These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

High sec, get ready to be represented! James 315 announced his candidacy for CSM 8 in Brapelille!!!

Author
Bleah ImBald
Doomheim
#161 - 2013-02-28 12:11:48 UTC
Wescro wrote:
Bleah ImBald wrote:
this thread gave me cancer...


Want to make a bald + cancer joke but it might be a little tasteless.

i used to have hair before i've laid my eyes upon this thread...
now its...
dead and gone, dead and gone...
Miiikka
Stanza Inc.
4S Alliance
#162 - 2013-02-28 13:37:28 UTC
Vin King wrote:
SPIONKOP wrote:

So James does not want a high sec or a carebear in Eve. I know there are many that don't "do" carebears but who do you think mines the trit for your ships. Carebears that's who.

So there is too much ISK in Empire. Who has the best minerals, the best moons, the best rats. Well it aint empire.

James is just another goon who wants to destroy Eve, he does not want to better high sec he wants to destroy it.


James has proposed a slightly different purpose for HighSec. It wouldn't flat out destroy HighSec, because it includes it as part of the risk/reward system. Right now, many of us have no real drive to push into LowSec, because we can do what we need entirely within HighSec. We can progress well entirely within HighSec. We can accumulate vast quantities of ISK in HighSec.

Part of his proposal is increasing the value of LowSec. As it stands right now, LowSec is kinda the red headed step child that few really bother with. Increasing the reward for venturing into LowSec creates new opportunities for many things. A mining op to LowSec with some security might be worth it, for the right reward. And when a mining op into LowSec isn't just fish in a barrel, maybe targeting mining ops in Low Sec becomes less palatable. From there, LowSec becomes a bit safer for housing some industrial types, while still maintaining a degree of risk, while still being less risky than trying to ninja into someone's 0.0 sov and steal their minerals.

This opens the door for new types of interactions. Right now, holing up in HighSec is a mostly viable method for avoiding interaction. When interaction is forced, people cry. We need them to be less worried about playing with themselves in public, and get out there and play with others. If that means that miners can't AFK mine ice or trit 23/7, I'm not sure that's a huge loss. After initial upheaval, the market normalizes.

As these interactions work with each other, the net effect is that LowSec becomes a safer place, HighSec isn't as desirable, the market improves for Industrialists, combat ships remain in demand, and people spend more time playing the game instead of watching Netflix while their ore holds fill themselves.

This type of approach endorses the idea of sandboxing, because it attacks the idea that your pillow fort really will keep the monsters outside.



So how does all this translate into James's quote....

"High sec. Will. Be. Saved"

What a load of crap lol
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#163 - 2013-02-28 14:17:44 UTC
Miiikka wrote:
So how does all this translate into James's quote....

"High sec. Will. Be. Saved"

What a load of crap lol


He will save highsec from it's present state of gluttony & bring it more in line with what it's supposed to be. There's a reason most people are in highsec making money. That reason is the rewards compared to the risk makes highsec THE place to make money. On the same note though, nullsec needs to be made better in terms of industry or the whole venture is pointless.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.

Vin King
State War Academy
Caldari State
#164 - 2013-02-28 17:53:51 UTC
Miiikka wrote:

So how does all this translate into James's quote....

"High sec. Will. Be. Saved"

What a load of crap lol


I have interesting things happen in HighSec. I can park two cats on a mining barge, and wait to see how long it takes to realize there may be a threat present. It's almost never immediate. If you think that's great for the game, then you appear to need some saving, too! Don't worry, the New Order is always pleased to help a miner.

Proud member of the New Order of HighSec

MrDiao
Fuxi Legion
Fraternity.
#165 - 2013-03-01 05:16:25 UTC
I agree that high-sec really needs a representative. which many people have being asked for, and Wescro should fit the best.
Wescro
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#166 - 2013-03-01 05:29:53 UTC
MrDiao wrote:
I agree that high-sec really needs a representative. which many people have being asked for, and Wescro should fit the best.


I appreciate the vote of confidence Diao, but I am running on my alt, James 315.
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#167 - 2013-03-01 08:07:28 UTC
Imagine if the 4 high-sec empires were all separated by low-sec space... and daring traders had to run through gatecamps in order to make a killing...

