These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Highsec "Carebear" representation from the CSM?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#241 - 2012-12-12 02:29:13 UTC
JC Anderson wrote:


Also she was removed from the CSM for an NDA disclosure violation.


Speaking of removals, is Mittens back on yet?

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#242 - 2012-12-12 02:52:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

Yes, please monetize those risks.

Gotta start from somewhere, else how do we get the *numbers* to input in the game?


Edit: I stress so much on numbers because:

1) They stop the whining and start *decisions*.

2) Imho hi sec should not have existed at all, but now the milk's been spilled and we have to keep it.
But why it should not have existed at all? Because it's impossible to "price" a reward for a place that does not involve deaths vs others that involve deaths.

IE in the past I have made 10.0 corp standings on 4 characters, never lost a single ship, lost like 10 drones a year. This equals to no loss, so how can you nerf a no loss environment enough to match the risk of say doing 1000 missions in low sec? It's just impossible, hi sec would always get a "zero ISK", that's why the very notion of hi sec is wrong.

But as I said, the notion has been made and now we have to keep hi sec and price its rewards knowing they should tend to zero. But if they tend to zero, we get a mass unsub. So what's the fair price?

Excellent.

I find the best way of beginning to quantify this would be to measure the level of ship/item 'consumption' (read 'stuff being blown up') in the pursuit of reward. With that in mind, here's some statistics:

http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3235

PVP Losses by Secstatus
High Sec - 1,974,022
Null Sec - 7,061,988

http://scaurus.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/PVP-Losses-Jan-2012.jpg
http://scaurus.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Pop-vs-Kills-Jan-2012.jpg

The main problem with both highsec and nullsec is the industrial disparity between the two, which is much more pronounced then the raw resource extraction aspect: L4s are very slightly inferior to nullsec anomalies, mineral mining is roughly equal in null/high - but manufacturing, refining, researching and industry as a whole is so disproportionately and unjustifiably in highsec favour that there is no real purpose discussing balancing the various regions of EVE without addressing this first.

Now there have been several proposals in order to address this, some of which I agree with and some of which I don't - the general aim of what I suggest is that industry in New Eden should be geared towards the level of 'consumption' in their respective secstatuses. According to the graphs assembled from Diagoras' tweets, contests over the rewards of nullsec consumes more of New Eden's output then all other regions combined. While some posters have advocating simply piling on taxes and fees to hisec industry, I argue that hand in hand with a massive low/wh/null industry buff, hisec manufacturing/research capacity overall should be lowered to the point where it can continue to meet all of highsec's needs, but no longer the easy outsource destination for all of New Eden's industrial needs. Or about to a max capacity of around a seventh of present output.

Goods being produced in the regions that consume them would follow with local markets emerging instead of a global trade hub; a bottleneck on highsec's ability to consume and compress minerals for transport would mean more experienced highsec industrialists would (with appropriate low-end min/ice buffs) make the supply the distant null/low markets directly.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#243 - 2012-12-12 03:19:10 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


And you will ultimately dominate not just null sec, but finally, all of high sec as well, once you have completely destroyed any potential of making a living in high sec.



That outcome depends on how many gullible idiots work at CCP.


If I was a CCP stakeholder (it'd be cool to know what's the minimum shares to hold to become heard) I'd impose that null seccers REALLY engage in pre-2010 furious 0.0 continuous warfare and destruction, THEN I'd reward them for risk.

EvE news should return to be the old, continuous epic battle reports that made to the media.

The current news? Somer blink, buy 28 PLEX... YAWN.


See, this is where you and I differ Vaerah.
I don't think there are many, if any, gullible idiots working at CCP.

What is happening with the game the past 12-18 months is a factor of the decisions made by an influential, powerful group within CCP. What their biases and beliefs on the future of the game is easy enough to figure if you look at the in-game corps they belonged to before being hired by CCP.

What I will say is human nature is at work. Though CCP employees are supposed to drop all allegiances to any contacts/corps/alliances when they get hired and become completely neutral, there is no way to stop human nature.

People don't change their attitudes and views on the game overnight.
In fact, they very likely got hired because of their views and attitudes.

I was going to go through a hypothetical hiring process, but can skip to the final analysis.

Let's assume we someone who is a lead dev, or lead content designer, and that dev or content designer formally spent 5 years playing with , oh , I dunno, let's say the goons. Let's assume that person has played a character that has preyed on high sec and hated everything about it for years.

