EVE General Discussion

It isn't , it doesn't and that's the fallacy here.

Null holds so much more potential for isk. It's there, that's where the empires are made.

PL didn't become PL by doing missions, goons didn't become goons by doing missions.

What people are crying about is how easy it is for an individual to make isk in high sec. That will never ever change due to the lack of conflict in high sec. You can compare wealth, certainly, but not with any meaningful context here and not as long as people will pretend there isn't isk to be made in null (there is).

Just because they aren't making doesn't make it not so. And if there is an inherent inability for the null empires to sustain themselves in null, it has nothing to do with the wealth in high sec and everything to do with null mechanics.

If it wasn't the case, then every empire built in this game would have been built with level 4 mission alts.

(spoiler: they aren't and they weren't)

This is a blatant ball.

As I posted pages ago I and Kerfira pushed for a past nerf and indeed in 2010 and 2011 the missions got nerfed, multiple times.
Then L5 missions got moved to low sec, what's that, a null sec nerf?
Subsequently we also pushed for an incursions nerf and it came. "none to hi sec" LOL.



Also you are dodging my previous question: "How little should a L4 yield for you to be happy and stop spamming these forums since years?"

Just type down an amount so we can all laugh.

I know, right?

I mean, goons just spent a year long endevour into fountain for ZERO REWARD.

You have nothing here. Your argument is broken and I feel bad you can't admit that.

As for the "nerfs" to null... they haven't gone far enough. (to go off topic even further)

And by that I dont mean that null needs nerfed, but that static forms of income in controllable space will always go against the health of this game.

One of the best things ccp did was realize that dynamic resources promote conflict and the day moons run out of isk wont be the day the null game is destroyed but will be the day it will have it's highest activity ever as ever moon, every worthless corner of null will potentially be a gold mine at any moment in time.


You could be talking about real things to help self-sustainability in null. Station slots. Belts, ratting mechanics, sov changes and rewards

... but you're in here talking about nerfing high sec missioning as if that would do anything

..... really man. Step back and look at your argument for a minute.

The FW problem our guys saw it and showed it to CCP before it was known and abused. CCP didn't even know it existed.

Indeed, that's one of the things I had in mind when I wrote it.

And for the record, the way they implemented FW basically broke the entire LP system.

There is so much they need to do to fix that (starting with removing any common items in the FW stores vs any other lp store in the game)

Yes, it is. Because profit is income minus costs. Highsec has such vastly lower costs, that it doesn't even matter what the difference is between their upper bounds of income.

The sheer safety of highsec is the unbalancing factor here.

They make too much money in relation to how safely they can earn that money.



Nope. At least, that certainly is not my issue with it. My issue is that after nearly a decade of nerfs to nullsec, highsec's isk/risk ratio is skewed, and needs to be adjusted.

I'd like to see a 5-10% reduction in payoffs for L4s, and to make wardecs not dodge-able. That'd about do it, imo. Because if you ask me, that's the real reason for the problem. Not that's it too much money (although that is part of it) but that it's too safe. The intended risk in highsec is not present. Once it is, we can start talking about whether they make too much or too little money.

We've (CCP included) have been over a lot of this already. If you buff null it will break the game. It's just that simple.

And, it's not just null being measured against highsec. It's highsec being measured against: Sov null, NPC null, lowsec, and wormhole space.

And highsec wins, flat out, against all 4.

And you're telling me that "Highsec isn't the problem, everything else is the problem! Stay away from my golden goose!".

it would give us a reason to go back the null.



We also got that out in null.

How many different ways can we say high sec pays as much as null?

There is literally no point in taking more risk and expending more effort when you can get exactly the same thing with much less effort and near no risk.

First, it's not my goose egg. I have no dog in this fight.

You keep confusing the issues. Baltar as well

If you dont make enough isk in null. That's that. Period. That will never change by ANYTHING you do in high sec.

But you do... well, maybe YOU don't, but plenty of others do.
The reason you might not be seeing the isk in your wallet is another thing entirely.

I am not your servant. If you don't even know the game past for the last 4 years you should not even be here making topics or do those "8 years" broad statements.

Arm yourself with Google and search for me and Kerfira and the mission forums. Edit: tips a la LMFGTFY "Bounties horizontal reduction, loot first and second reduction and finally removal of non meta loot". Indirectly, further nerf by removing drone goo (it netted me about 1B a month). Removal of L5 missions from hi sec. Let's see if you did not even know they moved L5 to low sec, that's clown grade poor figure. Moving agents around, it caused many to create missions going to low sec (expecially penalizing to Minmatar and Gallente, not all have 3 7+ standing alts to pick only the hi sec, non faction, non drone missions). Moving SOE to Caldari space aka the great Gallente nerf and what finally pushed me out of missioning for good.

Here's how a professional did get a nerf done.

That's how and where it's done, not with some uninformed whining on GD.