EVE General Discussion

Combining a relatively low-action activity such as mining with a relatively high-attention counter-measure such as spamming D-scan? That's what leads people into questioning why they're mining and then they go to level 4 missions or quit. That sort of mining sucks to do, no matter how high mineral prices are.

Wow, you sound scary good at PvP.
I am sure that all of empire will shut down because of your declaration of war against high sec corps.

Right, and all the freighters being lost in Uedama to your corp (a goon corp), they are a figment of the API's imagination.
And Hulkageddon, another goon treat, that never happened.
Nor the ice interdictions, nor the weekend attack in Jita.

And of course, the new AI that will totally wipe out drones as PVE platform, that will have no effect on high sec.

A good laywer, or in this case, null sec propagandist, should never ask a question he does not already know the answer to.
You are clearly bad at both.

You asked for a simple (pressing a button), careful (guaranteed safety) method of keeping safe.

If that doesn't suit you, then Fit a Tank. Tanking a Hulk made it unprofitable to gank you, but cost you one or both of your low slots (depending on paranoia level). If you want to complain about "they'll bring more ships" find me the killmail a brick tanked Hulk that was Suicide Ganked.

I'm serious, no level of knowledge is too small to start pvping. Also, you'll learn much faster actually doing it, than just doing bear stuff and reading the forums. You'll be running out of hard drive space in your brain trying to process all the information. Even now, after eight years, I still get stuck in processing mode after each fight, even after winning, for hours thinking stuff like "okay, why did he take me to quarter shields, that should have been impossible given the scenario, time to look at combat logs."

Well, all 9 of you must be truly deadly to wipe out so many high sec corps.
It is going to be such a shame when you won't be able to use out of corp alt logistics anymore.
Perhaps you will be able to drive people from the game with harsh language on the forums.

BTW, just looked up your war history.
Indeed, you do love your wars.
But given that 4 of the 5 wars you are currently in are mutual, it doesn't appear that you have many people terrified.

But you keep on your crusade to wipe out high sec.
I am sure that if you are all the other null sec zealots are successful (outside and inside of CCP), the investors in CCP will be thrilled with the "balancing" of the subscription base.

When did freighters gain the ability to fit mining lasers?
Also hulkageddon and both ice interdictions happened before the barge buff. We are in a different world now and pulling off a month long war on miners is just not afforable now. The AI update will also not impact miners as the belt rats will be just as weak as they are now.

They did. One of the trailers was a nub getting his revenge by joining an alliance that ganked him and stealing everything they own and shutting dow their pos network.

First, I like that the OP posted specific examples, with your reasoning behind them. I would more would do the same in this thread.

I can't really speak to null/low because that isn't how I play. I'm not a forum alt, this is my main. I know its sad. (tear) I play a much different eve that most others play. EvE isn't my only game, but I play off and on as my schedule allows. Most people say that the vast majority of NPC corp members are null alts. Maybe that's true, but most of the active players that I see are new or play much like I do. This is a perception, and my best guess, there is no use in debating it, because it is an opinion without any hard data to back it up.

I don't see anything wrong with improving smart bombs, they are supposed to be smart after all. They've been killing players since they were introduced. I don't think that equipping aoe modules should be liability in high sec. It seems simple enough for them not to hit neutral targets.

I can't keep up with the game constantly, though I do try, but it seems to me that if people are concerned mission payouts and the isk faucets they are, that mission payout and even rat bounties could be dynamically allocated to adjust for more population. The more popular a mission hib becomes, the less it pays per mission. This encourages mission runners to move to new areas, if the scalar for rewards had more priority for lower security and underutilized systems, as would make sense for a faction space wishing to expand its lawful sovereignty, then over times you'd see more players spreading to low/null. Mission agents would probably have to be decoupled stations to make them possible otherwise, the "mission roam" would be hard to do with a specific faction.

This had the added benefit of spreading the load on server nodes and reducing payouts across thew board as some players will not move and increasing ship loss for those that do. It gives more opportunity for pvp in null against mission runners. But it doesn't concentrate the mission runners to certain system, which would make those system a unplayable due to pvp, since pvper could just go to one system and be assured targets, and they'd still have to put together an operation involving probing to be efficient about it.

I know the missions do some of this, but I propose making it more responsive and dynamic than it currently is.

I get some players will never move around, but some is better than the pretty much none that currently exists. And given enough visibility, probably though a mission search window with information on payout multipliers or average isk per mission for systems, and an aggressive enough multiplier for lower security. I think you'll see more players than you've seen in the past.

Even more shocked CCP isn't actively promoting it. There's obviously a market for it.