These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Do Level 4 missions pay too much compared to 1 through 3?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#801 - 2013-09-07 13:16:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
baltec1 wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Concord doesn't stop ships from being blown up to the degree you imply. It does raise the requirements more than null ill grant you.

But high sec also lacks the ability to use Capitals and such that nullsec has so i'm not sure if our hull limitations can be ignored when determining safety.

I use no alts, nor do I troll in the manner you suggest.


We dont use capitals to rat. Only the foolish do that. Incidently, you can out damage a carrier with some of the subcap fits used in high sec missions.


Which sub capital out tanks a titan?

Or are you implying ehp has zero to do with safety and that sub capitals tank just as well?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#802 - 2013-09-07 13:18:16 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Concord doesn't stop ships from being blown up to the degree you imply. It does raise the requirements more than null ill grant you.

But high sec also lacks the ability to use Capitals and such that nullsec has so i'm not sure if our hull limitations can be ignored when determining safety.

I use no alts, nor do I troll in the manner you suggest.


We dont use capitals to rat. Only the foolish do that. Incidently, you can out damage a carrier with some of the subcap fits used in high sec missions.


Which sub capital out tanks a titan?

Or are you implying ehp has zero to do with safety and that sub capitals tank just as well?


Titans aren't useful (and certainly aren't sensible) ratting platforms any more since the tracking nerf.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#803 - 2013-09-07 13:24:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Then you don't need access to a ship that's not useful. Since carriers damage is also subpar to sub-capitals in lucrative isk making opportunities I submit we get rid of all capital ships and bring EVE to having just sub-capitals.

I doubt i'll have a nullsec constituency for that though.

That will fix many issues with EVE including the one where a high sec alliance is told to use those sub capitals to unseat a nullsec empire that holds those ships.

I assume as CSM you'll point that out.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#804 - 2013-09-07 13:30:23 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Then you don't need access to a ship that's not useful. Since carriers damage is also subpar to sub-capitals in lucrative isk making opportunities I submit we get rid of all capital ships and bring EVE to having just sub-capitals.

I doubt i'll have a nullsec constituency for that though.


Why would we get rid of our capital RR boats?
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#805 - 2013-09-07 13:31:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Because they provide no benefit to your isk making activities and do not enhance your nullsec safety?
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#806 - 2013-09-07 13:32:52 UTC
I think that is the dumbest reply I've ever read.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#807 - 2013-09-07 13:36:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
No, its actually quite ingenious. It forces the opposition to consider how to defend being able to use more resilient ships while claiming others safer.




Ingenious
1 - clever, original, and inventive.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#808 - 2013-09-07 13:40:49 UTC
"you can't do pve in it? what's the point of that?"

- carebears
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#809 - 2013-09-07 13:41:28 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Because they provide no benefit to your isk making activities and do not enhance your nullsec safety?


Well this is a new level of stupid from you.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#810 - 2013-09-07 13:42:39 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
No, its actually quite ingenious. It forces the opposition to consider how to defend being able to use more resilient ships while claiming others safer.




Ingenious
1 - clever, original, and inventive.



yeah everything you are not and?
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#811 - 2013-09-07 13:44:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Its okay fellas. I understand I've stumped your logic. Feel free at this point to proceed with ad-hominems and fallacious non arguments.

Im used to it. If I wanted to get along it would be just as easy for me to take your side of the argument and do so.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#812 - 2013-09-07 13:45:41 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

We are starting none of these threads however we will not stand by while people demand tbat we be nerfed yet again because they refuse to take any steps to protect themselves.

As for mission income, we simply ask that null and low offer more reward for the higher risk we face. We want to live in null but so long as high sec offers the same or higher reward we find its just not worth it.


Ah, by reading the "Do Level 4 missions pay too much compared to 1 through 3?" I thought this was not exactly the thread where nerfs are called on you.

Imo EvE is more or less fine as is and actually they overnerfed miners ganking. The "dynamically spawn anoms" mechanic, as I said several times in the past, HAS impacted more the gankers than their targets.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#813 - 2013-09-07 13:49:28 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

We are starting none of these threads however we will not stand by while people demand tbat we be nerfed yet again because they refuse to take any steps to protect themselves.

As for mission income, we simply ask that null and low offer more reward for the higher risk we face. We want to live in null but so long as high sec offers the same or higher reward we find its just not worth it.


Ah, by reading the "Do Level 4 missions pay too much compared to 1 through 3?" I thought this was not exactly the thread where nerfs are called on you.

Imo EvE is more or less fine as is and actually they overnerfed miners ganking. The "dynamically spawn anoms" mechanic, as I said several times in the past, HAS impacted more the gankers than their targets.


We adapted. Its now time for high sec to adapt to some much needed nerfs to further balance the game.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#814 - 2013-09-07 13:50:16 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Because they provide no benefit to your isk making activities and do not enhance your nullsec safety?


Well this is a new level of stupid from you.


That's quite the argument you've made their Baltec.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#815 - 2013-09-07 13:51:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Its time for nullsec to receive the nerf its due. Its time for nullsec to adapt to the nerfs so that we may further balance the game based on real risk and not a subjectively applied version of said risk.

As we know nullsec has received nerfs recently that CCP felt justified in doing and there are more to come. Its time to man up and accept what's best for the game.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#816 - 2013-09-07 13:52:53 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Then you don't need access to a ship that's not useful.


Titans have uses outside of PvE, if you can conceive of such a thing.

Seriously, do you never tire of publically humiliating yourself by speaking loudly about matters about which you know little or nothing, and then being immediately shown to be incontrovertibly wrong? Is it a sex fetish thing or what?

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#817 - 2013-09-07 13:53:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Onictus
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


Ah, by reading the "Do Level 4 missions pay too much compared to 1 through 3?" I thought this was not exactly the thread where nerfs are called on you.



No actually the argument is weather or no hi sec income is too high compared to null.

...and it is by a long shot
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#818 - 2013-09-07 13:53:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Malcanis wrote:


Titans have uses outside of PvE, if you can conceive of such a thing.

Seriously, do you never tire of publically humiliating yourself by speaking loudly about matters about which you know little or nothing, and then being immediately shown to be incontrovertibly wrong? Is it a sex fetish thing or what?


To shoot other titans whos only justification for existence can be the existence of another titan? Circular reasoning is circular.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#819 - 2013-09-07 13:53:59 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Its time for nullsec to receive the nerf its due. Its time for nullsec to adapt to the nerfs so that we may further balance the game based on real risk and not a subjectively applied version of said risk.

As we know nullsec has received nerfs recently that CCP felt justified in doing and there are more to come. Its time to man up and accept what's best for the game.


Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Hisec is safer than null security and that's working as intended. The level of safety is subjective.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#820 - 2013-09-07 13:54:04 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Its time for nullsec to receive the nerf its due. Its time for nullsec to adapt to the nerfs so that we may further balance the game based on real risk and not a subjectively applied version of said risk.

As we know nullsec has received nerfs recently that CCP felt justified in doing and there are more to come. Its time to man up and accept what's best for the game.


We have taken 4 years of nerfs while high sec has had none.