These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Making nullsec vibrant again

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bane Nucleus
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#501 - 2012-06-20 22:03:51 UTC
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:

what about closing down stargates that have bads on the other side? Because otherwise we're not living the hardman wormholer experience.


Excellent point. If wormholes are such a great example of how things should work, then nullsec should get a similar mechanic. If you want to take away local, then give us the ability to close entrances to our systems when ever we want. Also make it so that you have to drop probes to find anything. None of this "free intel" about where our belts, anoms, gates and stations are.



I support this. Lol

No trolling please
Marconus Orion
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#502 - 2012-06-20 22:05:20 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Bane Nucleus wrote:

Free intel that requires zero effort. God forbid you actually have to work for intel.

please elaborate on why making this process difficult or time consuming adds to the game

please be specific, and be aware making things annoying is not an end in itself


It depends on ones point of view as to what is considered annoying, difficult and time consuming.
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#503 - 2012-06-20 22:05:28 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Malphilos wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
Generally speaking the only thing that we want nerfed in highsec ...


QED

It's like a freaking disease.
the idea nothing should be nerfed is stupid and wrong



Proof, please.

You'll excuse me if I don't genuflect and accept your opinion as the absolute truth.

The idea that something needs to be nerfed is a symptom of a base and mean intellect.
Rer Eirikr
The Scope
#504 - 2012-06-20 22:08:11 UTC
If we could just cut the dry sarcasm and bullshit responses I think we may be able to have another informative page or so about ISK generation in Null Sec vs. High Sec and the pros/cons of both.

Pretty, pretty please? Or do I have to go back to Kugu for good posts? Straight
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#505 - 2012-06-20 22:11:21 UTC
Malphilos wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
Malphilos wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
Generally speaking the only thing that we want nerfed in highsec ...


QED

It's like a freaking disease.
the idea nothing should be nerfed is stupid and wrong



Proof, please.

You'll excuse me if I don't genuflect and accept your opinion as the absolute truth.

The idea that something needs to be nerfed is a symptom of a base and mean intellect.

We could of course tell CCP to just double the isk payout for rats etc, but then their economist would slit his wrist over the ensuing inflation.

Remember the anom nerf? Remember the cause for it?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#506 - 2012-06-20 22:12:58 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Remember the anom nerf? Remember the cause for it?


and the fact that it was preceded by incursions and was not accompanied by an l4/incursion nerf, ahahahahah

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Marconus Orion
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#507 - 2012-06-20 22:13:16 UTC
Rer Eirikr wrote:
If we could just cut the dry sarcasm and bullshit responses I think we may be able to have another informative page or so about ISK generation in Null Sec vs. High Sec and the pros/cons of both.

Pretty, pretty please? Or do I have to go back to Kugu for good posts? Straight

It would be nice.
Dragon Outlaw
Rogue Fleet
#508 - 2012-06-20 22:13:31 UTC
dontbanmebro wrote:
Dragon Outlaw wrote:
Well I for one enjoy watching Forum PvP.


That's all GD is really good for. The idea that you can have an honest and constructive debate in an open forum with anonymous space avatars is beyond farce.

That's why knowledge communities have qualifications and very strict formats for discourse. Imagine if biologists working on some advanced topic had to address the input of some anonymous creationist every few posts. It just wouldn't work.

The irony of someone like marlona decrying a lack of constructiveness is overwhelming, as people like him are a key reason this forum is utter trash and only good for verbally mushroom-stamping fools.


Well I would not go as far as saying that Marlona is a trash poster. I would rather think that he/she brings some good points on the forums. What I am starting to realize is that the forums are just another battleground of Eve. I am realizing that some individuals took (or have been assigned) the responsibility to flame down and even discredit any potential idea or suggestion that could be a threat to their space pixel empire. Their really seem to be a high lvl of fear within some individuals in the Forums that some of the ideas being brought forth, could attract the attention of the Devs (as a good idea), and this could become a problem to the future of their organization... (and not necessarily to Eve itself).

