These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Null is Broken, Hisec working as intended.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Frying Doom
#221 - 2012-12-28 07:59:00 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Eterne
Malcanis wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
Lady Katherine Devonshire wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
You and most hi-seccers seem to think sov null is just Turn up, Plant flag, Collect free Technetium & Anomalies. . You're missing the titanic amount of ISK (amd effort) that's required to gain, control, upgrade and maintain space. And that's not even including what it costs to fight for it. Just to claim it costs many billions per region, and then more billions per month to keep it.


Oh no, there is dookey in your end of the sandbox! Shall you hold your nose and scoop it out, or just go and poop on the other side to make it match? Decisions, decisions. Oh wait, we're dealing with the vast web of insecurities & egomania of modern internet culture, so the answer is obvious: More poop for everyone.

"There is no such thing as justice. There is only the desire to see the pain spread around equally."
- Solomon Short



There is a lot of truth here, jealousy can get the better of people, so instead of doing something about improving their own circumstance, some just want every one to share their problems, that doesn't bode well for progress in Eve.


Yeah we're asking to share the "problem" of viable industry

man how mean spirited and selfish can we get?

That is kind of what this is about

Those wanting to nerf Hi-sec really just need a *snip*.

This should be more about the whole game and less about any individual zones.

NPC refining, manufacturing, ME & PE research copying ect. Should be Nerfed with the player owned and built facilities being massively buffed to encourage people to own their own facilities in all parts of space.

My only worry with the current ideas is the introduction of hi-sec minerals to Null but if this was off set with a reduction in the range of bridges and jump drives to more isolate Null from the Hi-sec markets.

While this would damage the hi-sec markets by removing Null as a market to sell too, it would prevent the cheaper Null produced goods from further damaging the markets in Hi-sec and allow Null to become more than just a suburb of Hi-sec.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Peter Raptor
Galactic Hawks
#222 - 2012-12-28 08:59:29 UTC

POSs that refine at a mere 75% does make POS less desirable, buff POSs, Im ok with that.

Evelopedia; 

The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion  †  
CaiIyn Dove
DMoney Corp
Fraternity.
#223 - 2012-12-28 10:10:22 UTC
There will not be a one way "nerf" or "boost" on either high or null. The balance between high and null will be revised as a whole, make the risk/isk reward ratio always match the "risk/reward" rule.
Frying Doom
#224 - 2012-12-28 10:13:06 UTC
CaiIyn Dove wrote:
There will not be a one way "nerf" or "boost" on either high or null. The balance between high and null will be revised as a whole, make the risk/isk reward ratio always match the "risk/reward" rule.

But would that not mean that WH space then needs to be buffed to make the risk vs reward higher than Nulls

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
CCP Eterne
C C P
C C P Alliance
#225 - 2012-12-28 10:25:34 UTC
I removed a bit of silliness from this thread. Though just a bit,

EVE Online/DUST 514 Community Representative ※ EVE Illuminati ※ Fiction Adept

@CCP_Eterne ※ @EVE_LiveEvents
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#226 - 2012-12-28 10:26:29 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
CaiIyn Dove wrote:
There will not be a one way "nerf" or "boost" on either high or null. The balance between high and null will be revised as a whole, make the risk/isk reward ratio always match the "risk/reward" rule.

But would that not mean that WH space then needs to be buffed to make the risk vs reward higher than Nulls


W-space is already astonishingly lucrative. Even when I was only dabbling, 400M an hour was easily done, and I've heard credible schemas for even higher rates.

"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.
#227 - 2012-12-28 10:27:28 UTC
Peter Raptor wrote:

POSs that refine at a mere 75% does make POS less desirable, buff POSs, Im ok with that.


The POS refine job also takes several hours. Just saying!

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
CaiIyn Dove
DMoney Corp
Fraternity.
#228 - 2012-12-28 10:29:01 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
CaiIyn Dove wrote:
There will not be a one way "nerf" or "boost" on either high or null. The balance between high and null will be revised as a whole, make the risk/isk reward ratio always match the "risk/reward" rule.

But would that not mean that WH space then needs to be buffed to make the risk vs reward higher than Nulls


Isn't that already works in that way? I don't live in WH anyway so I don't know, but if it is the case, do it.

I hope you're not expecting me to be jealous to the WH or whatever that turn against the whole balance, because it is so unusual to human mind.
Peter Raptor
Galactic Hawks
#229 - 2012-12-28 11:52:28 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
CaiIyn Dove wrote:
There will not be a one way "nerf" or "boost" on either high or null. The balance between high and null will be revised as a whole, make the risk/isk reward ratio always match the "risk/reward" rule.

But would that not mean that WH space then needs to be buffed to make the risk vs reward higher than Nulls


W-space is already astonishingly lucrative. Even when I was only dabbling, 400M an hour was easily done, and I've heard credible schemas for even higher rates.


