Missions & Complexes

We've already seen what happens when null income is the best, most consistent and easily farmable in the game; giant blue rental empires and rampant RMTing. Currently it's only a mild problem because the content can still be farmed with multiboxing but any buffs to nullsec (as have started creeping into the nullies posts) will worsen it again. Jenn's entire argument depends on multiboxing not existing. Multiboxing 3 alts in null will net you more isk but that's apparently 'not fair'. It's fair that you can make double the isk with 3 alts in null than people can running the content normally with 3 alts in HS. It's fair that you can just add more alts and make double the isk I will ever be able to make in HS. But people are lazy and risk averse in null and suddenly it's unfair what hisec is able to do.

The only metric that matters is how much isk a player(not character) can make because that will dictate the level of abuse possible for that content. So why is it every time I bring multiboxing up it's immediately dismissed or ignored?

Then we have a smaller powerblock with the same lack of anoms. Anoms are very poor at their job because they are finite, they cant adapt to growing populations like missions can. Everyone in null has this problem.

Because you can multibox incursions in highsec and make a staggering sum of isk that dwarfs any other pve activity.

Funny thing is I don't give a single care about incursions, I've only ever pointed out that excessive, or the wrong kind of nerfs has in the past backfired and CCP has had to undo them. None of the suggested changes (as few and far in between as they are) are sane and most of them will have knock on effects that will harm the game. Besides they're already changing incursions. What's the point of baying for blood if we don't even know what effect the planned changes will have in the first place?

Oh Jenn, tsk, tsk, so dishonest. After all that high and mighty preaching to be lying through your teeth like this. First off, it's hard for lv4s to "literally" be Lv5s so that's a straight up lie. Lv5 missions were a bug, as you've said multiple times, while blitzing missions is practically as old as missions themselves. Hardly a bug wouldn't you say? The fact that they're in high sec is also, not a bug. In fact they have been making multiple changes to burners, both in frequency and in how hard each burner is since soon after their release. Currently the dev are very happy with where burners are at, again, exactly the opposite of hisec lv5s.


Another bit of dishonest preaching, made worse by the fact that you're asserting this out of ignorance too. Not only that but that you're so hypocritical in what information and proof you choose to believe. You haven't managed to get to 250mill/h solo blitzing lv4s and burners but you take my word as gospel that it can be done. However when I say that doing so means you can't do anything else, that it requires as much if not more effort than multiboxing 3 characters in null you call me all kinds of nast, nasty names and slander my person up and down these threads. Extremely disappointing.

Talk about self-serving and self centered. I can't take a word you say serious util you can give me proof that you're able to get to 250mill/h solo blitzing lv4s. Until that time I have to unfortunately consider everything coming out of your mouth as self serving dishonestly and lies.

Salvage nerf comes to mind. Concord LP (and the ability to exchange it). Super easy scanning mechanics which caused a rise in the exploration community effectively lowering the value of faction and deadspace mods/ships. It also made combat scanning so easy that you saw an increase in mission ganking/flipping. Removal of drone loot.

Kind of ironic that some hisec carebears come up with ways to min/max mission rewards, and nullbears who whine about it; trying to make it out that this is the norm.

OP made 108mil isk per hour using 3 toons. Three toons. 3 toons in nullsec flying AFK Ishtars make more than that in 1 hour of gaming with less effort involved. I can chain some FW L4 missions and make more than that. I can join an incursion and make more isk than that.

Bittervets. Get over yourselves and adapt. Lest the Dark Lord Jar Jar Binks decides to destroy you.

A guide to specialized blitzing techniques. Takes a year to train to do it, and requires several billions of isk to get it rolling. Training for a stealth bomber takes less time and cost to start running FW L4s, but I don't see you complaining about it. Not to mention, training for a logi or DPS ship for Incursions takes less time and will net lot more isk, and you're not complaining about your preferred hisec activity.

And technically if you were to take Anize's guide and apply it to lowsec and nullsec npc space, then you would make a lot more, barring interruptions; but you know, if you got some good peeps you can easily overcome that.

And yet, you continue to whine.

Being honest enough and informed enough to point out things that are problems even when you benefit from them is not whining, it's literally honesty. I ran high sec lvl 5 missions in dual rattlesnakes back in the day, and those of us who told the truth about them (even before CCP admitted that is was a bug) got the same kind of reaction that we are getting in this thread.

This is the 1st mistake. We are individual PVErs. We are talking about individual pve, not about what alliances have or do.

Looking at a group rather than the individuals that make up that group is how prejudices work. I'm not TEST Alliance, I'm one guy who likes to pew pew npcs. If you don't believe what we are saying about imbalances, you can always take a ship to null when the owners aren't there (for instance, the Detorid Region when Russians are sleep) and see for yourself.



I don't know why what I'm about to say next is hard to understand. WHY WOULD WE GANK OURSELVES? I know I have an incursion alt, and if you go to TVP's teamspeak and ask, lots of people will tell you "yea, I play in null, this is how I get isk".


]quote]
High-sec DED sites are not an issue because even when they make a rare appearance, they are farmed into oblivion by low and null-sec alts. During the Blood Harvest it was next to impossible to find a spawn, despite the fact that both low and null-sec were literally flooded with sites. I'm sure we'll see a repeat with the upcoming Frost event as well.

Which brings us to high-sec PvE. Specifically - L4 missions. Even before Burners there have long been calls to remove these from high-sec, and now it effectively kills two birds with one stone. Never mind the fact that to achieve the level of ISK/hour by blitzing and running Burners requires about a year of solid training, a 5-billion or so investment in ISK and selection of one or two very specific regions. The alternative is several characters, a similar level of training and ISK investment and a higher degree of micromanagement beyond simply pressing 'F1' (something many null-sec players might be unfamiliar with).

High-sec players aren't risk-averse - we're bullsh*t averse. We don't want to be bullied or otherwise indoctrinated into the various alliance marketing and propaganda machines. If you nerf high-sec PvE income anymore than it already has (let's not forget the various loot drop, mineral, reprocessing, etc. nerfs that have taken place over the last year or so), you'll probably find that the vast majority of high-sec EVE players just quit.[/quote]

The rest of this is again dripping with the types of prejudices that are the real enemy of discussion.