These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why nerf high sec?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#481 - 2013-07-24 14:38:30 UTC
Manfred Hideous wrote:



There are areas in null where you can make a fortune ratting in a super (though think of the difference in cost when some awoxer gets said super)

Most of null, or at least a very large minority of systems aren't that much better than lowsec. Not every system is a -0.5 or below. These sub par systems are the ones most in need of a buff as it's these areas that have large numbers of pilots using missioning alts to afford PVP.

Yes, this would inject more isk into the game and yes, it would affect the highsec market but having that happen isn't exactly bad for eve. The real isk would be in null, where it should be. If nullseccers with deep pockets drive up prices in highsec, then that's not much different than all of the T1 hulls doubling (at least) in cost because CCP increased mineral requirements.


This is ignoring history.

CCP's 1st upgrade system allowed ANY system to have sanctums, havens and "named" hubs (forlorn, hidden, forsaken). CCP's expressed reason for the very 1st anom nerf was that "space was too even". On top of that, there were statistics in the quarterly updates and such that showed just how crazy to isk generation from null sec was, and that was because of anoms and the ability to upgrade any system to be good.

So they nerfed it. A bit too hard, so months later they came back with the "EHP/ISK" buff to anoms. it was good, but it turned forsaken hubs from cool little anoms with no frigs to OMGWTF isk generators. I hated that because i did forsaekn hubs way beofre this buff, after the buff I had to compete with TITANS for them...

So here comes another round of nerfing (of Titans and super carriers, nd then lastly of forsaken hubs which now have 2 minor frigate spawns, still good sites but not like they were for big ships). No the anom/military upgrade system is pretty ok, but generally for 1 ship the average isk/hr income isn't that much higher than high sec level 4s (which I've tested by using a machariel in serp, sansha and blood raiders anoms vs the same mach in lvl 4 high sec missions).

Which is why I say CCP CAN'T buff null (at least when it comes to combat PVE), because we've already been there and it was a disaster or epic proportions. The only sane way to lessen the imbalance is to nerf high sec stuff, but that opens a whole 'nother can of worms.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#482 - 2013-07-24 14:45:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Malcanis wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:


Malcanis do you even play in HS?



We hit less than 0.001% of all freighter traffic a month.


Maybe, but you guys are very good at killing freighters and at times you go on killing sprees based around your scurity status, so at times it is high risk, also you ply this trade in certain systems that you have to use, like Uedama. So moving stuff around which does not require using those systems is low risk, but moving through those bottleneck systems is high risk, especially around certain TZ's.


What do you think the risk of moving a freighter around 0.0 is, in comparison?


Minimal, you Titan bridge it!

Edit: In terms of your previous comment, I have seen a large number of faction fitted faction BS in 0.0.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#483 - 2013-07-24 14:53:58 UTC
Quote:
No the anom/military upgrade system is pretty ok, but generally for 1 ship the average isk/hr income isn't that much higher than high sec level 4s (which I've tested by using a machariel in serp, sansha and blood raiders anoms vs the same mach in lvl 4 high sec missions).


Hopefully I helped in making you be more specific, as a single ship which cannot do the higher escalations, but I still disagree with this because in a system in 0.0 you warp to the next Sanctum or Haven, in missions you have to warp back from perhaps 4 systems out finish mission then adjust fit, then warp 4 systems out to the next one, all adds up after all time is money...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Manfred Hideous
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#484 - 2013-07-24 14:55:13 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Manfred Hideous wrote:



There are areas in null where you can make a fortune ratting in a super (though think of the difference in cost when some awoxer gets said super)

Most of null, or at least a very large minority of systems aren't that much better than lowsec. Not every system is a -0.5 or below. These sub par systems are the ones most in need of a buff as it's these areas that have large numbers of pilots using missioning alts to afford PVP.

Yes, this would inject more isk into the game and yes, it would affect the highsec market but having that happen isn't exactly bad for eve. The real isk would be in null, where it should be. If nullseccers with deep pockets drive up prices in highsec, then that's not much different than all of the T1 hulls doubling (at least) in cost because CCP increased mineral requirements.