The current state of affairs is that it's still possible to afk freighter from one end of high-sec to the other, and still come out profitable. So... no-one really bothers to do industry in low-sec for its own sake.

Until we get nerfs or buffs (take your pick, I prefer buffs), the solution is VIOLENCE. And violence is something that all brave pilots are entitled to.

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"

Vin King
State War Academy
Caldari State
#168 - 2013-03-01 15:22:22 UTC
Amyclas Amatin wrote:
Imagine if the 4 high-sec empires were all separated by low-sec space... and daring traders had to run through gatecamps in order to make a killing...

The current state of affairs is that it's still possible to afk freighter from one end of high-sec to the other, and still come out profitable. So... no-one really bothers to do industry in low-sec for its own sake.

Until we get nerfs or buffs (take your pick, I prefer buffs), the solution is VIOLENCE. And violence is something that all brave pilots are entitled to.


There's nothing about this post I don't like. If violence isn't the answer, you're not asking the right question.

Proud member of the New Order of HighSec

John E Normus
New Order Logistics
CODE.
#169 - 2013-03-01 17:49:33 UTC
Amyclas Amatin wrote:
Imagine if the 4 high-sec empires were all separated by low-sec space... and daring traders had to run through gatecamps in order to make a killing...

The current state of affairs is that it's still possible to afk freighter from one end of high-sec to the other, and still come out profitable. So... no-one really bothers to do industry in low-sec for its own sake.

Until we get nerfs or buffs (take your pick, I prefer buffs), the solution is VIOLENCE. And violence is something that all brave pilots are entitled to.


This should occur if James 315's idea about shrinking highsec is implemented. i like the way you put it though!

Between Ignorance and Wisdom

Primary Me
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#170 - 2013-03-01 22:07:35 UTC
Another incisive post by James:
http://themittani.com/features/highsec-rising-danger-safe-zone-eve
Straight to the point as usual
Frying Doom
#171 - 2013-03-01 23:03:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Primary Me wrote:
Another incisive post by James:
http://themittani.com/features/highsec-rising-danger-safe-zone-eve
Straight to the point as usual

While I agree with his reasoning, I must admit the idea that CCP will ever nerf Hi-sec in any real manner, now days is laughable. They have made more money making hi-sec more user friendly and will probably continue down that path.

As to the why, this more comes down to the change in the CSM as the voice of the players. In CSM 7 that became the voice of CCP, with an ex-ccp employee as chairman. If you look at the evolution of the minutes in the last 18 months they have gone from working with CCP, to catering to CCP with such wonderful words as "Seleene: Dima [Greene Lee], I understand what you are getting at, but the core question is one CCP has to answer. It’s about what CCP wants from this group. If you're translating stuff and so on, that's great, but in my opinion it's about more than watching what's going on and passing it on to other people. There should be some level of interaction and communication. But it's up to CCP to determine what they expect to get out of their investment. If they think it's fine for someone to sit in a corner and report things to their constituents, that's fine. I don't think that's fine, and a lot of other people agree with me."

So now we have CCP deciding who goes to Iceland, so no I think CCP has managed to cut off the wires on its warning button and now they will not know they screwed up till it is too late.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#172 - 2013-03-01 23:38:14 UTC
You can't nerf high-sec without losing subs. It'll be painful in the short term but, coupled with buffs in other areas, it's the best thing CCP could do for the game.

Unless the surge in high-sec population is because of low-sec, null-sec, and WH alts, in which case they'll empty back out to where they belong and we lose some terrible **** carebears the game didn't need anyway.

Also, Amyclas Amatin, good to see you out of the Uni, your posts indicated you were too good for them.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.

John E Normus
New Order Logistics
CODE.
#173 - 2013-03-03 05:08:50 UTC
You starting to get comfortable with the idea of James 315 yet? Try another helping:

James 315 for CSM

Between Ignorance and Wisdom

Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#174 - 2013-03-04 01:48:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Amyclas Amatin
Karl Hobb wrote:
You can't nerf high-sec without losing subs. It'll be painful in the short term but, coupled with buffs in other areas, it's the best thing CCP could do for the game.

Unless the surge in high-sec population is because of low-sec, null-sec, and WH alts, in which case they'll empty back out to where they belong and we lose some terrible **** carebears the game didn't need anyway.