I understand that it is natural to be attached to is success in this game. Specially those of big alliances and coalitions. I would probably react the same way you know. I just hope the Devs are able to understand the influence some people currently have on the forums, and take the right decisions. And that we can continu to "brainstorm" in here...without to much trash talk.
Kuehnelt
Devoid Privateering
#509 - 2012-06-20 22:15:49 UTC
/disappointed that my SoE-for-all-the-pirates got no traction at all.

/fascinated by how bad nullsec industry is.

Thread success.
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#510 - 2012-06-20 22:16:47 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Malphilos wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
Malphilos wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
Generally speaking the only thing that we want nerfed in highsec ...


QED

It's like a freaking disease.
the idea nothing should be nerfed is stupid and wrong



Proof, please.

You'll excuse me if I don't genuflect and accept your opinion as the absolute truth.

The idea that something needs to be nerfed is a symptom of a base and mean intellect.

We could of course tell CCP to just double the isk payout for rats etc,...


Why? As in: what's the objective?

Only slightly less depressing and common than the urge to kill everybody else's cows is the belief that throwing iskies at things is the solution.

To wit, if the isk generation in null is so horrible, why are people there? If it's not, why do people ever leave?

I suggest there's an elephant in the room.
arcca jeth
Dark Alliance
#511 - 2012-06-20 22:16:57 UTC
I've been saying this for awhile in multiple threads and really hope CCP will do this. As some have already mentioned in this thread, industry in null/low SUCKS and it needs more reward. When I ventured to low for my 1st low sec mining/refining project it wasn't the "passerby's" or "miner bashers" that really concerned me. I just sacrifice one strip turret for a cloaky and watched D-scan and local. What really turned me off from the whole thing was that the refining rates and refining times for the POS modules was just unacceptable. You lose a lot of resources and it takes way too long. If I were to move back to low or null and setup project operations it would be only if the rewards for refining there were boosted. I really cannot seem to find anyone who opposes these basic simple ideas:

1. revamp the bonuses on refining structures for the POS's. Make them substantially better than high sec station refining. I am talking like 50% better than high sec. So you could even break them down to 2 refining structures. 1 for null and one for .4 to .1
Make the one for null the highest rate and the one for low 2nd best rate and leave high sec refining the way it is. People are opportunistic in nature and you might, JUST MIGHT, have people hauling their high sec ores for those higher refining yields.

2. give industrialists a 2nd capital industrial ship for those who do not wish to anchor a POS. Make it equally as expensive and time consuming to train for as the Rorqual and instead of compressing make it a mobile refinery. Some might say that this might make the Rorqual obsolete and that could be a possibility, so maybe revamp the Rorqual to play this role and get rid of the compressing capability completely.

Manufacturing bonuses should also be BETTER in regards to time and materials required than high sec.

3. NPC pirate faction missions. It would be a lot of fun running missions in low and null for hidden or hard to find NPC pirate factions. This could open a whole new world of possibilities for pirates with low security status. Again, the risk has to be worth the reward so the payout of bounties for the kills and the mission payouts would need to be substantially better than high sec.

as the system is set up now, it's kind of like punishment for even wanting to do it. and the reward is lackluster at best. why do all the work in low/null and run the risk of losing your resources and products when you can do it all better in high sec? so you don't get the mega and zydrine? so what! buy it and you will still make a profit in high sec.

increase the industry in low/null and you will see increased traffic. you will also see more "juicy targets" for the pirates. give us the egg and you can have the chicken!
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#512 - 2012-06-20 22:19:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Richard Desturned
Malphilos wrote:
To wit, if the isk generation in null is so horrible, why are people there?


Because they enjoy other aspects of nullsec and opt for generating ISK elsewhere, or simply putting up with the horrible ISK generation in nullsec.

Believe it or not most people don't live in nullsec just to make ISK, but being able to make a little better than L4 income + 10% is nice because, well, PvPers have to fund their PvP.

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Rer Eirikr
The Scope
#513 - 2012-06-20 22:21:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Rer Eirikr
Malphilos wrote:
To wit, if the isk generation in null is so horrible, why are people there? If it's not, why do people ever leave?

I suggest there's an elephant in the room.


High Sec Alts. Seriously, there are a lot more of us in HighSec these days than people seem to realize. Which is a damn shame because it detracts from Null Sec play.
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#514 - 2012-06-20 22:23:10 UTC
Rer Eirikr wrote:
If we could just cut the dry sarcasm and bullshit responses I think we may be able to have another informative page or so about ISK generation in Null Sec vs. High Sec and the pros/cons of both.