This is ignoring history.

CCP's 1st upgrade system allowed ANY system to have sanctums, havens and "named" hubs (forlorn, hidden, forsaken). CCP's expressed reason for the very 1st anom nerf was that "space was too even". On top of that, there were statistics in the quarterly updates and such that showed just how crazy to isk generation from null sec was, and that was because of anoms and the ability to upgrade any system to be good.

So they nerfed it. A bit too hard, so months later they came back with the "EHP/ISK" buff to anoms. it was good, but it turned forsaken hubs from cool little anoms with no frigs to OMGWTF isk generators. I hated that because i did forsaekn hubs way beofre this buff, after the buff I had to compete with TITANS for them...

So here comes another round of nerfing (of Titans and super carriers, nd then lastly of forsaken hubs which now have 2 minor frigate spawns, still good sites but not like they were for big ships). No the anom/military upgrade system is pretty ok, but generally for 1 ship the average isk/hr income isn't that much higher than high sec level 4s (which I've tested by using a machariel in serp, sansha and blood raiders anoms vs the same mach in lvl 4 high sec missions).

Which is why I say CCP CAN'T buff null (at least when it comes to combat PVE), because we've already been there and it was a disaster or epic proportions. The only sane way to lessen the imbalance is to nerf high sec stuff, but that opens a whole 'nother can of worms.


How am I ignoring history? I disagree with the conclusion that the disasters were of epic proportion.

One of the biggest (if not THE biggest) nerf to null was making BS hulls all cost 2.5 to 3 times as much. In the null areas I specifically mentioned this means without an SRP, the ability of an individual pilot to participate in fleet fights is greatly reduced... unless he moves an alt to HS where he can mission in relative peace.

Stack this with the heavy nerfing of anoms and null loses the risk:reward to highsec. Personally, I don't think a nerf to HS would be a good idea. You can't encourage many HS people to move to null because they don't want to play at that level of risk whatever the potential profit (which isn't great for individual pilots anyway). These are the ones who would unsub before they moved to null and I'd prefer not to see subs crash.

The only answer is to make null more viable. The station changes were a step in the right direction but IMO not nearly enough. What someone in CCP needs to do is take a character to GW or Provi (or any number of other ****** sec areas) and rat while dodging reds. Do this for a few days to see what the average isk/hour actually is. Then go to HS and run level 4 missions for a few days. Then they could determine a scale of rewards based on sec status and change the anoms to reflect that.

Really lowsec areas could be buffed by having better occurrence and rate and loot tables for faction spawns, say 2.5% vs 1% (or whatever the chances actually are). Really low null already has the bonuses of better ore everywhere and I would imagine (but CBA to check) better moons in larger numbers.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#485 - 2013-07-24 15:02:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Quote:
The only sane way to lessen the imbalance is to nerf high sec stuff, but that opens a whole 'nother can of whine.


Fixed it.

My personal thought on this is, it needs to be gradual, a piece at a time, just like how everything except highsec has been nerfed over the years. (Insurance, can flipping, boomerang, barges)

First, we start by making NPC corporations incredibly unwise choices for older players. After the first 30 days of active account, NPC corp tax is raised to 30% or so* This keeps people from hiding in NPC corps their entire lives. (it has no effect on noobs, since "but that will hurt the newbies!" is the rallying cry against nerfing highsec)

*Debating whether this should apply to FW NPC corps too, it has ups and downs both ways

After this, we increase CONCORD response time by 1 sec across the board.

Then, I'd like to see public kill rights (on second thought, corporation/alliance killrights, for the aggressing party) generated against people who leave a corp during a war.

Because that's the real problem with highsec. The intended highsec method to PvP is completely, utterly trivial. It needs to have teeth, and until it does, highsec cannot be balanced.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#486 - 2013-07-24 15:18:52 UTC
Manfred Hideous wrote:


One of the biggest (if not THE biggest) nerf to null was making BS hulls all cost 2.5 to 3 times as much


When did they do that?
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#487 - 2013-07-24 15:20:09 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Quote:
No the anom/military upgrade system is pretty ok, but generally for 1 ship the average isk/hr income isn't that much higher than high sec level 4s (which I've tested by using a machariel in serp, sansha and blood raiders anoms vs the same mach in lvl 4 high sec missions).


