These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Null sec what chance does the little guy have

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#541 - 2014-02-16 17:37:26 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


Idk what you think "exact opposite" means, but the rest of us heard "we should be actively discouraging any sov monopoly".

Which means that you think there is such a thing as winning too much. You've outright said it.


If the only way you can imagine null sec is the status quo,

and if for you, suggesting any improvements or alterations to what a massive part of the playerbase see's as a stale and repeatedly inevitable conclusion to sov warfare
... can only be viewed through the lens of "you think we're winning too much!" ??

then we're probably done here.

You are either lacking the will or capacity to view the topic in anything but a niche interpretation.

And incapable of seeing a discussion of macro-mechanics as anything but a verdict against the organizations that have risen facilitated by mechanics,

instead of as the critique of those mechanics themselves that this is.

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#542 - 2014-02-16 17:38:12 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
(you tell me, should we make it easier or harder to be a 30,000 person entity?)


Easier. Having to use out of game means and metagaming to identify your own allies is indicative of a failure of game mechanics.


Says who?

Is the fact you have to create a 2nd fleet a failure of game mechanics?

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#543 - 2014-02-16 17:39:22 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
(you tell me, should we make it easier or harder to be a 30,000 person entity?)


Easier. Having to use out of game means and metagaming to identify your own allies is indicative of a failure of game mechanics.


Says who?

Is the fact you have to create a 2nd fleet a failure of game mechanics?


Yes.

And so is all the hideousness of the fleet window. Although that was recently abrogated to some degree.

"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.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#544 - 2014-02-16 17:43:45 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


Idk what you think "exact opposite" means, but the rest of us heard "we should be actively discouraging any sov monopoly".

Which means that you think there is such a thing as winning too much. You've outright said it.


If the only way you can imagine null sec is the status quo,

and if for you, suggesting any improvements or alterations to what a massive part of the playerbase see's as a stale and repeatedly inevitable conclusion to sov warfare
... can only be viewed through the lens of "you think we're winning too much!" ??

then we're probably done here.

You are either lacking the will or capacity to view the topic in anything but a niche interpretation.

And incapable of seeing a discussion of macro-mechanics as anything but a verdict against the organizations that have risen facilitated by mechanics,

instead of as the critique of those mechanics themselves that this is.


You just spat out a lot of words to say essentially nothing. You do that. a. lot.

As for claiming that all I can imagine is the status quo, you may be unaware of this, but I (the person, not this posting alt) was a line member for a large alliance for a long while. I've seen sov get shaken up.

But not by people who cry about how the mechanics don't favor them enough to let them win.

Get this. The Goons EARNED what they have. They played the game to get it. If you want to take it away, or if you think someone else deserves it more, then sack up and go do it. Yep, if you want sov, you will have to earn it. The same damn way everyone else does. The shock, the horror.

The "massive part of the playerbase" you're claiming to represent need to stop being such tossers and actually play the game for once.

"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.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#545 - 2014-02-16 17:44:06 UTC  |  Edited by: La Nariz
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
La Nariz wrote:


Stealth "you want to force us out of highsec," no and yes you can encourage people to do things by nerfing and buffing things. Hence nerfing highsec is a good idea.


I've got plenty of words you can quote from. No need to construct strawman interpretations.

Who wants to force who out of highsec?
I live in low sec, I don't understand.



Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:

You can't incentivize someone into changing how they enjoy playing the game.
This is why the sec's shouldn't and can't be balanced against each other.


That is literally a stealth "you want to force us out of highsec."

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
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#546 - 2014-02-16 17:48:42 UTC
La Nariz wrote:


That is literally a stealth "you want to force us out of highsec."


No, it isn't.

It's a statement on what should be the obvious divides that will exist as long as there is a high sec. No amount of nerf will make a bear choose a less safe option. It's a matter of game philosophy, not incentives. Press hard enough, you'll only convince that person to play another game.

It's a "you cant force some out of highsec",

what you want to do is obvious. And more power to you.... I'm just telling you it won't work.

And it won't do jack to improve null.

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#547 - 2014-02-16 17:51:33 UTC
Quote:
No amount of nerf will make a bear choose a less safe option.


Good thing that's not what he wants, then.

"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.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#548 - 2014-02-16 17:51:35 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
No amount of nerf will make a bear choose a less safe option.


That's fine.

Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
It's a "you cant force some out of highsec",


Please point to a single credible person who has said they want to force anyone to go anywhere.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#549 - 2014-02-16 17:57:54 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


You just spat out a lot of words to say essentially nothing. You do that. a. lot.

As for claiming that all I can imagine is the status quo, you may be unaware of this, but I (the person, not this posting alt) was a line member for a large alliance for a long while. I've seen sov get shaken up.

But not by people who cry about how the mechanics don't favor them enough to let them win.

Get this. The Goons EARNED what they have. They played the game to get it. If you want to take it away, or if you think someone else deserves it more, then sack up and go do it. Yep, if you want sov, you will have to earn it. The same damn way everyone else does. The shock, the horror.

The "massive part of the playerbase" you're claiming to represent need to stop being such tossers and actually play the game for once.


you've already expressed that you have no wish to understand any intricacy of my argument.

you writing it off as "essentially nothing" is predictable.
and a convenient way of ignoring that you are so painfully wrong and boring.

I too have played this game for a long time. Since 8+ mo after inception in fact.

Sov gets shaken up. Of course, it's as inevitable as anything else. I have not suggested otherwise. It's under what conditions the shakeups occurr that matter... the devil is in the details. The hows and the whys.

