These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

PVE? NO,only PVC(CCP).Maybe I should leave EVE too
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Arcelian
0nus
#41 - 2014-07-26 14:16:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Arcelian
Tippia wrote:
Arcelian wrote:
Right.... and like I said earlier, it now creates a low risk, low effort environment for the average null sec dweller. Only a few entities can now come and ruin your day, because they don't want to deal with the whole lot of you. I'm not talking about null before coalitions existed, I'm talking about it in it's current state.
…a state that sees more destruction, more effort, and more risk than highsec through a combination of unavoidable mechanics and player activity.

Quote:
Whether player organization or game mechanics has made it low risk or not, right now, it is low risk.
Lower than before, maybe, but still vastly higher than anything highsec has to offer.

Put another way: null is characterised by the risk and effort involved. Highsec is characterised by the complete absence of both. So yes, they're pretty good words for describing null.


Destruction and player activity does not equal risk. Yes, it takes some player collaboration to get by in null sec, however for the masses I would only say it's marginally more than in high.

You keep saying this over and over, without anything to back it up. Please tell me this great risk the average null dweller is facing by being there, if he is part of one of the big three.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#42 - 2014-07-26 14:18:04 UTC
Arcelian wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Arcelian wrote:


All because everyone has blued up and we are all one big happy family. With the monopoly the way that it is, it's only going to get worse.


You are aware that we are currently running three deployments to fight off invasions of our space aren't you?



Of course they are, who else are they going to invade?


So...

How can we have everyone blued up if we are being invaded?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#43 - 2014-07-26 14:21:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Arcelian wrote:
Destruction and player activity does not equal risk.
…it only creates it, and to a far higher extent in null than in highsec. Thus, risk is a fairly good word to use to describe null.

Quote:
Yes, it takes some player collaboration to get by in null sec
…thus, effort is also a fairly good word to use to describe null, especially since highsec requires zero amount of it to get by.

Quote:
You keep saying this over and over, without anything to back it up.
You provide all that is needed.
Arcelian
0nus
#44 - 2014-07-26 14:25:39 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Arcelian wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Arcelian wrote:


All because everyone has blued up and we are all one big happy family. With the monopoly the way that it is, it's only going to get worse.


You are aware that we are currently running three deployments to fight off invasions of our space aren't you?



Of course they are, who else are they going to invade?


So...

How can we have everyone blued up if we are being invaded?


"everyone" is clearly an exaggeration. I'm not going to get in a semantics argument over it, anyone can look at the sov map for the past few months and see the relatively little change.
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#45 - 2014-07-26 14:26:59 UTC
What were the market rules that got changed? I missed that memo

Fluffy Bunny Pic!

Arcelian
0nus
#46 - 2014-07-26 14:27:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Arcelian
Tippia wrote:
Arcelian wrote:
Destruction and player activity does not equal risk.
…it only creates it, and to a far higher extent in null than in highsec. Thus, risk is a fairly good word to use to describe null.

Quote:
Yes, it takes some player collaboration to get by in null sec
…thus, effort is also a fairly good word to use to describe null, especially since highsec requires zero amount of it to get by.

Quote:
You keep saying this over and over, without anything to back it up.
You provide all that is needed.


Now you are cherry picking quotes and grabbing at straws, sir. Still can't put up any quantifiable proof. I expected more.


You never answered, do you have much experience in null? I picture you more of a station trader type tbh. All about the numbers.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#47 - 2014-07-26 14:30:23 UTC
Arcelian wrote:


"everyone" is clearly an exaggeration. I'm not going to get in a semantics argument over it, anyone can look at the sov map for the past few months and see the relatively little change.


They can also see that we are up against half of nullsec. Hardly a blue doughnut.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#48 - 2014-07-26 14:31:16 UTC
Rhivre wrote:
What were the market rules that got changed? I missed that memo


Seems they turned off jita todayLol
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#49 - 2014-07-26 14:35:06 UTC
Arcelian wrote:
Still can't put up any quantifiable proof.
I know you can't, that's why I'm being so mean to you.

The fact remains: null sees far more destruction and conflict and has far fewer protective mechanics, both of which inherently increases the risk and effort involved in living there. All the examples you provide of how various measures have to be taken to reduce these risks only further proves that the risks are higher and that more effort is needed.

Quote:
You never answered, do you have much experience in null?
That's because I'm trying to protect you from instantly losing the argument by diving head-long into the putrid pool of fallacies.
Arcelian
0nus
#50 - 2014-07-26 14:37:44 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Arcelian wrote:


"everyone" is clearly an exaggeration. I'm not going to get in a semantics argument over it, anyone can look at the sov map for the past few months and see the relatively little change.


They can also see that we are up against half of nullsec. Hardly a blue doughnut.


Tbh, I didn't know that, and it's good news. However, part of me believes it only happened because the CFC wanted it to....time will tell.
Arcelian
0nus
#51 - 2014-07-26 14:42:16 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Arcelian wrote:
Still can't put up any quantifiable proof.
I know you can't, that's why I'm being so mean to you.

