These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1381 - 2012-12-28 06:02:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Malcanis wrote:
Randolph Rothstein wrote:
low sec:
- safety for two reasons - first if you look at the map the most ship/pod kills are in high sec,second because of density there are not a lot of people in low sec,id even argue that low sec is safer because of that but lets pretend they cancel each other

Lo-sec (by which I understand you to mean "everything that's not hi-sec") "safety" isn't safety; it's people being more god damb careful because it's dangerous. Calling "safety" an advantage of lo-sec is like calling a thin sheet of ice "the safest place to drive" because no one will drive on it, therefore there are no traffic incidents.

Lowsec is safe? Haha, look at that guy, he was calling lowsec safe.

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 ?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#1382 - 2012-12-28 06:03:34 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Lo-sec "safety" isn't safety; it's people being more god damb careful because it's dangerous. Calling "safety" an advantage of lo-sec is like calling a thin sheet of ice "the safest place to drive" because no one will drive on it, therefore there are no traffic incidents.

Lowsec is safe? Haha, look at that guy, he was calling highsec safe.


Hi-sec is so safe that it's a worthwhile risk to autopilot a T1 industrial vith valuable cargo, or run missions with a hundred neutrals in local.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Randolph Rothstein
whatever corp.
#1383 - 2012-12-28 06:04:04 UTC
Malcanis wrote:


You forgot a couple of pros for hi-sec

R&D
Invention
Trading (OK you included this one but you tried to roll it into "industry"; it deserves its own category
Mining

Also if hi-sec exploration is so popular that the sites are regularly cleaned out, then how can you say that exploration isn't a hi-sec activity?

Lo-sec "safety" isn't safety; it's people being more god damb careful because it's dangerous. Calling "safety" an advantage of lo-sec is like calling a thin sheet of ice "the safest place to drive" because no one will drive on it, therefore there are no traffic incidents.


science,trading,mining is all in the industry category - its a huge caregory that why you have more low sec perks in pure numbers

we can argue about safety for days,the fact is that you have very low density population and because of that its easier to avoid people - its a different point of view with same result - no destroyed ships of your own

in high sec you have a lot of people but less fighting per capita because concord - i actually bet there is more isk destroyed in high sec then low sec,hence more safety in low sec

but i said it cancels each other,we will never agree on that anyway
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1384 - 2012-12-28 06:05:10 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Lo-sec "safety" isn't safety; it's people being more god damb careful because it's dangerous. Calling "safety" an advantage of lo-sec is like calling a thin sheet of ice "the safest place to drive" because no one will drive on it, therefore there are no traffic incidents.

Lowsec is safe? Haha, look at that guy, he was calling highsec safe.


Hi-sec is so safe that it's a worthwhile risk to autopilot a T1 industrial vith valuable cargo, or run missions with a hundred neutrals in local.

typo.

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 ?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1385 - 2012-12-28 06:05:16 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Lo-sec (by which I understand you to mean "everything that's not hi-sec") "safety" isn't safety; it's people being more god damb careful because it's dangerous. Calling "safety" an advantage of lo-sec is like calling a thin sheet of ice "the safest place to drive" because no one will drive on it, therefore there are no traffic incidents.

This is what irritates me about people saying nullsec is safe.
It's only safe if you're constantly paying attention to what you're doing.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1386 - 2012-12-28 06:05:40 UTC
Randolph Rothstein wrote:
n the industry category - its a huge caregory that why you have more low sec perks in pure numbers

we can argue about safety for days,the fact is that you have very low density population and because of that its easier to avoid people - its a different point of view with same result - no destroyed ships of your own

in high sec you have a lot of people but less fighting per capita because concord - i actually bet there is more isk destroyed in high sec then low sec,hence more safety in low sec

but i said it cancels each other,we will never agree on that anyway

Haha, look at you.

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 ?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1387 - 2012-12-28 06:07:20 UTC
Randolph Rothstein wrote:
in high sec you have a lot of people but less fighting per capita

You just contradicted everything else you said about safety with that little statement right there.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1388 - 2012-12-28 06:08:34 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Randolph Rothstein wrote:
in high sec you have a lot of people but less fighting per capita

You just contradicted everything else you said about safety with that little statement right there.

CONCORD, our protectors <3 <3 <3 Who work for free.

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 ?
Ryuji Takemiya
Doomheim
#1389 - 2012-12-28 06:12:32 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

This is what irritates me about people saying nullsec is safe.
It's only safe if you're constantly paying attention to what you're doing.