I agree Goons earned what they have.
They are one of if not the best organized and most strategically intelligent group to play the game.
I think they and their success represents what any wanna-be or up-and-coming group should aspire to.
This history of this game will not be written without chapters to their accomplishments and successes.

Again, I have no problem with success. I'm not attacking any group, I dont' want anyone to get knocked down a peg.

This is a discussion of the mechanics and environment.

Again, your inability to acknowledge that and trying to skew this into a grrr goons is just ... lazy.
Get over it. Do you even reading comprehension?

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#550 - 2014-02-16 18:09:32 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
La Nariz wrote:


That is literally a stealth "you want to force us out of highsec."


No, it isn't.

It's a statement on what should be the obvious divides that will exist as long as there is a high sec. No amount of nerf will make a bear choose a less safe option. It's a matter of game philosophy, not incentives. Press hard enough, you'll only convince that person to play another game.

It's a "you cant force some out of highsec",

what you want to do is obvious. And more power to you.... I'm just telling you it won't work.

And it won't do jack to improve null.


No one was ever trying to force people out of highsec so how that even came into any of your reasoning beyond the attempt at a dog whistle "you want to force us out of highsec," is nebulous.

We want our alts to be able to live in the space we fought for and defend. Right now they are forced into highsec which isn't okay, you highsec people need to quit trying to force your play style on us.

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
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#551 - 2014-02-16 18:19:55 UTC
Quote:
Do you even reading comprehension?


This from the person who as soon as they got into the conversation, raised the "you just want to force us out of highsec" flag? Truly amusing.

"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.
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#552 - 2014-02-16 18:32:45 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
Do you even reading comprehension?


This from the person who as soon as they got into the conversation, raised the "you just want to force us out of highsec" flag? Truly amusing.


yeah, those words didn't start out of my mouth. Go talk to La Nariz.

go look, it's not far back

That's why I said:

Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:


Who wants to force who out of highsec?
I live in low sec, I don't understand.


"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#553 - 2014-02-16 18:36:04 UTC
La Nariz wrote:


No one was ever trying to force people out of highsec so how that even came into any of your reasoning beyond the attempt at a dog whistle "you want to force us out of highsec," is nebulous.

We want our alts to be able to live in the space we fought for and defend. Right now they are forced into highsec which isn't okay, you highsec people need to quit trying to force your play style on us.


You were the first person to utter those words.
You attributed them to me as if that was what I was implying.

I already clarified to you what I was saying.

And I don't even live in highsec.
Try debating the people in front of you instead of the ones in your head.

If you want to stop being intentionally obtuse, we could probably get back to discussing keeping the people in null sec that want to be there.

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#554 - 2014-02-16 18:40:57 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
No amount of nerf will make a bear choose a less safe option.


Good thing that's not what he wants, then.


Here, let me help. This is where it fell apart.

What he wants to do is nerf high sec to improve null. It doesn't work that way.

No one was suggesting any "forcing". You just assumed that's what I meant.

"Dog whistle" ? Lol ,ok Blink

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#555 - 2014-02-16 18:45:45 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
La Nariz wrote:


No one was ever trying to force people out of highsec so how that even came into any of your reasoning beyond the attempt at a dog whistle "you want to force us out of highsec," is nebulous.

We want our alts to be able to live in the space we fought for and defend. Right now they are forced into highsec which isn't okay, you highsec people need to quit trying to force your play style on us.


You were the first person to utter those words.
You attributed them to me as if that was what I was implying.

I already clarified to you what I was saying.

And I don't even live in highsec.
Try debating the people in front of you instead of the ones in your head.

If you want to stop being intentionally obtuse, we could probably get back to discussing keeping the people in null sec that want to be there.



You were the one that brought the idea to the thread and now you're getting very defensive of it. I'd suggest you stop using dog whistles though it didn't turn out well for you last time.

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
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#556 - 2014-02-16 18:46:16 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
What he wants to do is nerf high sec to improve null. It doesn't work that way.


Proper nerfing to highsec will mean that lots of the nullsec alts will return home. Are you saying that this won't be a start towards improving nullsec?

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#557 - 2014-02-16 18:54:33 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
What he wants to do is nerf high sec to improve null. It doesn't work that way.


Proper nerfing to highsec will mean that lots of the nullsec alts will return home. Are you saying that this won't be a start towards improving nullsec?


Says who? Show me anything to support this.

What you need is a buff to null.
Nerfing high sec won't help null become self-sufficient. Apples and oranges.

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#558 - 2014-02-16 18:56:11 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
What you need is a buff to null.


Many people far smarter than me have explained on many occasions why buffing null will cause problems with the economy. Either way, if the situation is fixed it will mean highsec is still relatively the worst space in the game.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#559 - 2014-02-16 19:01:41 UTC
Removed some more off topic posts.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#560 - 2014-02-16 19:07:20 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
What you need is a buff to null.


Many people far smarter than me have explained on many occasions why buffing null will cause problems with the economy. Either way, if the situation is fixed it will mean highsec is still relatively the worst space in the game.


And those people are right, if those buffs are the short-sighted back of a napkin and pushed out over a weekend style buffs ccp seems to make (even more mysteriously, these seemingly /whatever changes come after months or years of deliberation)

You can't just say... increase rat bounties. No. That will fall apart, just as you say it would.

But there are many many other things we can do to make null self-sufficient.
But it requires actual development of the concept of null and sov. Not just a tweak of any one or two variables.

It's never had the attention it deserves and the current landscape is the unfortunate result.

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."