These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

How Highsec isn't broken - But modern gaming is.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Grendel Sickswitch
#21 - 2013-03-26 02:33:03 UTC
high sec is a hard place to live. isn't that the whole point of it?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2013-03-26 02:58:50 UTC
Grendel Sickswitch wrote:
high sec is a hard place to live. isn't that the whole point of it?

Uh no, it isn't.
It's not only an easy place to live, but you can make pretty much the same amount of isk there as you can anywhere else, except for wormhole space.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#23 - 2013-03-26 03:18:06 UTC
Tiberius StarGazer wrote:
So using mining as an example why this is wrong
So you're using the example that no-one ever really mentions as a problem as your proof why it's not a problem? Hmmm…

Quote:
But all arguments that mining is too profitable is complete nonsense
Is anyone actually making any such argument, or is that just a strawman?

Quote:
As for mission running, well that's a whole different kettle of fish, that does have an effect on the eve universe in that its an ISK and item faucet that pumps money and resources into the game.
It's not all that different. It affects the universe, just like every other activity, including mining. The exact nature of those effects may vary, but you're making it sound like it's different in that it has an effect at all, and that's completely inaccurate.

Quote:
My suggestion is that Hi-Sec isn't broken, it works fine,
Interesting suggestion given the numerous broken things about it that people have enumerated over a number of threads, none of which you have particularly addressed.

Quote:
my point is that today's gaming noobs, the yoof, the younger generation are fed and suckled on the insta-gratification of modern day gaming which is why Eve has a hard time retaining new players.
…and the current trends show that they are sick and tired of it, which has given rise to an upswing of deliberately difficult games and games where there is no set difficulty since you're competing against other players.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#24 - 2013-03-26 03:21:04 UTC
Jerome Hauleralt wrote:
RavenTesio wrote:
Seriously in my opinion the ENTIRE situation in Null-Sec right now is one of the Sovereignty Alliances OWN DOING.
This is all that really needs to be said for any past, present, and future nerf hi-sec/buff null thread. It's the simple
…wilful ignorance, bordering on sheer idiocy, that comes from deciding to refuse to look at anything even remotely resembling facts.

The fact is that the mechanics that has created the nullsec situation cannot be the alliances' doing because the game doesn't allow for that kind of rules modding.
Weiland Taur
The Icarus Expedition
Solyaris Chtonium
#25 - 2013-03-26 03:32:42 UTC

I would love to see some real numbers to back up this argument that highsec is so easy to make ISK in. I've lived in High and Null sec and every time I lived in null I made much more ISK.

In Null...

You can moon mine which you can't do in High sec.
You get far superior planets for PI than in Highsec.
Those damned infestations of Red Crosses are worth so much more, even in the belts.
Exploration and Anomalies are worth much more than their comparable mission sites in hisec.
You can mine in grav sites which is startling safe if you pay attention to local and intel. You get awesome ores if you put the work in. If you pay attention to your alliance intel channel you should only have the inconvenience of having to dock up and reship for home defense or small gang hunts. Did i mention that you get an intel channel. And due to the marvelous use of color coding, you get the security of not having to guess if the ship entering local is a friend or not. It's awesome.

I'm sorry but the miner bumpers and gankers would find life very dull in nullsec. That is not to say of course that Darwin does not rear his head and take those who are too stupid to dock up or to be aligned etc...

So I will say one more time, everything I have done in Null has made me more ISK with sometimes a relative jump in risk depending on whether i have to leave blue space or not. The Highsec is broken argument is a fraud.
mentalkiller
Celestial Eyes
#26 - 2013-03-26 03:41:30 UTC
Yes everybody listen to the thoughts of a 8 month dude

/mentalKiller
Gustaf Heleneto
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#27 - 2013-03-26 03:42:10 UTC
Weiland Taur wrote:

I would love to see some real numbers to back up this argument that highsec is so easy to make ISK in. I've lived in High and Null sec and every time I lived in null I made much more ISK.

In Null...

You can moon mine which you can't do in High sec.
You get far superior planets for PI than in Highsec.
Those damned infestations of Red Crosses are worth so much more, even in the belts.
Exploration and Anomalies are worth much more than their comparable mission sites in hisec.
You can mine in grav sites which is startling safe if you pay attention to local and intel. You get awesome ores if you put the work in. If you pay attention to your alliance intel channel you should only have the inconvenience of having to dock up and reship for home defense or small gang hunts. Did i mention that you get an intel channel. And due to the marvelous use of color coding, you get the security of not having to guess if the ship entering local is a friend or not. It's awesome.

I'm sorry but the miner bumpers and gankers would find life very dull in nullsec. That is not to say of course that Darwin does not rear his head and take those who are too stupid to dock up or to be aligned etc...

So I will say one more time, everything I have done in Null has made me more ISK with sometimes a relative jump in risk depending on whether i have to leave blue space or not. The Highsec is broken argument is a fraud.


