EVE General Discussion

I've been wanting pirate missions in lowsec for years. Scale payouts accordingly. Like seriously it is so easy.

Has EVE's economy ground to a halt? No. I would appear there is enough demand with things just the way they are.

Do people lose ships in other ways besides PvP in low/null? Yes.

These hypothetical risk takers are not taking risks, even though they are supposedly risk takers? This is a contradictory statement. You seem bent on speaking about EVE as you'd like EVE to be and not based on the reality.



Actually, they will if that's what they like. I explore and I go into WH's frequently. I don't have to because I typically make more in a DED 3/10 combat site, which offer me practically zero risk, than any WH pirate relic/data sites I've come across . But I do what I enjoy. If you find yourself incapable of doing the things you enjoy because 90% of the player base isn't frequenting your small piece of the pie, perhaps EVE isn't the game for you.



It never ceases to amaze me the amount of mental gymnastics your kind must perform in those heads of yours to actually believe the stuff you say. Again, the very statement is self contradicting. Most people who are operating in high sec do so because the risk vs. reward ratio is more favorable than null/low sec, but they aren't risk-averse? Please listen to yourself.

If high sec was rendered financially ineffectual any exodus to occur would not be a matter of risk vs reward. It would be a matter of worthless vs. valuable. Risk goes out the window when there is only one practical choice (two if you include people simply quitting the game entirely). Are you telling me that null/low sec is not currently more lucrative than high sec? Why do I get the feeling high sec will be "too lucrative for its own good" as long as the vast majority of people choose it over null/low. Even if you could make 10x more profit in null, high sec would still be "too lucrative" as long as people maintained a preference for high sec.

This is false information plain and simple.. you can make really nice isk/hr in high sec doing HS incursions relatively risk free, however the potential isk/hr that you can make in WH space and nullsec space is a LOT higher.

PI. moon mining, anomolies, sleepers, relic & data sites etc.. the amount of isk you can make is staggering. The amount of isk you can make in these areas is tempered by the amount of risk that you need to be willing to take to make the big isk. A lot of risk with a big payout at the end of the day if you survive.

Again, I would be all for reducing the maximum isk per hour for things like high sec incursions, and possibly moving level 4 missions to low sec (not sure if this would make much difference, since L4 mission pay outs aren't all that great anyway)

Significantly reducing the isk/hour for high sec activities would still not push the carebears that you so desperately seem to want to be able to farm, into low/null space.. they will just take longer to accumulate wealth since there is still very little risk in dying in high sec space. I suppose the one possible positive outcome of significantly cutting high sec income would be to MAYBE push nullbear/low seccer's isk grinding alts back into their respective space.

As i've said in previous posts, the issue isn't with the CCP game mechanics, it is an issue driven by the players. Look at nullsec.. you have masses of space that is taken by zerg alliances like Goonswarm.. if you get a pilot into goonswarm, or you rent a system from one of these massive alliances, you basically have less risk afk ratting, than you would if you were in high sec mining.

Effectively, the big alliances and the "tear harvesting" corporations have forced the game into a level of stagnation.. if you are a player like me that is only interested in small corp/small group action both pve and pvp, you are either forced to try to find fun in high sec and wormholes with the occasional low sec roam, or you have to join one of the massive alliances if you want to have any sort of a chance in nullsec. I'd rather unsubscribe than be forced to join one of the mega alliances just so that I can play EVE.

It's sort of sad that the one nullsec area that was semi-accessible to everyone has been invaded by pretty much every large alliance in the last few months (providence block).

At the end of the day, you cannot force people to be your content. You can try to encourage and entice them to play in your world (by not being as toxic as a lot of null/low sec is), but don't go crying to the forums demanding that CCP change the game to force people to play the game the way you want them to.

This is the kettle calling the pot black if ever I've seen it. PvP in nullsec and low sec is the biggest risk aversion in EVE. Noone wants to leave the space station unless they are at a significant advantage to be able to win.

Most battles in nullsec/low sec are a case of who can bring the biggest blob.. how is that not being extremely risk averse? Not wanting to engage the enemy unless you have the overwhelming advantage. Then you have people station bound because of a cloaked red afk ship in the system.. again pretty risk averse aye?