Hmm, wonder why the null bears dont cry "nerf WHs!" I mean if you find an isolated WH, and scan reguarly, risk is minimal.

Evelopedia; 

The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion  †  
Frying Doom
#230 - 2012-12-28 12:05:11 UTC
Peter Raptor wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
CaiIyn Dove wrote:
There will not be a one way "nerf" or "boost" on either high or null. The balance between high and null will be revised as a whole, make the risk/isk reward ratio always match the "risk/reward" rule.

But would that not mean that WH space then needs to be buffed to make the risk vs reward higher than Nulls


W-space is already astonishingly lucrative. Even when I was only dabbling, 400M an hour was easily done, and I've heard credible schemas for even higher rates.


Hmm, wonder why the null bears dont cry "nerf WHs!" I mean if you find an isolated WH, and scan reguarly, risk is minimal.

400 mill an hour what a load of crap. Try way lower than that. And we can't just cyno our stuff to the nearest Hi-sec market.

Isolated is the word however and the more isolated the more of a whore it is to get to a market.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Peter Raptor
Galactic Hawks
#231 - 2012-12-28 12:10:10 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
CaiIyn Dove wrote:
There will not be a one way "nerf" or "boost" on either high or null. The balance between high and null will be revised as a whole, make the risk/isk reward ratio always match the "risk/reward" rule.

But would that not mean that WH space then needs to be buffed to make the risk vs reward higher than Nulls


W-space is already astonishingly lucrative. Even when I was only dabbling, 400M an hour was easily done, and I've heard credible schemas for even higher rates.


Hmm, wonder why the null bears dont cry "nerf WHs!" I mean if you find an isolated WH, and scan reguarly, risk is minimal.

400 mill an hour what a load of crap. Try way lower than that. And we can't just cyno our stuff to the nearest Hi-sec market.

Isolated is the word however and the more isolated the more of a ***** it is to get to a market.


Yeah , I have 17 PI planets in Class 4 with a Class 4 static, takes a long time to get to hisec through multiple WHs, and am willing to risk it since hisec PI is pretty bad. But I wouldn't wanna mine in a WH with the POS refining restrictions, unless hisec mining is made uselss, but that'll just wreck the economy.

Evelopedia; 

The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion  †  
Frying Doom
#232 - 2012-12-28 13:08:42 UTC
Peter Raptor wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

But would that not mean that WH space then needs to be buffed to make the risk vs reward higher than Nulls


W-space is already astonishingly lucrative. Even when I was only dabbling, 400M an hour was easily done, and I've heard credible schemas for even higher rates.


Hmm, wonder why the null bears dont cry "nerf WHs!" I mean if you find an isolated WH, and scan reguarly, risk is minimal.

400 mill an hour what a load of crap. Try way lower than that. And we can't just cyno our stuff to the nearest Hi-sec market.

Isolated is the word however and the more isolated the more of a ***** it is to get to a market.


Yeah , I have 17 PI planets in Class 4 with a Class 4 static, takes a long time to get to hisec through multiple WHs, and am willing to risk it since hisec PI is pretty bad. But I wouldn't wanna mine in a WH with the POS refining restrictions, unless hisec mining is made uselss, but that'll just wreck the economy.

It would want to be one hell of a gut to make mining in a WH worth while. Even if they make the Player refineries better than NPC it will still be touchy as you have to fly the stuff out spamming d-scan as you go and waiting for the inevitable cloaked ship to blow you to bits with no warning.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Ghazu
#233 - 2012-12-28 18:50:26 UTC
Peter Raptor wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
CaiIyn Dove wrote:
There will not be a one way "nerf" or "boost" on either high or null. The balance between high and null will be revised as a whole, make the risk/isk reward ratio always match the "risk/reward" rule.

But would that not mean that WH space then needs to be buffed to make the risk vs reward higher than Nulls


W-space is already astonishingly lucrative. Even when I was only dabbling, 400M an hour was easily done, and I've heard credible schemas for even higher rates.


Hmm, wonder why the null bears dont cry "nerf WHs!" I mean if you find an isolated WH, and scan reguarly, risk is minimal.

No local, concord, blobs, supers, stations, gates, or keep wondering your hisec mind away.

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#234 - 2012-12-28 20:14:52 UTC
Peter Raptor wrote:
Eternal Error wrote:
This thread sucks.


Youre a Pirate right?



Yea he lives in lowsec with a lot of other gate campers. (Yes I'm bitter for getting blown up the other evening =P)

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#235 - 2012-12-28 20:30:06 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
destiny2 wrote:
If their going to nerf anything nerf null get rid of the tech moons, make it so people actually have to work for their isk


How much "work" did hi-sec players put in to get all those invulnerable stations which they can't be locked out of?