It's not fraud. Doing all that stuff is a whole lot of effort to make a comparable income to the high sec methods where you can make 100m/hr with several accounts at the same time...while reading a book and wathcing a movie, because it's that easy....but what am I saying? No, nullsec ISK is the best. Stay there.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#28 - 2013-03-26 03:42:18 UTC
Weiland Taur wrote:
The Highsec is broken argument is a fraud.
A single highsec system having more industrial capacity than an entire region of null proves you wrong.

…and that's before we get into how you casually skip over the huge cost that null will always incur as if it didn't matter.
Felicity Love
Doomheim
#29 - 2013-03-26 04:10:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Felicity Love
Some folks view NullSec as nothing more than the realm of petty dictatorships or personal fiefdoms, largely governed by a handful of clever individuals who spout "group participation" as a means to various Machiavellian ends.

Personally, I just think the food sucks, the beer ****-poor and the women waaaaaaaaay too hairy. Blink

"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
#30 - 2013-03-26 04:22:17 UTC
Stray Bullets wrote:
I don't believe that risk aversion or instant gratification addiction is the problem in high-sec. That problem is common to all parts of EVE with the possible exception of W-Space (not really sure and haven't lived there in a long while to have an opinion on it's residents).

The mission runner doesn't want to risk his shiny new toy. The low sec guys fly mostly sub BS hulls ... anything else and it's risky. Nullsec just stops the moment a neut/red comes in local. These folks went out to null to get "gud fights" and everyone is docking up as soon as there's a target in system! Awesome. Wanna talk about risk aversion? It's not exclusive to high-sec mate.


Even with that quality of player, the balance between risk vs reward is screwed. People normally attack the miners at this point. Mining is one of the few parts of EVE industry that's correctly balanced in it's risks and rewards.

ICE Mining sucks, so it's pointless to debate it any further. Mental Note to CCP: -> ICE ROCKS THAT POP! <-

High-sec will yield around 10-15mil/h for a maxed out miner.
Low-sec will yield around 20-25mil/h although you need to find a quiet system (they still exist!).
Null-sec will yield around 40/60mil/h. The 60 mil come with the rorqual bonuses and not sleeping on the job! ;)



The real tragedy comes in the absence of any sort of industry (not counting building capitals). The biggest imbalance between null-sec and high-sec is industry.

High-sec simply has everything better (regarding industry), except POCOs on PI and PI itself.

Right now it's just more efficient to building everything subcap in High-sec and then transport it down to null-sec. It's cheaper and safer. I've made a couple of suggestions in some other thread, but it's basically the list below.

Changes to empire

  • All station facilities get reduced slots (yes!) (+/- 30%)
  • All station facilities get reduced efficiency (refining at 40%, copy / R&D take 15% longer, Invention has lower success rates -10%, etc)
  • All station facilities get heavier taxing (broker fee's, setup costs for jobs, etc)


Changes to nullsec (when compared to the above high-sec)

  • All stations get a boost in slots (+/- 40%, etc)
  • All stations get a boost in efficiency (refining at 50%, copy / R&D are 15% faster, invention has higher success rates +10%, etc)


Changes to general stuff

  • POSs in 0.5/0.6 can use refineries (these need to be more efficient than refining in NPC stations)
  • Ice belts that deplete just like regular belts.
  • A cool down timer between jumps for all jump capable ships (including titan bridges), except black ops. (I'd say 10m but every JF pilot would just say "he's ******* nuts!")
  • Limit the amount of mass that a jump bridge can handle per day. (similar to WH working)



Why all these changes?

Let's start with the changes to empire. You actually get something better out of a POS. Owning a POS is more efficient than using the NPC facilities. Why? You need to risk it. You need to deploy it and defend it. It's a pure conflict driver as the moon slots will become a valued commodity. You risk more, you gain more.

NPC stations can't and won't be the building power house that they are right now as you'll have longer cues due to the lack of slots. The idea is to make it inefficient to build in high-sec while showing that null-sec is just more convenient.

Taxes as isk sinks, reduced inefficiency leads people to POSs (which drive conflict) or null-sec (which drives conflict).


The changes to null-sec. High-sec won't be able to produce at the same rate, nor can the JF pilots just flood the local market with imported goods due to the changes in jump capable ships and jump bridges for those brave ones thinking of hauling in a regular freighter plus the changes to ice belts should make the fuel prices go up, making it less inviting to jump everything in from high-sec. Imports to null-sec should come from transport ships. Everything else will become too much risk for too little reward or just nor profitable.

This will open up space for local markets, either region wide or alliance/coalition wide (like VFK is today). The point with VFK is that now it's seeded with JF imports. After this it would be seeded by local builders.

My 2 cents. Thanks for reading.