Hopefully I helped in making you be more specific, as a single ship which cannot do the higher escalations, but I still disagree with this because in a system in 0.0 you warp to the next Sanctum or Haven, in missions you have to warp back from perhaps 4 systems out finish mission then adjust fit, then warp 4 systems out to the next one, all adds up after all time is money...


You again. you still know you don't have enough experience to say what you say right.

For you information, a single ship can do every single DED 10/10 except Blood Raider naval Shipyard. it wasn't for lack of trying, I did almost complete it with a level 5 mission fit totally passive loki, but had to warp out. A single Tengu can do the MAZE, Centus Assembly, Angel Cartel Naval Ship Yard and Serp shipyard too. i've done each of them, repeatedly. The only 10/10 i haven't done is the drone one.

In addition, what you say about missions is incorrect. Yes you have time sinks like having to dock to complete, or having to retrieve items. But in null sec you have sinks like neutrals in system (which means either dock up, or, as i tend to do, fit to resist them, but fitting to resist them can cost you dps as stabs are low slot systems and a MJD for example takes up space on my machariel I'd use for a tracking computer).

I urge you to continue to learn more about high end PVE outside of drone regions and a few Blood Raider Naval Shipyards before commenting on it further.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#488 - 2013-07-24 15:23:26 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


Then, I'd like to see public kill rights (on second thought, corporation/alliance killrights, for the aggressing party) generated against people who leave a corp during a war.

Because that's the real problem with highsec. The intended highsec method to PvP is completely, utterly trivial. It needs to have teeth, and until it does, highsec cannot be balanced.


Best idea for that is to have the wardec follow that pilot for however long was left on the wardec timer or have them pay a 50% NPC corp tax on everything they earn for however long was on their wardeced corp.

A corp would also not be able to scrape off a wardec on a ghost alliance to save their tower.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#489 - 2013-07-24 15:28:58 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


Then, I'd like to see public kill rights (on second thought, corporation/alliance killrights, for the aggressing party) generated against people who leave a corp during a war.

Because that's the real problem with highsec. The intended highsec method to PvP is completely, utterly trivial. It needs to have teeth, and until it does, highsec cannot be balanced.


Best idea for that is to have the wardec follow that pilot for however long was left on the wardec timer or have them pay a 50% NPC corp tax on everything they earn for however long was on their wardeced corp.

A corp would also not be able to scrape off a wardec on a ghost alliance to save their tower.


Ah, interesting idea. I wonder though, about the feasibility of keeping a permanent flag on someone, though. Hence the easier to implement killrights possibility.

But it's past overdue. Wardecs are almost pointless, and it needs reworked before we can really talk about highsec. Once it's fixed? Then we might see the whole risk vs reward being massively skewed towards highsec start to be redressed.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#490 - 2013-07-24 15:29:46 UTC
Manfred Hideous wrote:


How am I ignoring history? I disagree with the conclusion that the disasters were of epic proportion.


That's basically ccp's conclusion, as evidenced by the nerfs. Did you see the chart they had displaying where bountes came from.

it was so bad they were last year talking about a 20% reduction in NPC bounties. That's in a video somewhere, pre-fanfest, i'll look for it for you when I get home.

Given recent history I just don't see CCP doing much to buff grunt level combat pve income, because when they did that before, it set off alarm bells. Anything a gunt null sec player can use to keep himself in ships, a nullbear can farm to the extreme.

