, I need Jita / Amarr / Dodixie / Rens to trade.

9. Nope. I have mined both in hi sec, with and without fleets (solo), with and without corp fleets with Orca and in null sec with Rorqual but also alone when my corpies were not online.
First of all you can't AFK mine unless you bot, only ice allows AFK mining but I know nobody mining ice in null sec.
Second, any miners in a group will greatly out-ISK a loner. Just the mining boosts make it a reality, so group >>> solo.

Third you chose the most wrong example, as the income is not due to some faucet but by the perceived value of something otherwise worth zero. Therefore if null sec miners suddenly increased their output (very possible expecially if you get the null sec industry buffs) their income WILL tank accordingly and that has nothing to do with the fact they are in a specific sec.
What will happen is exactly what happened with all the hi sec miners switching to ice: ice price crashed very hard.

Furthermore: "
You contradict yourself:" Which is it? Either a single player can crash/monopolize/do bad things to markets or a single player cannot crash/monopolize/do bad things to markets.

A single player will spike the markets and impair them for days to weeks. A group will completely perform scorched Earth.
The single player is the example of how EvE markets are illiquid enough (due to lack of transactions and market participants) that he can visibly dent into them. Compare with the RL markets where it takes an Hedge Fund to do something half as significant to a *small* market.

A group of players (yours) will raise ice price from 440 to 1800 in a process lasting 4+ months, which is vastly more than what a single guy can do.

Bollocks. isk per hour is a useless standard in a shifting player driven market. The reward for missions is static - yet the value for ammunitions and ship replacement has doubled in twelve months. So a missioner now needs two missions to afford the same items compared to a year ago. So income value has already been nerfed 50%.

One point worth emphasizing is the statement: "the first question you should ask is if there's a way to boost B without nerfing A" In the case of highsec industry A in perfect. It can be made completely costless in some aspects. This leaves no room to buff B without making B broken. Since we can't simply buff our way out of it we are limited to a nerf as the best potential course of action.

Eve is ABSOLUTELY a PvP game. Just because you don't shoot at Player's ships doesn't mean you aren't PvPing. Do you undercut people in the market? Thats Player vs Player. Do you Research and sell BPCs? Unless you are the only one doing that, you are competeing with otherplayers, and PvPing.


Empire space is an important part of EVE, but given that 65% of everything in the game is Player made, its obviously a player vs player game.

Having massive NPC infastructure is really only there to guide and teach players "how to EVE"


But the fact that you can make as much money AFK mining in highsec, as you can running Anom's in Null, is ********. If I am puting myself at huge risk, constantly watching everything around me so I don't get ganked, fighting the toughest rats in a -1.0 system, why are you making more money than me in candyland?

Risk = reward.

AFK highsec mining = 0 risk, therefore should yeild zero reward.

If you wanna make hundreds of millions of isk mining, you should need a Tech2 harvester, and decent squad of bodyguards rolling with you out in the reaches of space. Miner's should have to band together just like Plexers. You don't get faction mods doing complexes in highsec, so why should there be an abundance of decent ore sitting up there.

Nullsec isnt JUST about gatecamps and massive blobs. Its about owning the land and making it better, upgrading it and making money. SURE, you gotta boat your loots to highsec and sell them, but you risked your butt getting them, so you should be rewarded for it. The guys with 3 -7 accounts AFK mining in highsec risk nothing, and get paid like whoa because of what CCP did to the minerals market. (not saying that was a bad thing)

Im gunna do it, Im making a WoW reference, but if you could stay in a Level 5 zone and farm copper ore all day, and make the same money as people Raiding endgame dungeons and level cap quests, your game is broken. At least in wow if you want to farm ore you have to actually play the game. AFK mining is RAMPANT in eve.

Again, Risk should equal reward. And highsec mining has 0 risk, therefore should be marginally profitable compaired to lowsec/nullsec mining.






2400ish I believe, and also 3000+ wormhole systems.

Really? I never got anything better than an implant that sold for a few million.

Unless I'm mistaken this isn't possible without a large number of qualifiers which would at any point make at least some part of it untrue.

I'll bet you own lots of stations, after all, you are such an expert on everything nullsec.

You're never going to drive this home. Some people just think they should be able to play the game with zero risk and be competitive with people who are laying everything on the line.

I like how you snuck in the implication that nerfing manufacturing in hisec means nobody will manufacture in hisec. That's not true. As long as manufacturing things in a hisec station is free of risk, people will always do it.