These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#1341 - 2013-09-09 20:10:59 UTC
Yeah CCP wreck your monthly income you pussies!
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1342 - 2013-09-09 20:12:01 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
That is sacrilege against highsec, isk/hr is sacred and any nerfing of it will make thousands of quit so eve dies.


oh no, a few scrubs quit because they can't amass wealth for the sake of amassing wealth. how will the game cope?


Sky is falling, there will never be new players who will replace their precious subscription fees, they aren't in fact insignificant compared to their comrades in highsec who aren't horribly unreasonable and will remain.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#1343 - 2013-09-09 20:15:44 UTC
CCP Nullsec subs are enough money for you! "F" highsec. You morons. Delete it.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#1344 - 2013-09-09 20:18:03 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
La Nariz wrote:

So you're a highsec chauvinist.


No, just someone that advocated and actually achieved L4 and incursions nerfs well before you but knows when it's time to stop.
L4, expecially as played by the majority of missioneers, is now a middle of the pack activity and being middle of the pack it means it's balanced enough.
Min max blitzers could maybe get a tone down but since they basically only earn LP, nerfing the LP they earn would mean an important ISK sink going away. Nerfing ISK sinks = bad.


Oh I agree keep the isk sinks, highsec still needs nerfs to balance risk : reward and make eve a good product. I think it hasn't happened because CCP* is a bit risk averse after the incarna disaster.

*This is not an impersonation of CCP. I am not an affiliate of CCP or any of its related companies. CCP and I are mutually exclusive independent entities.


There's a reason why about 1 year ago I posted (on the lol-ideas-nobody-at-CCP-reads forum) a quite complete plan to remove high sec and just leave new player starting systems as hi sec.

The reason is simple: Hi sec is a square peg in EvE's round hole (any dirty thoughts are left to the readers! ).

It's physically impossible to nerf hi sec in a fair way. Baltec1 said he'd be "happy" with a 20% high sec nerf.

But that's just him. If he's doing 50M per hour, he says he'd return farming ISK in null if those ISK became 40M.

Would another player be happy and return to null sec at the prospect to still earn 40M per hour? NO WAY.

I am sure there are people who would stay in hi sec even if it yielded 10M per hour, the "controlled environment" gives just too many possibilities and comfortability. Just knowing that you can haul stuff from hub to hub in solo and in relative peace, makes up for the meager L4 income.

So, sure, you could nerf L4s to the ground but all you'll achieve is to get some to quit EvE, others to stay in hi sec, other to switch from L4 to incursions, low sec FW (odd how nobody in this thread mentions the awesome FW income...).

The problem is greater than L4, the problem is having an "high sec" conflicting with the rest of the game with its different and much appetible mechanisms.

But now imo it's too late to really do radical revolutions like removing hi sec and replacing it with a continuum or other ideas.

So we are left with an hi sec. And that hi sec will never be "fair". No matter how much you nerf it. You are just directing energy towards a task that won't change this fact.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#1345 - 2013-09-09 20:23:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Yeah, delete high sec. Millions of players will pay you 15 bucks a month to outfit a ship and die to a hundred man perma camp at the gates. You guys are just too stupid to see it.

But don't delete local cuz that'll hose our bots.

Oh and you guys need to fix plex prices. Tell the people buying it that they have to sell it for a lower price. Okay?

If you don't know how to fix the plex problem ill let you pubbies in on the solution. You create plex out of thin air and compete with the people who buy it . When the people who buy it see the price is going down they'll buy more of it. Its win/win

CCP sells more gametime and we get cheaper plex.
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#1346 - 2013-09-09 20:36:16 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
I thought you wanted higher risk? It's funny you advocate changes for high secs risk factor while admitting that in null sec you make plans to lower the risk in your pve activities.

Sounds like you're just a bunch of carebear pubs masquerading as balls to the wall hardcores.


I quite agree, there's an awful lot of penis envy coming from the Null Sec camp.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#1347 - 2013-09-09 20:42:48 UTC
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
They are taking as much risk as the high secs. Local enables you to function in null with the same level of risk.



Here, let me give it a shot, maybe I can break through the wall.

Highsec is low risk because an outside, artificial intervention (CONCORD) makes it low risk.

Sovereign nullsec is low risk (for the owning alliance) because the people who live in the area make it low risk.