I know, I am that nullbear lol.
CanI haveyourstuff
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#491 - 2013-07-24 15:30:12 UTC  |  Edited by: CanI haveyourstuff
you guys are delusional and really dumb Big smile sorry

if this happens, you will not be able to kill them... cuz problably they are someone alt, mostly.
therefore everyone will be set to blue eventually or you'll get blown up by your alliance members soon enough for revenge.

new ppl will just quit game and thats that... not good for ccp. Also many alts will be unsubbed.. again not good for ccp.


what you guys want is just to have more targets to shoot at Big smile admit it already and move on with some better ideas, how to fix solo small gang pvp.

eve doesnt need to be some 10+ man fleet game... it never was meant to be one, but you have option.
Sandbox...
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#492 - 2013-07-24 15:34:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
CanI haveyourstuff wrote:
you guys are delusional and really dumb Big smile sorry

if this happens, you will not be able to kill them... cuz problably they are someone alt, mostly.
therefore everyone will be set to blue eventually or you'll get blown up by your alliance members soon enough for revenge.

new ppl will just quit game and thats that... not good for ccp. Also many alts will be unsubbed.. again not good for ccp.


what you guys want is just to have more targets to shoot at Big smile admit it already and move on with some better ideas, how to fix solo small gang pvp.

eve doesnt need to be some 10+ man fleet game... it never was meant to be one, but you have option.
Sandbox...


This is an idiotic statement.

Also, take off the tinfoil hat. The "everyone is someone's nullsec alt" conspiracy has long since been disproven.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#493 - 2013-07-24 15:38:54 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Quote:
No the anom/military upgrade system is pretty ok, but generally for 1 ship the average isk/hr income isn't that much higher than high sec level 4s (which I've tested by using a machariel in serp, sansha and blood raiders anoms vs the same mach in lvl 4 high sec missions).


Hopefully I helped in making you be more specific, as a single ship which cannot do the higher escalations, but I still disagree with this because in a system in 0.0 you warp to the next Sanctum or Haven, in missions you have to warp back from perhaps 4 systems out finish mission then adjust fit, then warp 4 systems out to the next one, all adds up after all time is money...


You again. you still know you don't have enough experience to say what you say right.

For you information, a single ship can do every single DED 10/10 except Blood Raider naval Shipyard. it wasn't for lack of trying, I did almost complete it with a level 5 mission fit totally passive loki, but had to warp out. A single Tengu can do the MAZE, Centus Assembly, Angel Cartel Naval Ship Yard and Serp shipyard too. i've done each of them, repeatedly. The only 10/10 i haven't done is the drone one.

In addition, what you say about missions is incorrect. Yes you have time sinks like having to dock to complete, or having to retrieve items. But in null sec you have sinks like neutrals in system (which means either dock up, or, as i tend to do, fit to resist them, but fitting to resist them can cost you dps as stabs are low slot systems and a MJD for example takes up space on my machariel I'd use for a tracking computer).

I urge you to continue to learn more about high end PVE outside of drone regions and a few Blood Raider Naval Shipyards before commenting on it further.


Hold on your esteemed leader said that you (Initiative )don't use faction fitted or deadspace faction BS, sorry for taking your esteemed leaders word for it, hold on he was talking about himself. Of course you can if you are using something like that, though the Drone one is really DPS based you need over 1,200 sustained DPS to kill the mother.

Oh the experience thing, I have clearly laid out my experience and the holes in it, acknowledged your correctioon on the value of the non-drone 10/10's. I have run a huge anount of level 4's in my time in game, gone through multiple Sanctums etc. I made much more ISK in 0.0 but admit that I do not triple box Incursions and only can bear so many level 4's before suicide bcomes an option, that is my experience, I have had three officer spawns, I have lost count on how many faction spawns I have had, and yet you try to paint me as some noob, which is funny as hell.

0.0 apart from triple boxing incursions is more profitable than HS, you get faction spawns every so often and escalations and you do not have to jump back to the agent and then warp back to the mission that can be 4 jumps out having refitted.

Apart from Incursions 0.0 is much more protitable in terms of rat derived ISk generation and if you get a good quiet system which I had in Cobalt Edge you can make as much as incursions if you do it right.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Manfred Hideous
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#494 - 2013-07-24 15:39:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Manfred Hideous
baltec1 wrote:
Manfred Hideous wrote:


One of the biggest (if not THE biggest) nerf to null was making BS hulls all cost 2.5 to 3 times as much


When did they do that?