Pretty, pretty please? Or do I have to go back to Kugu for good posts? Straight


We know what the problem is with expanding isk making in null. We need stations that aren't crappier than highsec ones. Just giving use stations that are equal to highsec ones in terms of factory slots and base refine would be an improvement. Allowing us to drop multiple stations of highsec quality would be even better.

Until then, nullsec is going to remain a place where people just export raw materials and rat loot. Outside of super production, no one really wants to invest in a supply chain that is less efficient, less safe and generally less lucrative than what highsec offers.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#515 - 2012-06-20 22:23:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Zim
Malphilos wrote:
Only slightly less depressing and common than the urge to kill everybody else's cows is the belief that throwing iskies at things is the solution.

I'll happily take a mining ship which'll mine 10x as much as the equivalent hisec barge.

I could've suggested that rat wrecks are salvageable for minerals, but drones had that and CCP decided that 40% of all minerals coming from gunmining instead of bargemining was no good. So they nerfed that.

Malphilos wrote:
To wit, if the isk generation in null is so horrible, why are people there? If it's not, why do people ever leave?

It's not horrible, it's just not good enough in comparison to L4s etc to incentivize most people into bothering with doing sanctums etc for isk, so they leave a L4 char in hisec instead.

As to why I'm in nullsec? Fights with 1000+ in local. That's why.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Rer Eirikr
The Scope
#516 - 2012-06-20 22:24:41 UTC
Yea, we touched on this around pages 7-12, and overall I felt we left with a lot of people having a new understanding for just how bad Null/Low Industry really is.
dontbanmebro
Doomheim
#517 - 2012-06-20 22:25:16 UTC
Dragon Outlaw wrote:
garbage


Yes, it is fear of all your really good ideas. Because they're really good.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#518 - 2012-06-20 22:25:18 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
I think you may have something there. But I also think they will need to make the rewards greater.

CFC incursion runners were netting a pretty silly amount of ISK from vanguard farming, just under what hisec shiny fleets were pulling

incursions did need a reduction in their rewards but trying to fix incursions, which are effectively the same regardless of security level (save for the lack of gate rats in hisec) means that they have to balance them around goddamn shinyfleets which really do not happen outside of hisec

I'm guessing the reason people didn't use neutral (altcorp) alts and farm incursions in safe highsec is because they needed to be shiny to get in?

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 ?
Kuehnelt
Devoid Privateering
#519 - 2012-06-20 22:27:17 UTC
arcca jeth wrote:
3. NPC pirate faction missions. It would be a lot of fun running missions in low and null for hidden or hard to find NPC pirate factions. This could open a whole new world of possibilities for pirates with low security status. Again, the risk has to be worth the reward so the payout of bounties for the kills and the mission payouts would need to be substantially better than high sec.


These already exist in NPC nullsec. There are even two pirate epic arcs that you only need a decent frigate to complete - player knowledge is much more of a barrier to them than SP. Standings are also a barrier if you've made a habit of killing pirates, or if the pirates you'd like to work for are hostile to a faction that has come to love you (for instance, not even Diplomacy V gets my Blood/Sansha faction standings to the point where I'm no longer restricted to L1 missions.)
Rer Eirikr
The Scope
#520 - 2012-06-20 22:28:07 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
I think you may have something there. But I also think they will need to make the rewards greater.

CFC incursion runners were netting a pretty silly amount of ISK from vanguard farming, just under what hisec shiny fleets were pulling

incursions did need a reduction in their rewards but trying to fix incursions, which are effectively the same regardless of security level (save for the lack of gate rats in hisec) means that they have to balance them around goddamn shinyfleets which really do not happen outside of hisec

I'm guessing the reason people didn't use neutral (altcorp) alts and farm incursions in safe highsec is because they needed to be shiny to get in?


If you weren't in a Basi, Faction Battleship, or Legion-Fleet you were very often waiting a significant amount of time for a fleet invite, even then, you'd have to hope your fleet was good enough to compete.

Even with that factored though the ISK you could generate was just stupid.