Depending on an outside, artificial intervention to protect you is quite unEVEish.

As is, ask TEST about how safe and low-risk null is. They might have a...unique perspective.



I agree with this too, Concord is artificial in nature and OP, I would prefer a system of fines in place so that if someone breaks the law in high sec and ganks a freighter or a mining barge they should be fined 5 times the values of the ship plus cargo making all ganks unprofitable. Whilst people would be free to gank as they please without a concord response. You get fined for carrying contraband so why not? Players could gank all day if they could afford it.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#1348 - 2013-09-09 20:50:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
They are taking as much risk as the high secs. Local enables you to function in null with the same level of risk.



Here, let me give it a shot, maybe I can break through the wall.

Highsec is low risk because an outside, artificial intervention (CONCORD) makes it low risk.

Sovereign nullsec is low risk (for the owning alliance) because the people who live in the area make it low risk.


Depending on an outside, artificial intervention to protect you is quite unEVEish.

As is, ask TEST about how safe and low-risk null is. They might have a...unique perspective.



I agree with this too, Concord is artificial in nature and OP, I would prefer a system of fines in place so that if someone breaks the law in high sec and ganks a freighter or a mining barge they should be fined 5 times the values of the ship plus cargo making all ganks unprofitable. Whilst people would be free to gank as they please without a concord response. You get fined for carrying contraband so why not? Players could gank all day if they could afford it.

Who would enforce the fines? If NPCs do the enforcing you've merely replaced Concord with another artificial and overpowered entity. That's hardly a solution.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#1349 - 2013-09-09 20:52:57 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:


You guys are as predictable as the rising sun. Any thread you disagree with you try and derail by attempting to shift the argument to something inane then when that doesn’t work you continue to troll until the thread becomes locked. Tippa was shown to be lying by Matrix earlier which didn’t hurt his/her credibility with me because she already had zero.

I realize this is the internet “BONJOUR” but because tipia or yourself type the words it still won’t make it true or factual.

Flame on master trolls.



Fortunately there are no flames or master trolls here. Unfortunately the inane crap being emitted from highsec has driven off the people you highsec pubbies would prefer to ~debate~ with. Clearly if you present an opinion as a fact then you cannot expect other people to forgo doing this. Knowledge, is not something most highsec pubbies have though so this grievous insult to academia continues. You unfortunately fall into that category as well, you have continually substituted your own opinion in place of fact to further your own point and become furious if that wasn't the case. Offering an olive branch to repair the damage done by the blithering highsec masses is also too arduous as can be seen by that guy, who should be banned for role playing per CCP's rules, refusing to change his sig to a new nullsec friendly sig. Unfortunately this cannot be resolved and until it is we will all have to deal with the inane crap coming from highsec.

furious? How would you know this? You sound like my teenage son after he kills someone in league of legend….”oh he was pissed off”
Lol I have yet to get made over anything written by any of you forum trolls.

Any tone of being mad or upset would be injected from your own head and not what I have typed. And yes you have page after page of trolling on this topic alone.
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#1350 - 2013-09-09 20:55:30 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
i'll go with after 10 years of being around you cap out at roughly 35k playing at any given time. Many of which are alts. Players that stick around are not anywhere near the level you imply they are. Dedicated EVE players are not easily replaceable. If that needs proving i'll concede you technically win that argument but everyone else knows better. Not being able to disprove doesn't prove anything true. Google Celestial Teapot.


Yep those alts being nullsec people who are being forced into highsec. You just want to force people into highsec.


Why would I want to force you into high sec? I don't care where you play. It doesn't affect me. You aren't being forced. You're choosing too. Why you make that choice is of a personal nature.