This. You might look at the Starmap and think no ones comes out here, that you found a safe spot in Null. Then be amazed when that one person comes into your system, scans you down faster than you thought was possible, and fills your screen with explosions.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#1390 - 2012-12-28 06:12:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
Randolph Rothstein wrote:
Malcanis wrote:


You forgot a couple of pros for hi-sec

R&D
Invention
Trading (OK you included this one but you tried to roll it into "industry"; it deserves its own category
Mining

Also if hi-sec exploration is so popular that the sites are regularly cleaned out, then how can you say that exploration isn't a hi-sec activity?

Lo-sec "safety" isn't safety; it's people being more god damb careful because it's dangerous. Calling "safety" an advantage of lo-sec is like calling a thin sheet of ice "the safest place to drive" because no one will drive on it, therefore there are no traffic incidents.


science,trading,mining is all in the industry category - its a huge caregory that why you have more low sec perks in pure numbers


So you roll those together, but you try and make "rats" and "exploration" two seperate categories and assign them both as 0.0 "pros"?

Nice try bro, but I'm not falling for that little sleight-of-hand. Invention, Trading and manufacturing are all seperate professions with seperate skillsets, seperate resources, seperate infrastructure.

Randolph Rothstein wrote:


we can argue about safety for days,the fact is that you have very low density population and because of that its easier to avoid people - its a different point of view with same result - no destroyed ships of your own

in high sec you have a lot of people but less fighting per capita because concord - i actually bet there is more isk destroyed in high sec then low sec,hence more safety in low sec

but i said it cancels each other,we will never agree on that anyway


CCP Diagoras' stat dump showed that 0.0 is approximate 17 times more dangerous than hi-sec. That is, a single player in 0.0 is 17 times more likely to lose a ship in 0.0 to PvP than his counterpart in hi-sec. If you want to call "17 times more dangerous" a form of "safety", then I can't stop you, but don't expect many people to adhere to your definition. I certainly won't.

The large majority of ships lost in hi-sec are lost to rats. And most of them are frigates. Two Titans were lost in 0.0 a week ago; together they cost as much as about 300,000 frigates. Hi-sec doesn't 'win' on total value of ship loss either.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1391 - 2012-12-28 06:14:33 UTC
Ryuji Takemiya wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

This is what irritates me about people saying nullsec is safe.
It's only safe if you're constantly paying attention to what you're doing.

This. You might look at the Starmap and think no ones comes out here, that you found a safe spot in Null. Then be amazed when that one person comes into your system, scans you down faster than you thought was possible, and fills your screen with explosions.

EXPLOSIONS????!!!!

Painful. At least now the rats might help defend you, har har

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 ?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#1392 - 2012-12-28 06:14:41 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Randolph Rothstein wrote:
in high sec you have a lot of people but less fighting per capita

You just contradicted everything else you said about safety with that little statement right there.

CONCORD, our protectors <3 <3 <3 Who work for free.


Socialist government subsidies undercutting the hardworking, independent mercenary community :(

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Randolph Rothstein
whatever corp.
#1393 - 2012-12-28 06:18:09 UTC
look people not gonna answer you one by one,we would argue all night

my point of view is that the design of industrial high sec and dangerous low sec is intentional,whether am i right or not we will see, it makes sense to have it like that considering how the real world works

my claim is that its an inteligent design (pun totaly intended) and therefore nothing gonna change Roll

you think otherwise which is fine,tho i dont believe it,the thruth is probably out there...

throw a coin,we ll see

good night Blink
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1394 - 2012-12-28 06:18:23 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Randolph Rothstein wrote:
in high sec you have a lot of people but less fighting per capita

You just contradicted everything else you said about safety with that little statement right there.

CONCORD, our protectors <3 <3 <3 Who work for free.


Socialist government subsidies undercutting the hardworking, independent mercenary community :(

So when is CONCORD going to redistribute everything in highsec to it's military operations against the gankers?

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 ?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#1395 - 2012-12-28 06:22:24 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Randolph Rothstein wrote:
in high sec you have a lot of people but less fighting per capita

You just contradicted everything else you said about safety with that little statement right there.

CONCORD, our protectors <3 <3 <3 Who work for free.


Socialist government subsidies undercutting the hardworking, independent mercenary community :(

So when is CONCORD going to redistribute everything in highsec to it's military operations against the gankers?