Many in low sec are not as risk averse as it may seem.
We fly cheap because we can still win flying cheap against more expensive ships.

Why use a Harpy when you can do the same job in a Merlin if you fly it properly?

Sure - we could use more blingy ships with massive tanks and boosters worth 200mil etc etc - or we can kill you with 5mil of frigates.

https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
Weiland Taur
The Icarus Expedition
Solyaris Chtonium
#31 - 2013-03-26 04:23:42 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Weiland Taur wrote:
The Highsec is broken argument is a fraud.
A single highsec system having more industrial capacity than an entire region of null proves you wrong.

…and that's before we get into how you casually skip over the huge cost that null will always incur as if it didn't matter.



What system are you talking about? Jita?

And are you counting the now seemingly endless tide of outposts going up in nullsec, (it is getting quite crowded) and POSs set up for manufacturing?

I did not mention the cost of Sov as most alliances that are doing a good job, are taking advantage of "passive" resources such as Moon Goo to pay those strange Concord bills.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#32 - 2013-03-26 04:36:20 UTC
Weiland Taur wrote:
What system are you talking about? Jita?
Jita's industrial capacity is pretty poor, so no.

Quote:
And are you counting the now seemingly endless tide of outposts going up in nullsec, (it is getting quite crowded) and POSs set up for manufacturing?
Outposts are horrid for manufacturing and can't even begin to compete with what highsec has to offer. In fact, they are at the very heart of the problem and need order-of-magnitude-scale fixes to become useful. POSes are not being used for manufacturing in null, for the same reason they're not used anywhere else either: because as bad as outposts are, POSes manage to be even worse. They're used for the things where they are the only option, and that's it.

Quote:
I did not mention the cost of Sov
…and that is not the cost I'm talking about. I'm talking about the inevitable, unavoidable interruptions — the things that cost the only real currency players have: time.
Galaxy Pig
New Order Logistics
CODE.
#33 - 2013-03-26 05:04:13 UTC
Dear, Lord.

Bad, posting.

Long, bad, posting.

Highsec is owned by players now. Systems 0.5-1.0 are New Order Territory. All miners and other residents of Highsec must obey The Code. Mining without a permit is dangerous and harmful to the EVE community. See www.MinerBumping.com
Domina Trix
McKNOBBLER DRINKING CLAN
#34 - 2013-03-26 05:51:56 UTC
Gustaf Heleneto wrote:


You can't farm null incursions like high incursions. HS incursions are the same pilots traveling from incursion to incursion. you can't do that in null. If you are lucky enough to have one spawn in your space you can make some money off it but you can't count on it as an income source like you can in high sec. Also, you have to consider hostile threats, cloaky campers in system, and all the other things that make you halt operations for periods of time in nullsec. And yes, 120m an hour is the new standard in high sec, and more is possible. You can down TCRCs with 12 minutes from payout to payout with a halfway decent group.


Oh no, you might have to actually do some pvp hopping between incursions. Is that not the reason you are in null in the first place?

Quote:
On paper those numbers look nice but consider that you cannot mine anytime you want. Your system could be shut down for weeks with a cloaky that wants to camp you. Move somewhere else? He moves too, or gets his buddy to join him. And again T2 production isn't always something that a pilot can do. Many of the high income moons are going to be owned by the alliance and that junk is going to be hauled to high sec and sold, or maybe used by the alliance level indy guy with 16 alts.


Again with the pvp being a problem. Take escorts, the attackers bring friends to deal with the escorts and it escalates into a fleet battle over resources, isn't that what null is supposed to be about. Not everyone blue to everyone else which seems to be a common complaint here on the forums.

Quote:


This may be true...nullsec could be improved by more organization on a higher level by the power blocs. But who is going to do that?! People already spend more time keeping the nullsec infrastructure alive than they do at their occupations!

Nullsec looks really great until you get out there and and try to make the ISK you think people make. Even if you do achieve an isk/hr rate that's comparable to highsec you are still risking everything just by bi


There is the problem,players seem to want to be dragging in the billions that the large corporations and alliances do but forget that they built those alliances up over time which comes back to the OPs original point of instant gratification. Why does it matter what isk/hour another player is making? you do not "win" EVE by being the richest player or corporation. Null sec isn't supposed to be a blue donut of isk-farms, those resources such as moons, morphite etc are there as an incentive to go to nullsec and fight over, not sit there more pvp-adverse than the most carebear hi-sec miner.