This person who is in a hiring decision position is presented with two candidates for a new junior dev/content design who have equally good technical credentials for the position. It is a real tossup because their skills are both so good.

The person with the null sec bias who is doing the hiring asks the first candidate, "do you play Eve?"

Candidate 1 answers "Oh yes, I love Eve. I love running missions to wind down from a crazy day at work, and love making stuff from the minerals I mine. I run 3 Hulks and an Orca at once in a quiet 0.8 system I have found."

Candidate 2 is asked the same question and answers " Are you kidding? Of course I love Eve. I love scamming noobs in Jita, and have multiple orgasms when I can convince them to fleet with me in null when they are moving their gear in a freighter. I have made so much coin doing that, and figure I have made at least 4 people quit the game. You should see the hate mail I have kept as mementos."

Who do you think that person in the position of power hires?
And then a year or 2 later, that junior person is now in a hiring decision position, and is faced with the same scenario.

You can see what this leads to.
That is where I think we are at now.
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#244 - 2012-12-12 03:32:42 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


What is happening with the game the past 12-18 months is a factor of the decisions made by an influential, powerful group within CCP. What their biases and beliefs on the future of the game is easy enough to figure if you look at the in-game corps they belonged to before being hired by CCP.



Which ones are those? Ive been out of the game a few months and am out of the loop

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#245 - 2012-12-12 03:33:58 UTC
for added forum pleasure read Dinsdale's above post while listening to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2S6ZQn9lvk
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#246 - 2012-12-12 03:37:52 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
for added forum pleasure read Dinsdale's above post while listening to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2S6ZQn9lvk


they removed the rule where creating rumors was actionable? Cause they introduced that around the last time I was on here lol

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#247 - 2012-12-12 03:39:08 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

Yes, please monetize those risks.

Gotta start from somewhere, else how do we get the *numbers* to input in the game?


Edit: I stress so much on numbers because:

1) They stop the whining and start *decisions*.

2) Imho hi sec should not have existed at all, but now the milk's been spilled and we have to keep it.
But why it should not have existed at all? Because it's impossible to "price" a reward for a place that does not involve deaths vs others that involve deaths.

IE in the past I have made 10.0 corp standings on 4 characters, never lost a single ship, lost like 10 drones a year. This equals to no loss, so how can you nerf a no loss environment enough to match the risk of say doing 1000 missions in low sec? It's just impossible, hi sec would always get a "zero ISK", that's why the very notion of hi sec is wrong.

But as I said, the notion has been made and now we have to keep hi sec and price its rewards knowing they should tend to zero. But if they tend to zero, we get a mass unsub. So what's the fair price?

Excellent.

I find the best way of beginning to quantify this would be to measure the level of ship/item 'consumption' (read 'stuff being blown up') in the pursuit of reward. With that in mind, here's some statistics:

http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3235

PVP Losses by Secstatus
High Sec - 1,974,022
Null Sec - 7,061,988

http://scaurus.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/PVP-Losses-Jan-2012.jpg
http://scaurus.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Pop-vs-Kills-Jan-2012.jpg

The main problem with both highsec and nullsec is the industrial disparity between the two, which is much more pronounced then the raw resource extraction aspect: L4s are very slightly inferior to nullsec anomalies, mineral mining is roughly equal in null/high - but manufacturing, refining, researching and industry as a whole is so disproportionately and unjustifiably in highsec favour that there is no real purpose discussing balancing the various regions of EVE without addressing this first.

Now there have been several proposals in order to address this, some of which I agree with and some of which I don't - the general aim of what I suggest is that industry in New Eden should be geared towards the level of 'consumption' in their respective secstatuses. According to the graphs assembled from Diagoras' tweets, contests over the rewards of nullsec consumes more of New Eden's output then all other regions combined. While some posters have advocating simply piling on taxes and fees to hisec industry, I argue that hand in hand with a massive low/wh/null industry buff, hisec manufacturing/research capacity overall should be lowered to the point where it can continue to meet all of highsec's needs, but no longer the easy outsource destination for all of New Eden's industrial needs. Or about to a max capacity of around a seventh of present output.

Goods being produced in the regions that consume them would follow with local markets emerging instead of a global trade hub; a bottleneck on highsec's ability to consume and compress minerals for transport would mean more experienced highsec industrialists would (with appropriate low-end min/ice buffs) make the supply the distant null/low markets directly.


Oh man, you know how to really twist facts and then make outright lies.