Also, Amyclas Amatin, good to see you out of the Uni, your posts indicated you were too good for them.


Thanks, I even changed my hairstyle and look so that it looks better with a WANTED sign on it.

While I agree with them that every play-style is valuable, it is maddening to see the uni turned into a political tool that pushes for a safe high-sec playground under the banner of the "new player experience". They're using us newbies to make themselves an authority on what new players go through, and claiming that we need to be sheltered from the "bad guys" who would exploit and gank us. (Kelduum's CSM 7 post: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=67217)

Now they're mad with me for claiming that the U-Mad war is a valuable pvp learning experience. If they had their way, they would have no non-consensual wars in high-sec.

The care-bears have and will continue to use every political edge (mostly numbers) they can to create a playground for themselves. I truly support any endeavor to thin their numbers and return "true" EVE industry, industry with risks and rewards for the bold and daring, to EVE.

P.S. This noob has indy alts that do not operate in highsec.

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"

Frying Doom
#175 - 2013-03-04 06:35:44 UTC
Amyclas Amatin wrote:
Karl Hobb wrote:
You can't nerf high-sec without losing subs. It'll be painful in the short term but, coupled with buffs in other areas, it's the best thing CCP could do for the game.

Unless the surge in high-sec population is because of low-sec, null-sec, and WH alts, in which case they'll empty back out to where they belong and we lose some terrible **** carebears the game didn't need anyway.

Also, Amyclas Amatin, good to see you out of the Uni, your posts indicated you were too good for them.


Thanks, I even changed my hairstyle and look so that it looks better with a WANTED sign on it.

While I agree with them that every play-style is valuable, it is maddening to see the uni turned into a political tool that pushes for a safe high-sec playground under the banner of the "new player experience". They're using us newbies to make themselves an authority on what new players go through, and claiming that we need to be sheltered from the "bad guys" who would exploit and gank us. (Kelduum's CSM 7 post: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=67217)

Now they're mad with me for claiming that the U-Mad war is a valuable pvp learning experience. If they had their way, they would have no non-consensual wars in high-sec.

The care-bears have and will continue to use every political edge (mostly numbers) they can to create a playground for themselves. I truly support any endeavor to thin their numbers and return "true" EVE industry, industry with risks and rewards for the bold and daring, to EVE.

P.S. This noob has indy alts that do not operate in highsec.

Actually the whole war dec issue mostly comes about not from people wanting good fights but people acting like bullies. They just need to alter the formula to be about kills rather than members.

So say my corp has 50 kill total in the last 12 months and I war dec Goonswarm for example so 50 mill a week fee. If on the other hand my corp is war decd by a merc corp for example 12000 kills in the last 12 months, so the bill is 5 billion a week.

This would make pvp corps go after other pvp corps of the same kind of level or ones with more kills, without completely removing the occasional fun of wasting miners.

Yeah you want to beat up baby seals you have to pay for the privilege. Unlike the current system where if you want to attack a bigger opponent you must pay more. That was just stupidity.

Easy fixed.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#176 - 2013-03-04 08:00:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Amyclas Amatin
Quote:
Actually the whole war dec issue mostly comes about not from people wanting good fights but people acting like bullies. They just need to alter the formula to be about kills rather than members.

So say my corp has 50 kill total in the last 12 months and I war dec Goonswarm for example so 50 mill a week fee. If on the other hand my corp is war decd by a merc corp for example 12000 kills in the last 12 months, so the bill is 5 billion a week.

This would make pvp corps go after other pvp corps of the same kind of level or ones with more kills, without completely removing the occasional fun of wasting miners.

Yeah you want to beat up baby seals you have to pay for the privilege. Unlike the current system where if you want to attack a bigger opponent you must pay more. That was just stupidity.

Easy fixed.


To paraphrase Jame's article on The Mittani, the reason why a combat game is fun is because we get to blow people up. While getting blown up is a sad experience, we don't mind being blown up because the same mechanics that get us blown up also allow us to blow others up.

The carebears are trying to get away from this interaction altogether by petitioning for a safe high-sec.

Eve wouldn't be a true hardcore game without the predator and prey dynamics that we see in high-sec wars.