Tiericide. When they added the non refinable extra materials to the BPs Phoons that used to cost 50-60M now run 125M (Rens sell price). I'm not really all that put out by the new cost but the isk earned in null didn't grow even a little to offset the new cost.

Jenn aSide wrote:
Manfred Hideous wrote:


How am I ignoring history? I disagree with the conclusion that the disasters were of epic proportion.


That's basically ccp's conclusion, as evidenced by the nerfs. Did you see the chart they had displaying where bountes came from.

it was so bad they were last year talking about a 20% reduction in NPC bounties. That's in a video somewhere, pre-fanfest, i'll look for it for you when I get home.

Given recent history I just don't see CCP doing much to buff grunt level combat pve income, because when they did that before, it set off alarm bells. Anything a gunt null sec player can use to keep himself in ships, a nullbear can farm to the extreme.

I know, I am that nullbear lol.


I'm OK with the idea that a nullbear can use the system to get mega-rich if the result is that grunts can afford to lose ships. Actually, your mentioning the bounties is a good place to look at buffs. You don't have to add back the deleted anoms if you make bounties sec level dependent. HS providing the base bounties and scaling them up as sec level drops.

Remember also that CCP stated their intention was being able to support dozens of people in a single system when they invented the iHub upgrades. Outside of the best space, that's simply not the case.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#495 - 2013-07-24 15:45:19 UTC
Manfred Hideous wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Manfred Hideous wrote:


One of the biggest (if not THE biggest) nerf to null was making BS hulls all cost 2.5 to 3 times as much


When did they do that?


Tiericide. When they added the non refinable extra materials to the BPs Phoons that used to cost 50-60M now run 125M (Rens sell price). I'm not really all that put out by the new cost but the isk earned in null didn't grow even a little to offset the new cost.


The bulk of the megathrons extra cost came from when we had runaway inflation thanks to incursions. The extra costs put on only makes them as expensive as the old teir 3 BS were.

Which highlights why we cant just buff null and low as that would damage the game.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#496 - 2013-07-24 15:51:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
baltec1 wrote:
Manfred Hideous wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Manfred Hideous wrote:


One of the biggest (if not THE biggest) nerf to null was making BS hulls all cost 2.5 to 3 times as much


When did they do that?


Tiericide. When they added the non refinable extra materials to the BPs Phoons that used to cost 50-60M now run 125M (Rens sell price). I'm not really all that put out by the new cost but the isk earned in null didn't grow even a little to offset the new cost.


The bulk of the megathrons extra cost came from when we had runaway inflation thanks to incursions. The extra costs put on only makes them as expensive as the old teir 3 BS were.

Which highlights why we cant just buff null and low as that would damage the game.


He talked about the increased minerals cost, that was applied to the BS's not the inflation from Incursions which really only impacted bling stuff to the benefit of 0.0 players by the way.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Afuran
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#497 - 2013-07-24 16:05:11 UTC
Throwing in my opinion because wtf not?....


The whole system in Eve is-> ISK for risk.

The more you risk the bigger the rewards should be if you manage to pull it off.

The more effort and time you put into building up your own empire, the more rewards you should get if you can defend it.

High sec is the total opposite-

very little risk, no time or effort is needed to build up your own empire- just use the empires' stations and factories etc...

no need to defend any territory....

taxes should be high- empires should be eating into your profits and trying to control pod pilots for their own gains.


Pilots who go out to low, null and w- space should be risking their pods and ships to build up their own corner of the galaxy and fighting to defend it with no help from NPCs.

Its these pilots that should be getting the biggest rewards and the comfy high sec guys should be getting poorer rewards.

Does that make sense?

Im not saying there should be no high sec- there should be parts of the game that cater for all different ways people want to play the game- I just think high sec should be more restrictive and less rewarding than the dangerous parts of space.
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#498 - 2013-07-24 16:11:17 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
What I don’t get is you have all these people like jenn and others in other threads with topics against ganking and afk cloaking and the like telling others to stop crying stop asking for change to HTFU and deal with it sand box blaaah blaaah blaa. They non-stop troll people until they finally just get fed up and stop posting.