Two of the defining characteristics of a carebear are wanting other players to play the way the carebear wants and whining on the forums for the game to change when they don't. Yet I see more threads on these forums from gankers than I do miners whining about wanting the game changed to suit them.
Gustaf Heleneto
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#35 - 2013-03-26 06:02:52 UTC
Domina Trix wrote:
Gustaf Heleneto wrote:


You can't farm null incursions like high incursions. HS incursions are the same pilots traveling from incursion to incursion. you can't do that in null. If you are lucky enough to have one spawn in your space you can make some money off it but you can't count on it as an income source like you can in high sec. Also, you have to consider hostile threats, cloaky campers in system, and all the other things that make you halt operations for periods of time in nullsec. And yes, 120m an hour is the new standard in high sec, and more is possible. You can down TCRCs with 12 minutes from payout to payout with a halfway decent group.


Oh no, you might have to actually do some pvp hopping between incursions. Is that not the reason you are in null in the first place?

Quote:
On paper those numbers look nice but consider that you cannot mine anytime you want. Your system could be shut down for weeks with a cloaky that wants to camp you. Move somewhere else? He moves too, or gets his buddy to join him. And again T2 production isn't always something that a pilot can do. Many of the high income moons are going to be owned by the alliance and that junk is going to be hauled to high sec and sold, or maybe used by the alliance level indy guy with 16 alts.


Again with the pvp being a problem. Take escorts, the attackers bring friends to deal with the escorts and it escalates into a fleet battle over resources, isn't that what null is supposed to be about. Not everyone blue to everyone else which seems to be a common complaint here on the forums.

Quote:


This may be true...nullsec could be improved by more organization on a higher level by the power blocs. But who is going to do that?! People already spend more time keeping the nullsec infrastructure alive than they do at their occupations!

Nullsec looks really great until you get out there and and try to make the ISK you think people make. Even if you do achieve an isk/hr rate that's comparable to highsec you are still risking everything just by bi


There is the problem,players seem to want to be dragging in the billions that the large corporations and alliances do but forget that they built those alliances up over time which comes back to the OPs original point of instant gratification. Why does it matter what isk/hour another player is making? you do not "win" EVE by being the richest player or corporation. Null sec isn't supposed to be a blue donut of isk-farms, those resources such as moons, morphite etc are there as an incentive to go to nullsec and fight over, not sit there more pvp-adverse than the most carebear hi-sec miner.

Your post reeks of inexperience...I don't like that smell...
Lin Suizei
#36 - 2013-03-26 06:44:46 UTC
IbanezLaney wrote:
Many in low sec are not as risk averse as it may seem.


The number of people in lowsec (and infact, all of EVE) who actually play in a non-risk-averse manner with regards to how they fly their spaceships is so few that it may as well just be a statistical anomaly.

Let's face it, risk averse gameplay is enabled and rewarded by EVE's broken rules, and smart people (plex farmers, wardec evaders, npc-corp miners, everyone who docks up as soon as a neut or red enters the system) take advantage of it to enrich themselves, as they should.

Lol I can't delete my forum sig.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#37 - 2013-03-26 07:54:34 UTC
Felicity Love wrote:
Some folks view NullSec as nothing more than the realm of petty dictatorships or personal fiefdoms, largely governed by a handful of clever individuals who spout "group participation" as a means to various Machiavellian ends.


Shame they're wrong.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Josef Djugashvilis
#38 - 2013-03-26 09:15:56 UTC
CCP intend to adjust industry in the summer expansion.

Wait for that, then whinge that your favoured play area in the game is still being hard done by.

This is not a signature.
Setaceous
Nexus Prima
#39 - 2013-03-26 10:02:19 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
CCP intend to adjust industry in the summer expansion.

Wait for that, then whinge that your favoured play area in the game is still being hard done by.

I'm sure they will. The natural human condition is to have everything for yourself at the expense of everyone else. Let's face it, we're pretty much still just monkeys with big brains that enable us to be far more creative in taking what we want.
Draydin Warsong
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#40 - 2013-03-26 10:52:10 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Weiland Taur wrote:
The Highsec is broken argument is a fraud.
A single highsec system having more industrial capacity than an entire region of null proves you wrong.

…and that's before we get into how you casually skip over the huge cost that null will always incur as if it didn't matter.


I agree with the need to bump industrial capacity in Null but how is the huge cost of Null NOT the Sov holders fault? The SOV holders that CHOOSE to amass a ridiculous amount of unused systems for whatever reason and hence choose to have enormous Sov bills. Paying for vast tracts of unused space isn’t exactly business efficient. If the ones complaining would stick with more reasonable amount of space based on their ability to both pay SOV and provide for their members this argument wouldn’t exist.
I would argue that SOV in its current state is not expensive enough ( I could afford to pay for a single system, fully upgraded including cyno jammers every month just through trading…by myself..it’s too cheap). To me it needs to be so expensive that an alliance would need to think long and hard on exactly how much they want to claim that system rather than just throw out it current inhabitants and burn their stuff. I imagine it on a exponential scale sliding ever upwards (IE 1st 5 systems are 100 Mil a month, next 5 systems 200 Mil a month, next 5 400 Mil, next 5 800 Mil…prices could be adjusted but you get the picture).