These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

Burning hisec to build something better from the ashes

Author
Mike Adoulin
Happys Happy Hamster Hunting Club
#41 - 2013-03-08 14:22:24 UTC
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
Mike Adoulin wrote:
Me and the corpies routinely farm..er..run..L4's as a team......much more money/loots to had when you have a buddy or 2 along.

Safer, too..:)



If by safer you mean 'the number of Catalyst pilots required for a successful carebear disruption operation is higher' then yes, it is safer.



Tsk.

You act if we all run the mission together......

Two words......

'Bait ship'.

Cool

Everything in EVE is a trap.

And if it isn't, it's your job to make it a trap...:)

You want to know what immorality in EVE Online looks like? Look no further than Ripard "Jester" Teg.

Chribba is the Chuck Norris of EVE.

Bjron
501st Amarr
#42 - 2013-03-08 20:02:51 UTC
This is silly, instead of pissing on highsec, why not make low and null better?

If you take the things I like to do away, or make them much more of a pain for me to do then I can take my two subs away. I paid RL money for my subs and I buy plex to sell.

As it is, I only play maybe 1 month out of every 3 I pay for. I still enjoy the game though.

I simply think making low and null better and leaving high sec alone is the way to go, upsetting the majority of your player base is not a wise idea.
We all know moving level 5's to low did jack all for low sec.

Faction warfare is bringing parts of low alive, because it worth doing and is fun. Add more of that is the answer, not taking away.

Oh well.
Wescro
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#43 - 2013-03-08 20:11:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Wescro
Bjron, incomes are relativistic. If you give null more income, their share of the wealth increases, and high sec residents become poorer in relation.

I wouldn't mind keeping the level of income in high sec the same, if the underlying safety was reduced a notch. Conversely, if the excessive safety is maintained, then the income has to be lowered. When 80% or so of the population favors high-sec, it's in part because the risk-reward is not in balance.
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#44 - 2013-03-08 22:56:32 UTC
Wescro wrote:
Bjron, incomes are relativistic. If you give null more income, their share of the wealth increases, and high sec residents become poorer in relation.

I wouldn't mind keeping the level of income in high sec the same, if the underlying safety was reduced a notch. Conversely, if the excessive safety is maintained, then the income has to be lowered. When 80% or so of the population favors high-sec, it's in part because the risk-reward is not in balance.


This.

The only activity that is higher absolute reward in lowsec than high is exploration.

Mining - the highsec ores are worth more than lowsec ones. (Nullsec ones are a bit more than either).
Missions - in lowsec you can't really use a blinged fit and your ship needs counttermeasures to various tacklers fit, reducing your compleetion speed. Plus in lowsec you get less for item drops other than a handful (meta 4 scrams, some plates, etc)
Incursions - again, much faster in faction fit t2/t3 hulls than in expendable t2 fit t1 hulls
Ratting - not lucrative in high or lowsec.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#45 - 2013-03-09 00:24:00 UTC
Redesign missions so they are optimally run in PvP-fit ships with more PvP-like tactics. Then increase the value of lowsec missions relative to high.

And if not, then redesign missions anyway. Seriously, they are really bad.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#46 - 2013-03-09 00:27:09 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Redesign missions so they are optimally run in PvP-fit ships with more PvP-like tactics. Then increase the value of lowsec missions relative to high.

And if not, then redesign missions anyway. Seriously, they are really bad.


This would be interesting.

Removing respawns, reducing numbers of NPC ships and buffing them and having it be a 'One player versus a small gang' feel would be worth a try, IMO.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Froggy Storm
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#47 - 2013-03-09 05:37:08 UTC
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
Zappity wrote:
Redesign missions so they are optimally run in PvP-fit ships with more PvP-like tactics. Then increase the value of lowsec missions relative to high.

And if not, then redesign missions anyway. Seriously, they are really bad.


This would be interesting.

Removing respawns, reducing numbers of NPC ships and buffing them and having it be a 'One player versus a small gang' feel would be worth a try, IMO.


I would like that as well. It might or might not address the safety issues, but missions are so terrible any imprisonment would be welcome.
Taoist Dragon
Okata Syndicate
#48 - 2013-03-09 06:18:14 UTC
Reward for work is backwards in High v Low sec.

Lets think about it:

High Sec space. I secured, Well populated and developed. So seeing as it is well developed then wouldn't it stand that the most usefull minerals have be mine out pretty much? After all you don't see many large mines being built in the center of a capital city do you? Mission agents wouldn't pay a premium for your services as there are plenty pilots out there who will work for less.

Low Sec space. Less secure but still fairly safe to travel if you have a pit of experiance/practice (just like the outback). Here you find the nice big mines that you can extract all the good minerals that the industry types are wanting. Agents out here would pay a premium to get you to come and hunt that local band of pirate nps etc.

Using this very simplified example you can see the backasswards way the risk v reward ratio is applied.

Fixes.......??? IMO remove all but the basic minerals (Veld? - dunno I never mine) from high sec and move it to low. Reduce the rewards for missions based on the security level of the system they are in. The higher the sec of the system the lower the reward with a decent jump from 0.5 to 0.4 showing the difference from high to low. Even this doesn't have to happen as a lot of agents in 0.5 systems bordering LS send players into LS for the mission so could possibly balance itself out there.

vOv my 2 isk.

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.

Previous page123