You don't get to complain about tech moons in null until stations in hi-sec cost you 20 bill a pop.


Thousands and thousands of years, if you read the lore for Empire space.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#236 - 2012-12-28 20:33:55 UTC
hi-sec players put in thousands and thousands of years to get access to invulnerable, ubiquitous superior and free station access and services, if you read the lore for Empire space
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#237 - 2012-12-28 20:35:45 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
CaiIyn Dove wrote:
There will not be a one way "nerf" or "boost" on either high or null. The balance between high and null will be revised as a whole, make the risk/isk reward ratio always match the "risk/reward" rule.

But would that not mean that WH space then needs to be buffed to make the risk vs reward higher than Nulls


W-space is already astonishingly lucrative. Even when I was only dabbling, 400M an hour was easily done, and I've heard credible schemas for even higher rates.


Hmm, wonder why the null bears dont cry "nerf WHs!" I mean if you find an isolated WH, and scan reguarly, risk is minimal.

400 mill an hour what a load of crap. Try way lower than that. And we can't just cyno our stuff to the nearest Hi-sec market.

Isolated is the word however and the more isolated the more of a ***** it is to get to a market.


Sorry man I can only speak from my own experience and that's what I was making. I freely concede my W-space experience is limited.

"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.
#238 - 2012-12-28 20:36:47 UTC
Peter Raptor wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
CaiIyn Dove wrote:
There will not be a one way "nerf" or "boost" on either high or null. The balance between high and null will be revised as a whole, make the risk/isk reward ratio always match the "risk/reward" rule.

But would that not mean that WH space then needs to be buffed to make the risk vs reward higher than Nulls


W-space is already astonishingly lucrative. Even when I was only dabbling, 400M an hour was easily done, and I've heard credible schemas for even higher rates.


Hmm, wonder why the null bears dont cry "nerf WHs!" I mean if you find an isolated WH, and scan reguarly, risk is minimal.


Maybe because we're not solely motivated by envy and selfishness like you.

Let me know if you need some help understanding this viewpoint.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#239 - 2012-12-28 20:46:42 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Glathull wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
You are not only misreading it, you're employing an obvious fallacy.

"People build stuff in hi-sec, therefore trying to make it viable to build stuff in nullsec as well is the same as trying to turn it into hi-sec".

"****** had a moustache and you're growing a moustache, therefore you're trying to declare war on Poland and conquer eastern Europe."

Imagine that all Amarr ships had a 50% hit point penalty in 0.0; correcting this wouldn't be "turning 0.0 into hi-sec", it would just be correcting an obvious and egregious imbalance, because there's nothing inherent to the concept of hi-sec that mandates Amarr ships only being worthwhile in empire and not in null.


SO: No, building stuff isn't the defining characteristic of hi-sec. What makes hi-sec hi-sec are the characteristics that are unique to it, like CONCORD.

The ability to build stuff is explicitly enabled in all areas, even W-space; but they're not properly balanced. Hi-sec has all of the advantages and none of the disadvantages, which is obviously imbalanced. You don't get to have the best stations AND multiple stations AND the stations are free AND you can't be locked out of them AND you can't lose them AND you get free NPC protection AND you can run missions from them... something has to give here.





There's a lot of incoherent stuff here.

I'm pretty careful about fallacies, and I haven't employed any here.



You employed the exact fallacy that I demonstrated: asserting that two things with a single similar characteristic are therefore similar in all characteristics.


Glathull wrote:

According to you:

Building things is okay.

So long as . . . it's not more efficient to build things in high sec.

What you want is a null sec that has stations at least as good as high sec for, well, everything.

That's what it sounds like.




And yes, pretty much that's what it sounds like because that's what it is. That's what I'm arguing.

Hi-sec is both more efficient AND free AND safer. That's as unbalanced as a ship that's faster AND has more EHP AND has better DPS than others in its class. Why should hi-sec be the best in every respect? Why isn't there a trade-off for that CONCORD-provided safety? Shouldn't that be balanced against lower efficiency? Shouldn't a station that cost players tens of billions of ISK and which is vulnerable to being taken away from them provide some compelling efficiency advantage over one that's just put there for free and which they can't ever be locked out of and which doesn't require continuous spending on sov bills?




Not every ship is created the same. All have specific roles and some are better than others. Highsec isn't "ours", it's everyones since its NPC controlled. NPC null is similiar with stations, such as mission agents and locator agents.


Sov space is "your's" to do with as you please without rules. The tradeoff? It isn't as industrial as high sec.

And of course, as we all know, Eve isn't fair. Balance doesn't belong.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#240 - 2012-12-28 20:48:40 UTC
Ship and game balancing doesn't belong, because EVE isn't fair. Slogans trump common sense and proper game design.