That's just you being butt hurt. I won't speak for anyone else, But I have never failed to tell the truth as I've seen it, and defense of the truth should and MUST be vigorous lest lies prevail.

But, rather than think more about what you post, or try to understand why i oppose what you say, you just skulk off in full boooty pain mode, like I did something wrong.

No sir, it was you, every time.

Quote:

Yet they jump in threads like this one and doe exactly what they criticize and berate other posters for doing.

Let’s call this exactly what it is…. hypocrisy.

The average player plays eve and never worries with the forum. I know from past experience it’s the squeaky wheel that gets the grease.

I for one don’t want to see these people like jenn get their way and ruin the game. They can’t see past their own noses to see that it’s all tied together and that in order for null/low sec to work hi-sec needs to thrive regardless of the risk vs. reward.


Just wanted to quote that part so I could show everyone the butt hurt part.

Quote:

Hell 99% of null use hi-sec to fund their ships loss. I know I do.


This is the meat of the matter. Even you can see the imbalance. WHY are so many people using high sec to fund their activites when null has all kinds of PVE?

it's because null also has a much higher danger potential (as it should). Their are 2 fixes to the imbalance:

buff null and low- This doesn't work because EVERY time ccp did that, it went bad. "Titans in Forsaken hubs with scimitars track linking them" bad. "Throwaway frigs making billions in FW" bad.

It was great for me and people like me, but bad for the game. So we understood when ccp nerfed us (multiple times)I

The other option is to carve up some of the ridicules stuff in high sec, soo much "free" stuff it's crazy. That's a better option for the game because (whilst we tend to hate it) nerfing is good as is prevents power creep.

My bet is that, at the end of the day because CCP basically painted themselves into a corner (they know they can't buff rewards out of high sec but nerfing high sec will cause serious community problems), nothing is really ever going to change and we'll have to end up living with the imbalance....

But it is an imbalance and eve you can see that.


Also, thanks for mentioning my name so many times. Means I own you, and you need to get back to your shed before I get my strap, I don't like uppity slaves Independent contract employees.

I dont feel null has higher risk per say (sea of blue) just I can do the things I need to do in hi-sec and be more relaxed because I cant process all the data in hi-sec anyway like I can in null. Normaly I run anomolies in null while I mine in hi-sec on my alt. I also manufacture in hi-sec.

I do think the profit in null would be greater should I take my alt to null but it would not be convenient (logistics) and has the potential to have income disrupted.


There is no butthurt here jenn. Only tired of your hypocrisy.
Manfred Hideous
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#499 - 2013-07-24 16:14:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Manfred Hideous
baltec1 wrote:
Manfred Hideous wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Manfred Hideous wrote:


One of the biggest (if not THE biggest) nerf to null was making BS hulls all cost 2.5 to 3 times as much


When did they do that?


Tiericide. When they added the non refinable extra materials to the BPs Phoons that used to cost 50-60M now run 125M (Rens sell price). I'm not really all that put out by the new cost but the isk earned in null didn't grow even a little to offset the new cost.


The bulk of the megathrons extra cost came from when we had runaway inflation thanks to incursions. The extra costs put on only makes them as expensive as the old teir 3 BS were.

Which highlights why we cant just buff null and low as that would damage the game.


I'm actually speaking of the prices now vs the pre incursions (and not just megas). CCP might have done better to average out all of the ships' material requirements instead of making all of them tier 3 equivalents.

We probably won't agree on whether buffing rat bounties would damage the game. It's too subjective what constitutes damage, though I'll acknowledge CCP agrees with you more than with me.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#500 - 2013-07-24 16:46:51 UTC
Nullsec wants to be highsec. All this talk of ISK ISK and more ISK shows that nullsecers are just as bearing and wallet-watching as a highseccer who refused to tank his hulk because it might reduce yield .01 percent.


Bring back DEEEEP Space!