The fact remains: null sees far more destruction and conflict and has far fewer protective mechanics, both of which inherently increases the risk and effort involved in living there. All the examples you provide of how various measures have to be taken to reduce these risks only further proves that the risks are higher and that more effort is needed.

Quote:
You never answered, do you have much experience in null?
That's because I'm trying to protect you from instantly losing the argument by diving head-long into the putrid pool of fallacies.


Cherry picking quotes again Tippia. Just accept you are wrong, maybe just once?

I think you didn't answer not to "protect" me, but to hide the fact that you are speaking from having no first hand experience in the matter what so ever, and are hardly anyone to voice an opinion on the subject.

I'm not willing to put in the hours of posting back and forth, you can have the last post with some snide comment about how you don't need to post anything because you are so awesome, blah blah blah... you win by attrition I suppose.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#52 - 2014-07-26 14:45:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Arcelian wrote:
Just accept you are wrong, maybe just once?
Sure, as soon as you provide something that convinces me that I am, such as something that contradicts all the data CCP has provided and all the mechanics involved.

Oh, and the map.

Quote:
I think you didn't answer not to "protect" me
So that makes you wrong about that part too.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#53 - 2014-07-26 14:47:52 UTC
Arcelian wrote:


Cherry picking quotes again Tippia. Just accept you are wrong, maybe just once?

I think you didn't answer not to "protect" me, but to hide the fact that you are speaking from having no first hand experience in the matter what so ever, and are hardly anyone to voice an opinion on the subject.

I'm not willing to put in the hours of posting back and forth, you can have the last post with some snide comment about how you don't need to post anything because you are so awesome, blah blah blah... you win by attrition I suppose.


How about we point out that there is no concord in null?

Or the fact that our stations can be taken off us with all of our assets stuck inside?

Or the fact that ratters/miners need to dock up the second a neutral enters local?

Or the fact that you cannot simply put stuff in a hauler and fly it around null without at the very least a scout.

Ot that there are bubbles. Also titan doomsday drivebys. Or an angry blob of tens of thousands of pilots who hate us and love to roam around in our space dropping blops on everything they can catch.
J'Poll
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#54 - 2014-07-26 14:50:05 UTC  |  Edited by: J'Poll
Peaceful Makbema wrote:
Being a PVE player in High-sec, I find it is hard to play a happy game nowadays.

I joined EVEonline 5 years ago, because I love universe-like online game. In that years there is few choice, and it is really very hard for me to settle in New Eden. I live in High-secs,not because I am a so called "pacificist", for I don't like politics in null and low-sec. I was ganked, cheated, and forced to protect my property, but all those are parts of the game, I enjoyed them . However, it is not old good time today, when I find CCP nerf the high-secs again and again.

CCP, you said it is a free game belongs to everyone, right? Everyone can Role-Play a character in the sandbox, right?
So, a high-sec civilian shouldn't be discriminated, right? But what you have done?
I used to be a loyalist, then you nerfed highsecs mission and LP value
I used to be a trader, then you chanced market rules
I used to be an explorer, then you make the scanning/hacking harder


Stopped reading there as OP is talking crap.

LP value has risen and missions haven't been nerfed at all (unless you call the drone-goo change a nerf - which hitted null more then high-sec and actually made mining more profitable).
Market rules haven't change at any point.
Explorations was made much much easier.


p.s. Your stuff, on contract to me, please?

Personal channel: Crazy Dutch Guy

Help channel: Help chat - Reloaded

Public roams channels: RvB Ganked / Redemption Road / Spectre Fleet / Bombers bar / The Content Club
J'Poll
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#55 - 2014-07-26 14:54:43 UTC
Maekchu wrote:
Peaceful Makbema wrote:
I use to love New Eden so much, but now I just what a "divorce"

I what a divorce too!


Are you sure, that means that CCP gets half of your money / belongings.

Personal channel: Crazy Dutch Guy

Help channel: Help chat - Reloaded

Public roams channels: RvB Ganked / Redemption Road / Spectre Fleet / Bombers bar / The Content Club
J'Poll
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#56 - 2014-07-26 15:01:08 UTC  |  Edited by: J'Poll
Tippia wrote:
Arcelian wrote:
Right.... and like I said earlier, it now creates a low risk, low effort environment for the average null sec dweller. Only a few entities can now come and ruin your day, because they don't want to deal with the whole lot of you. I'm not talking about null before coalitions existed, I'm talking about it in it's current state.
…a state that sees more destruction, more effort, and more risk than highsec through a combination of unavoidable mechanics and player activity.
.


Tippia, please check the stats...

There are more kills in Empire space then there are in Null-sec space, so please, keep claiming there is more risk for players in null then in empire space....I will keep laughing at those claims.

High-sec is more dangerous then the current state of null-sec for some regions / systems.


True, null has its hostilities, but there aren't wars all day, every day.