The moment that anyone undocks in EVE, they are at risk. I think CODE. and their ilk have proven that to everyone in high sec.
It's all about managing risk. Don't come to the forum here talking about risk aversion when you are part of the community that is probably the most risk averse. In fact, I would almost bet money on the fact that you are salivating at the thought of all of these carebears being forced into concord free space so that you can get relatively risk-free kills.


Hypocrite

I am just glad that CCP is at least making some small moves at fixing the risk vs. reward imbalances that are hurting the game, that's all.

There is nothing hypocritical in wanting a better and more vibrant sandbox game.

This isn't about "risk-free kills". It isn't even really primarily about PvP. It is about players being able to earn a PvE living where they live that is commensurate with the risk and cost of living there.

We all should want a more balanced and dynamic sandbox. I want Eve to succeed, not fall deeper into stagnation. You should too and maybe put your obsession with your ISK/h aside for once.

High sec isn't the problem. The isk infusion from bounties in Null Sec is far higher than that of Highsec. CCP has before stated this, and with the PVE/PVP ratio changing to nullsec being the ultimate carebear paradise this year, we can easily see the 750,000 faction kills in null out-bounty the 930,000 faction kills in high. Also, Incursions in HS are at least giving income to players in the form of leaching from other player's wallets. Null Sec is a direct infusion of isk from ratting from CCP to us.

The potential to have larger fleets with larger payouts in Null for incursions exist, they just are not utilized as much because null-sec is hugely risk adverse. Again, another example of how you can buff Null/Low all you want, the majority of characters are not leaving High Sec.

People just need to face the reality that this game needs a place where people can accumulate "Stuff" and keep it relatively safe. Accumulation of "Stuff" is what this game is all about. PVP in this game is a function of "stuff accumulation". I know that isn't what CCP had in mind at first, and I know it makes the Neanderthal's heads hurt... but just look at average player asset and wallet numbers from each economic report... it never goes down. People like making, taking and holding "Stuff".

First, just because you think Highsec is the problem doesn't mean it is. Second you have yet to identify an actual real Problem at all. And third your statement of non-fact is backed by... nothing.

Next, personal income is a culmination of many sources, but in terms of general populations we need to discuss Isk faucet income. Since LP (those pesky missions and incursions) consists of pure isk sinks because you trade isk and materials in for things other players buy and not CCP direct isk.

Last we don't have hideous inflation. This has been a lie since the first day people have been spouting it off. It was a lie the last time you said it and it is still a lie. Plex has inflated, but everything else has been healthy and stable in its year over year increases. CCP has addressed this at every fanfest and in every economic report. But considering everything in your post was a pompous display of emotion, I can't expect you to listen to facts.

Highsec isn't the problem. What is the problem is components of highsec, some of which are discussed. Every type of player had a limit to what they have interest in game. I know people who have played eve a long time. Their limit was just every once in a while running an L4 mission with friends. After quotes, i will bring more into this concept.



In a way, the income of raw isk is a little important. That is the balancing point for all item based earning as well. Any Item is based on supply and demand. The higher rate of isk earning, the more money there is for bling stuff increasing demand and decreasing supply. This drives up values and as such, improves the earnings from wormholes and other item based incomes. Eventually the demand for these items gets valued enough that people move from isk farms to item selling, value drops. But no matter what it will inflate if the item itself is passed the person's risk limit. Many will pay more for their bling by farming more no matter what.



It isn't entitled. Every ship sold, every unit of veldspar, transaction with isk. It needs to come from somewhere. Those new to the game or are otherwise reserved playstyle can only play if they have that safe isk location. A high risk person might need to fall back to a low risk to lick their wounds. There is benefit.

The big issue is if you view risk and reward together as a form of a curve. There are spots on said curve that risk increases greatly without much in the way of reward. This inhibits people from going out and taking risk, from pushing their boundaries. I am a prime example of this. I love Risk in eve even though the killboards might not show it. Early days starting, I ran support with pvp, I taught industrial corps skills to counter war decs, been out in null for a couple years. Just not piles of kills because I love support play so usually was in a logi. Since not multiboxing, I was on the ball. Combined with a bit of luck, never lost a logi out there.