Liar, you want highsec to be buffed so we all have to move to highsec. You want to force us into highsec because you want to force us into highsec.


~~~~Highsec is Safe~~~~


Biggest crock of **** yet read. Do you honestly believe this? What advantage there possibly be to having everybody in high sec, unless your a merc corp looking to war dec people. Most high sec players would prefer less people in high as there's less competition for market orders and minerals etc..

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#1351 - 2013-09-09 21:04:29 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
I'll admit, every time i'm in null sec i just think "i can make equal isk for less hassle, or just flat out more isk in high sec"
it really is quite frustrating because i want to be in null sec to do interesting things, but to fund that i find that the best place to be is... not in null sec.

sure i could just train another character to be my high sec cash cow but, really why should i?


That's what I ended up doing. I have an incursion alt, a hauling alt, a mission alt, and exploration alt (tbh that alt exploers in low sec and does some WH stuff too, but the other 3 are all high sec, all the time).

I do some low and null sec pve stuff, usually when I'm bored and need a change. But when the end of the month nears and I need 4 plex to keep going, it's nothing but high sec pve, simply because it's virtually uninteruptable.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#1352 - 2013-09-09 21:14:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Jenn aSide wrote:
But when the end of the month nears and I need 4 plex to keep going, it's nothing but high sec pve, simply because it's virtually uninteruptable.


It just makes the plex argument I injected in this thread all the more resounding.

Nerfing highsec will not make your 4 plex cheaper. No Jenn, ccp doesn't want you to play free. They want to sell gametime. Who uses it as long as its paid for matters not.

No Jenn, CCP isn't going to create plex out thin air to drive the price down.

No Jenn, I as a plex original purchaser and reseller am not going to lower the cost of plex because high sec pays less.

Yes jenn, what I will do is buy less plex thereby driving the supply down and the demand up.

You're welcome Jenn..
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1353 - 2013-09-09 21:14:29 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
I'll admit, every time i'm in null sec i just think "i can make equal isk for less hassle, or just flat out more isk in high sec"
it really is quite frustrating because i want to be in null sec to do interesting things, but to fund that i find that the best place to be is... not in null sec.

sure i could just train another character to be my high sec cash cow but, really why should i?

That's what I ended up doing. I have an incursion alt, a hauling alt, a mission alt, and exploration alt (tbh that alt exploers in low sec and does some WH stuff too, but the other 3 are all high sec, all the time).

I do some low and null sec pve stuff, usually when I'm bored and need a change. But when the end of the month nears and I need 4 plex to keep going, it's nothing but high sec pve, simply because it's virtually uninteruptable.

Highsec is pretty good for making bank.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#1354 - 2013-09-09 21:17:35 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:

Maybe we can get a gm to declare to us the truth and then lock the thread


What a very good idea.

I present these words of reflection about the truth for the GMs:

Psalm 15:1-2 O LORD, who shall sojourn in your tent? Who shall dwell on your holy hill? He who walks blamelessly and does what is right and speaks truth in his heart;

Zechariah 8:16 These are the things that you shall do: Speak the truth to one another; render in your gates judgments that are true and make for peace;

Ephesians 4:25 Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another.

1 John 1:8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

1 John 3:18 Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth.


Religion, the last refuge of the damned.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#1355 - 2013-09-09 21:32:22 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
That was cold & harsh Little Dragon. Be mindful of their delicate nature.


lol, I am cold and harsh, but warm and fuzzy to those I love.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#1356 - 2013-09-09 21:44:49 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
They are taking as much risk as the high secs. Local enables you to function in null with the same level of risk.



Here, let me give it a shot, maybe I can break through the wall.

Highsec is low risk because an outside, artificial intervention (CONCORD) makes it low risk.

Sovereign nullsec is low risk (for the owning alliance) because the people who live in the area make it low risk.


Depending on an outside, artificial intervention to protect you is quite unEVEish.

As is, ask TEST about how safe and low-risk null is. They might have a...unique perspective.



I agree with this too, Concord is artificial in nature and OP, I would prefer a system of fines in place so that if someone breaks the law in high sec and ganks a freighter or a mining barge they should be fined 5 times the values of the ship plus cargo making all ganks unprofitable. Whilst people would be free to gank as they please without a concord response. You get fined for carrying contraband so why not? Players could gank all day if they could afford it.

Who would enforce the fines? If NPCs do the enforcing you've merely replaced Concord with another artificial and overpowered entity. That's hardly a solution.


Not that I want to split the thread but the fines are already enforced and the mechanism is already in place. Just try running through a gate with a cargo hold of something illegal in high sec such as blue pill or exile etc. You get fined and you get a standing drop. Same thing.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#1357 - 2013-09-09 22:25:31 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
I already tried to salvage this thread and asked you to continue the discussion in a civil manner.
Now it has derailed again and plunged of the bridge in a ravine so deep, bystanders didn't even see the Hollywood explosions when the wreck hit the bottom.

Thread locked for being deemed a total loss.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)