First "ship consumption" as you call it.
How about pulling the REAL number there>

TOTAL ship losses:
Null Sec : 7,630,341
High Sec 8,291,948

So first off MORE ships were lost in high sec compared to null.
There goes your first point in a puff of FACTS.

2nd, A Manufacturing POS in null sec works just the same as a high sec POS.
It can be configured for just as many manufacturing slots, just as many invention slots.

The amount of total manufacturing and invention slots available at high sec stations is a pittance compared to the overall slots in the high sec manufacturing POS's. I would LOVE CCP to provide the actual number, but that would just blow this other lie on your part out of the water, and it is extremely unlikely CCP will provide them.

Suffice to say, I ran a high sec POS that allowed me to have 40 different production lines at once. There were 28 moons in that system. Guess how many had POS? Every one of them. There were 3 stations in that system, with 50 each.
So lets say only half the moons POS's were operational. That makes 14 x 40 = 560 mfg slots, compared to 150 mfg slots at the stations.

Next fact to be blown up?
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#248 - 2012-12-12 03:49:39 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


What is happening with the game the past 12-18 months is a factor of the decisions made by an influential, powerful group within CCP. What their biases and beliefs on the future of the game is easy enough to figure if you look at the in-game corps they belonged to before being hired by CCP.



Which ones are those? Ive been out of the game a few months and am out of the loop


Yes, that influential group would be called "game designers and developers".
It is their JOB to make decisions on the direction of the game.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#249 - 2012-12-12 03:52:04 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
for added forum pleasure read Dinsdale's above post while listening to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2S6ZQn9lvk


they removed the rule where creating rumors was actionable? Cause they introduced that around the last time I was on here lol


If it was a rumour, yes.
But this is no rumour.

I will say it one more time, this small influential group called Content Designers and Developers are doing what they are PAID to do, which is chart the direction of the game.

Any more questions for me?
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#250 - 2012-12-12 03:57:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Antisocial Malkavian
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
for added forum pleasure read Dinsdale's above post while listening to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2S6ZQn9lvk


they removed the rule where creating rumors was actionable? Cause they introduced that around the last time I was on here lol


If it was a rumour, yes.
But this is no rumour.

I will say it one more time, this small influential group called Content Designers and Developers are doing what they are PAID to do, which is chart the direction of the game.

Any more questions for me?


copy paste "Content Designers and Developers" and I get no corps. What corps were you alluding to? Or was this a anti - Goons type thing? Cause Im pretty sure that alluding to things like that were why they put that one rule into effect in the first place.

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#251 - 2012-12-12 04:02:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:

TOTAL ship losses:
Null Sec : 7,630,341
High Sec 8,291,948

So first off MORE ships were lost in high sec compared to null.
There goes your first point in a puff of FACTS.

Dinsdale you need to actually read the sources I'm quoting.
When you decide to include ships lost to NPCs when deriving the total, use the scroll wheel to see a list of the most common ships lost to NPCs.:

Condor - Frigate
Atron - Frigate
Slasher -Frigate
Rifter - Frigate
Kestrel - Frigate
Catalyst - Destroyer
Drake - Battlecruiser
Thrasher - Destroyer
Merlin - Frigate

In short, losses to NPCs are from a material consumption standpoint (and ISK standpoint), insignificant; which is why I didn't bother to include them. I could of course argue that since statistically the most a highsec player will even seriously risk is a frigate, therefore they should receive a frigate-level reward. Is that what you think?

Quote:
2nd, A Manufacturing POS in null sec works just the same as a high sec POS.
It can be configured for just as many manufacturing slots, just as many invention slots.

The amount of total manufacturing and invention slots available at high sec stations is a pittance compared to the overall slots in the high sec manufacturing POS's. I would LOVE CCP to provide the actual number, but that would just blow this other lie on your part out of the water, and it is extremely unlikely CCP will provide them.

Suffice to say, I ran a high sec POS that allowed me to have 40 different production lines at once. There were 28 moons in that system. Guess how many had POS? Every one of them. There were 3 stations in that system, with 50 each.
So lets say only half the moons POS's were operational. That makes 14 x 40 = 560 mfg slots, compared to 150 mfg slots at the stations.
Indeed, inequal risk for, as you pointed out, identical reward.

I agree, they need to fixed as well. Noone could have made my case better then you, Dinsdale. Large scale POSs should be 'seventhed' or removed from highsec entirely.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#252 - 2012-12-12 04:08:40 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
for added forum pleasure read Dinsdale's above post while listening to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2S6ZQn9lvk


they removed the rule where creating rumors was actionable? Cause they introduced that around the last time I was on here lol


If it was a rumour, yes.
But this is no rumour.