I don't think you quite get socialist governments

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#1396 - 2012-12-28 06:24:43 UTC
Randolph Rothstein wrote:
look people not gonna answer you one by one,we would argue all night

my point of view is that the design of industrial high sec and dangerous low sec is intentional,whether am i right or not we will see, it makes sense to have it like that considering how the real world works

my claim is that its an inteligent design (pun totaly intended) and therefore nothing gonna change Roll

you think otherwise which is fine,tho i dont believe it,the thruth is probably out there...

throw a coin,we ll see

good night Blink




"I got called out on my attempt to use sleight of hand to show that hi-sec and 0.0 aren't unbalanced, so I'll just claim that they're meant to be unbalanced and that discussing it is against god's will or something and run off before I get owned even harder"

A fine rhetorical technique, used by privileged classes everywhere.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1397 - 2012-12-28 06:24:52 UTC
Randolph Rothstein wrote:
look people not gonna answer you one by one,we would argue all night

my point of view is that the design of industrial high sec and dangerous low sec is intentional,whether am i right or not we will see, it makes sense to have it like that considering how the real world works

my claim is that its an inteligent design (pun totaly intended) and therefore nothing gonna change Roll

you think otherwise which is fine,tho i dont believe it,the thruth is probably out there...

throw a coin,we ll see

good night Blink


Uh, okay.
AoE remote doomsday was intentional.
Supercarriers fielding 25 combat drones was intentional.
Heavy missiles outperforming other medium sized long range weapons was intentional.
Incursions paying out 100M+ ISK/hr was intentional.

These things, however having been designed intentionally by intelligent developers, were however not perfect and needed rebalancing. The case here is exactly the same.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1398 - 2012-12-28 06:27:03 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Randolph Rothstein wrote:
look people not gonna answer you one by one,we would argue all night

my point of view is that the design of industrial high sec and dangerous low sec is intentional,whether am i right or not we will see, it makes sense to have it like that considering how the real world works

my claim is that its an inteligent design (pun totaly intended) and therefore nothing gonna change Roll

you think otherwise which is fine,tho i dont believe it,the thruth is probably out there...

throw a coin,we ll see

good night Blink


Uh, okay.
AoE remote doomsday was intentional.
Supercarriers fielding 25 combat drones was intentional.
Heavy missiles outperforming other medium sized long range weapons was intentional.
Incursions paying out 100M+ ISK/hr was intentional.

These things, however having been designed intentionally by intelligent developers, were however not perfect and needed rebalancing. The case here is exactly the same.

Working as intended, what a powerful argument.

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 ?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#1399 - 2012-12-28 06:27:20 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Randolph Rothstein wrote:
look people not gonna answer you one by one,we would argue all night

my point of view is that the design of industrial high sec and dangerous low sec is intentional,whether am i right or not we will see, it makes sense to have it like that considering how the real world works

my claim is that its an inteligent design (pun totaly intended) and therefore nothing gonna change Roll

you think otherwise which is fine,tho i dont believe it,the thruth is probably out there...

throw a coin,we ll see

good night Blink


Uh, okay.
AoE remote doomsday was intentional.
Supercarriers fielding 25 combat drones was intentional.
Heavy missiles outperforming other medium sized long range weapons was intentional.
Incursions paying out 100M+ ISK/hr was intentional.

These things, however having been designed intentionally by intelligent developers, were however not perfect and needed rebalancing. The case here is exactly the same.


I'm reminded of an excellent quote from the recent US election:

"They're all 'entitlements' except the ones I'm entitled too."


"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#1400 - 2012-12-28 06:29:38 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Randolph Rothstein wrote:
look people not gonna answer you one by one,we would argue all night

my point of view is that the design of industrial high sec and dangerous low sec is intentional,whether am i right or not we will see, it makes sense to have it like that considering how the real world works

my claim is that its an inteligent design (pun totaly intended) and therefore nothing gonna change Roll

you think otherwise which is fine,tho i dont believe it,the thruth is probably out there...

throw a coin,we ll see

good night Blink


Uh, okay.
AoE remote doomsday was intentional.
Supercarriers fielding 25 combat drones was intentional.
Heavy missiles outperforming other medium sized long range weapons was intentional.
Incursions paying out 100M+ ISK/hr was intentional.

These things, however having been designed intentionally by intelligent developers, were however not perfect and needed rebalancing. The case here is exactly the same.


Don't forget:

LP stores

CONCORD buffs

Insurance Nerf

Removal of insurance for suicide ganks

Increased hi-sec belt spawns

Mining barge buffs


Quick, someone link me to the posts made by the people who are against viable nullsec industry and also opposed these changes because "obviously working as intended".

I'll wait.








(For a very long time, I expect)

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016