There was a postings earlier arguing the risk and isk. One person made mention of moon mining and npc ratting and all that. Well, that needs to be taken with a grain of salt. That requires large number of people and logistics to maintain. It is a lot of isk, but it is clouded by low isk requiring alts. If every person envolved had to get some coin, well that income does drop a little. Still, it is more work and there is the increased risk so earn more. But that is of no benefit to the smaller corp or solo player.

Solo play, I have probably made most of my isk running in lowsec and nullsec despite the fact I am a highsec inhabitant. I leave highsec, and then am running exploration in lowsec and nullsec space. It is high risk, and the isk/hour is lower, but I do it because I enjoy it. The level of risk it has combined with the effort on part of the player to keep alive in somebody else's sov. Very fun. That is what the purpose of the risk/isk is about. There are people who pve cause they like pve, but we like risk. In the end though, if I want a bunch of isk fast, I gravitate to the low risk stuff. Since there is low risk that has an extremely high payout, choice is clear.

The problem is that people don't look widely at the mechanic changes. What happens if an incursion goes to a lowsec? Well the risk skyrockets because the mechanic incursions just are not condusive to low sec on non occupied null security. Big picture of it is first off, if going to a high risk situation, that means you want to invest less in your ship. As result, sites take longer and right there your isk earning is less than the high security operation. Second, you are moving a fleet that requires slow and less mobile ships in pirate space. A well established incursion fleet with a good FC should be able to hold it's own against a similar sized pvp, but that is isk invested being used for no return. Ergo more even less isk per hour. There are better ships for pvp than what is required to run and clear incursion sites. Lastly, the motherships require an extensive fleet and has to be cleared to get your LP. The time for that site means you have to put up a large fleet in which a pvp attack fleet can easily be assembled. Toss in having a defense fleet, and that added risk now has dropped the comparative isk earning by like 80% per pilot. So choice. Risk a large fleet in lowsec, or make more isk in l4 missions. Not a hard call.

As such, what is needed is a complete package for lowsec and nullsec which allows everything from the solo pilot to large groups to operate in said systems for an extended basis. As it stands now, highsec is the only way this functions. Nullsec isn't self sustaining, they need the market hubs of secure space. I can write probably a small book on concepts of markets, supply, demand, risk vs reward and all these nerf highsec, incursions, etc. But every concept comes down to one thing. Incentive.

Why do I not have a killboard full of small gang pvp fights? Is it that I am risk averse or dislike pvp? Nope. It is that I have zero incentive to do it. I don't have multi alts farming in background. The focus on Epeen and killboards detracts the pvp fun since few fleets bring on crap fit. Lastly, what is the point of it? I spend a bunch of time to probably lose a ship and not gain anything out of it. Then I gotta do stupid farming or something to replace it in a timely. No thank you, I would rather do stuff that is fun. While lower isk, at least I am enjoying myself.

We have been over this before. You curiously omit that the build materials for the ships you love to point out are more expensive have changed. A typhoon isn't built with the same amount of materials it was a decade ago. All modules, every single one of them has decreased in price (the ones that still exist after rebalance). T3 is down in price. The mineral basket has been fairly stable for a long time.

You can't go and say inflation is hideous because one ship you bought 10 years ago was 20% cheaper than it was today... and then be dumb enough to not compensate for the fact its material costs are much higher than before.

Fitting same ship, the typhoon, with a standard T2 fit is still cheaper than it was years ago by the way.

I am not white knighting for anything. I am asking people to stop making stupid, baseless and careless calls to destroy the most populous part of space for the sake of a perceived problem they think removal will fix.

So you have one battleship that went from 100 to 180... after its material build cost was changed and utility greatly increased.

How about the Abaddon... it went from 275mil to 190 in the same time. How about the Rokh, went from 200+ to 160. All the while their build costs went up.

You can cherry pick whatever you like. And you can try the whole "I am rubber you are glue" bit, but in the end you are just wasting words on a screen. Your arguments are that of a child.