Still think that CCP did a great job with the overhauls where lower sec = better payments / opportunities though.

Personal channel: Crazy Dutch Guy

Help channel: Help chat - Reloaded

Public roams channels: RvB Ganked / Redemption Road / Spectre Fleet / Bombers bar / The Content Club
Arcelian
0nus
#57 - 2014-07-26 15:01:45 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Arcelian wrote:


Cherry picking quotes again Tippia. Just accept you are wrong, maybe just once?

I think you didn't answer not to "protect" me, but to hide the fact that you are speaking from having no first hand experience in the matter what so ever, and are hardly anyone to voice an opinion on the subject.

I'm not willing to put in the hours of posting back and forth, you can have the last post with some snide comment about how you don't need to post anything because you are so awesome, blah blah blah... you win by attrition I suppose.


How about we point out that there is no concord in null?

Or the fact that our stations can be taken off us with all of our assets stuck inside?

Or the fact that ratters/miners need to dock up the second a neutral enters local?

Or the fact that you cannot simply put stuff in a hauler and fly it around null without at the very least a scout.

Ot that there are bubbles. Also titan doomsday drivebys. Or an angry blob of tens of thousands of pilots who hate us and love to roam around in our space dropping blops on everything they can catch.



1. There's no need for concord, anyone not blue is killed on sight. And you see them coming before they even get there! Thank god for the local/intel channel. I think I had 5 or so of them open at any one time.

2. Yes, because that happens ALL THE TIME. And you have no warning at all that it may occur, nope certainly don't move your shinies someplace safe prior in that situation. Right.

3. See 1. Also, you don't dock, you warp to the POS, bubbling the station as soon as you enter is the oldest trick in the book. Hmm, kinda figured you would know that.

4. Says who? All you need is a blockade runner and a cloak, and that's being paranoid. Or you just ask for status of the adjacent system you are going to, chances are you'll know if it's red before even going there.

5. Yes, bubbles. That's why you bounce off a safe or celestial.... BLOPS can be a threat, but you know, those blops have to have a cyno ship to begin with. And you know he's there. Up to you to gamble the risk of a cloaky camper, I did once, I lost :P I'd say cloaky campers are in fact, the main annoyance of null, but that's another topic entirely.
Arcelian
0nus
#58 - 2014-07-26 15:03:20 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Arcelian wrote:
Just accept you are wrong, maybe just once?
Sure, as soon as you provide something that convinces me that I am, such as something that contradicts all the data CCP has provided and all the mechanics involved.

Oh, and the map.

Quote:
I think you didn't answer not to "protect" me
So that makes you wrong about that part too.



No, you are wrong.

See, I can do it too.
Arcelian
0nus
#59 - 2014-07-26 15:05:47 UTC
J'Poll wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Arcelian wrote:
Right.... and like I said earlier, it now creates a low risk, low effort environment for the average null sec dweller. Only a few entities can now come and ruin your day, because they don't want to deal with the whole lot of you. I'm not talking about null before coalitions existed, I'm talking about it in it's current state.
…a state that sees more destruction, more effort, and more risk than highsec through a combination of unavoidable mechanics and player activity.
.


Tippia, please check the stats...

There are more kills in Empire space then there are in Null-sec space, so please, keep claiming there is more risk for players in null then in empire space....I will keep laughing at those claims.

High-sec is more dangerous then the current state of null-sec for some regions / systems.


But, Tippia said it, he must be right?! Right?!

Oh wait..
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#60 - 2014-07-26 15:10:39 UTC
Arcelian wrote:


1. There's no need for concord, anyone not blue is killed on sight. And you see them coming before they even get there! Thank god for the local/intel channel. I think I had 5 or so of them open at any one time.


Yet we still lose hundreds of ratting ships in dek alone every month.
Arcelian wrote:

2. Yes, because that happens ALL THE TIME. And you have no warning at all that it may occur, nope certainly don't move your shinies someplace safe prior in that situation. Right.


In the last war we deadzoned the enemy staging station, trapping their entire armada and its supplies.
Arcelian wrote:

3. See 1. Also, you don't dock, you warp to the POS, bubbling the station as soon as you enter is the oldest trick in the book. Hmm, kinda figured you would know that.


So now you are stuck in a POS doing nothing until they leave. I guess its too risky to continue ratting...
Arcelian wrote:

4. Says who? All you need is a blockade runner and a cloak, and that's being paranoid. Or you just ask for status of the adjacent system you are going to, chances are you'll know if it's red before even going there.


So, once again, its risky to haul stuff in null to the point where you are limited to just one class of hauler to get through.

Arcelian wrote:

5. Yes, bubbles. That's why you bounce off a safe or celestial.... BLOPS can be a threat, but you know, those blops have to have a cyno ship to begin with. And you know he's there. Up to you to gamble the risk of a cloaky camper, I did once, I lost :P I'd say cloaky campers are in fact, the main annoyance of null, but that's another topic entirely.


These things are not in high sec, so yet again, more risk.