Of course a "hardcore" game favours the bold, and culls the passive. We shouldn't make the game easier just because casual players from "easy" MMOs won't learn the skills needed to survive in EVE.

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"

Primary Me
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#177 - 2013-03-04 12:41:36 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

Actually the whole war dec issue mostly comes about not from people wanting good fights but people acting like bullies. They just need to alter the formula to be about kills rather than members.

So say my corp has 50 kill total in the last 12 months and I war dec Goonswarm for example so 50 mill a week fee. If on the other hand my corp is war decd by a merc corp for example 12000 kills in the last 12 months, so the bill is 5 billion a week.

This would make pvp corps go after other pvp corps of the same kind of level or ones with more kills, without completely removing the occasional fun of wasting miners.

Yeah you want to beat up baby seals you have to pay for the privilege. Unlike the current system where if you want to attack a bigger opponent you must pay more. That was just stupidity.

Easy fixed.

Wouldn't people just keep creating new corps with zero kills before wardeccing?
Frying Doom
#178 - 2013-03-04 13:55:17 UTC
Primary Me wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

Actually the whole war dec issue mostly comes about not from people wanting good fights but people acting like bullies. They just need to alter the formula to be about kills rather than members.

So say my corp has 50 kill total in the last 12 months and I war dec Goonswarm for example so 50 mill a week fee. If on the other hand my corp is war decd by a merc corp for example 12000 kills in the last 12 months, so the bill is 5 billion a week.

This would make pvp corps go after other pvp corps of the same kind of level or ones with more kills, without completely removing the occasional fun of wasting miners.

Yeah you want to beat up baby seals you have to pay for the privilege. Unlike the current system where if you want to attack a bigger opponent you must pay more. That was just stupidity.

Easy fixed.

Wouldn't people just keep creating new corps with zero kills before wardeccing?

How the number of kills is attached to a person? Haven't you noticed for example on Battle clinic that a corps kills increase and decrease on who joins or not. It is just EvE keeping a database of player kills.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Frying Doom
#179 - 2013-03-04 13:59:35 UTC
Amyclas Amatin wrote:
Quote:
Actually the whole war dec issue mostly comes about not from people wanting good fights but people acting like bullies. They just need to alter the formula to be about kills rather than members.

So say my corp has 50 kill total in the last 12 months and I war dec Goonswarm for example so 50 mill a week fee. If on the other hand my corp is war decd by a merc corp for example 12000 kills in the last 12 months, so the bill is 5 billion a week.

This would make pvp corps go after other pvp corps of the same kind of level or ones with more kills, without completely removing the occasional fun of wasting miners.

Yeah you want to beat up baby seals you have to pay for the privilege. Unlike the current system where if you want to attack a bigger opponent you must pay more. That was just stupidity.

Easy fixed.


To paraphrase Jame's article on The Mittani, the reason why a combat game is fun is because we get to blow people up. While getting blown up is a sad experience, we don't mind being blown up because the same mechanics that get us blown up also allow us to blow others up.

The carebears are trying to get away from this interaction altogether by petitioning for a safe high-sec.

Eve wouldn't be a true hardcore game without the predator and prey dynamics that we see in high-sec wars.

Of course a "hardcore" game favours the bold, and culls the passive. We shouldn't make the game easier just because casual players from "easy" MMOs won't learn the skills needed to survive in EVE.

Personally I would call it cowardice but at the end of the day it is being bullies.

Now I have no objection to bullies in EvE if you are willing to pay for the privilege, that way more indy players will continue to play the game as has now happened after the barge buff and the PvP guys get to splat indy types for fun.

You want to kill defenseless people go right ahead but pay for your pleasure if not just go and shoot NPCs (they even give you money back)

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#180 - 2013-03-04 14:12:55 UTC
Quote:
Personally I would call it cowardice but at the end of the day it is being bullies.

Now I have no objection to bullies in EvE if you are willing to pay for the privilege, that way more indy players will continue to play the game as has now happened after the barge buff and the PvP guys get to splat indy types for fun.

You want to kill defenseless people go right ahead but pay for your pleasure if not just go and shoot NPCs (they even give you money back)


If an industry player is defenseless, they're doing it wrong, and should be shot because they can be.

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"