I will say it one more time, this small influential group called Content Designers and Developers are doing what they are PAID to do, which is chart the direction of the game.

Any more questions for me?


copy paste "Content Designers and Developers" and I get no corps. What corps were you alluding to? Or was this a anti - Goons type thing? Cause Im pretty sure that alluding to things like that were why they put that one rule into effect in the first place.


Really, you can read my mind?
Well done then.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#253 - 2012-12-12 04:20:01 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:

TOTAL ship losses:
Null Sec : 7,630,341
High Sec 8,291,948

So first off MORE ships were lost in high sec compared to null.
There goes your first point in a puff of FACTS.

Dinsdale you need to actually read the sources I'm quoting.
When you decide to include ships lost to NPCs when deriving the total, use the scroll wheel to see a list of the most common ships lost to NPCs.:

Condor - Frigate
Atron - Frigate
Slasher -Frigate
Rifter - Frigate
Kestrel - Frigate
Catalyst - Destroyer
Drake - Battlecruiser
Thrasher - Destroyer
Merlin - Frigate

In short, losses to NPCs are from a material consumption standpoint (and ISK standpoint), insignificant; which is why I didn't bother to include them. I could of course argue that since statistically the most a highsec player will even seriously risk is a frigate, therefore they should receive a frigate-level reward. Is that what you think?

Quote:
2nd, A Manufacturing POS in null sec works just the same as a high sec POS.
It can be configured for just as many manufacturing slots, just as many invention slots.

The amount of total manufacturing and invention slots available at high sec stations is a pittance compared to the overall slots in the high sec manufacturing POS's. I would LOVE CCP to provide the actual number, but that would just blow this other lie on your part out of the water, and it is extremely unlikely CCP will provide them.

Suffice to say, I ran a high sec POS that allowed me to have 40 different production lines at once. There were 28 moons in that system. Guess how many had POS? Every one of them. There were 3 stations in that system, with 50 each.
So lets say only half the moons POS's were operational. That makes 14 x 40 = 560 mfg slots, compared to 150 mfg slots at the stations.
Indeed, inequal risk for, as you pointed out, identical reward.

I agree, they need to fixed as well. Noone could have made my case better then you, Dinsdale. Large scale POSs should be 'seventhed' or removed from highsec entirely.


Righht....when challenged with facts, switch gears.
I am not even going to begin with how many cyno alts are lost in null, because it is utterly pointless getting into it with you regarding ship losses and the ISK generation in null.
Remember, I LIVED there. I know precisely how much ISK can be churned.

As for manufacturing capabilities, I have stated it umpteen times, the only reason that mfg is not done in null, is because the ISK / hour from mfg is peanuts compared to ratting Sanctums/Havens and running anomalies and escalations.
Oh, and I will keep looking for those high sec POS's parked next to a tech moon churning out 7 billion / month, that require 1 hour of work / month.

But you keep spinning your propaganda.

Like I also have already stated, you guys will achieve total victory soon enough, and the numbers you are suggesting are very likely to be close to what will happen in June.
Frying Doom
#254 - 2012-12-12 05:14:32 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:

TOTAL ship losses:
Null Sec : 7,630,341
High Sec 8,291,948

So first off MORE ships were lost in high sec compared to null.
There goes your first point in a puff of FACTS.

Dinsdale you need to actually read the sources I'm quoting.
When you decide to include ships lost to NPCs when deriving the total, use the scroll wheel to see a list of the most common ships lost to NPCs.:

Condor - Frigate
Atron - Frigate
Slasher -Frigate
Rifter - Frigate
Kestrel - Frigate
Catalyst - Destroyer
Drake - Battlecruiser
Thrasher - Destroyer
Merlin - Frigate

In short, losses to NPCs are from a material consumption standpoint (and ISK standpoint), insignificant; which is why I didn't bother to include them. I could of course argue that since statistically the most a highsec player will even seriously risk is a frigate, therefore they should receive a frigate-level reward. Is that what you think?

Quote:
2nd, A Manufacturing POS in null sec works just the same as a high sec POS.
It can be configured for just as many manufacturing slots, just as many invention slots.

The amount of total manufacturing and invention slots available at high sec stations is a pittance compared to the overall slots in the high sec manufacturing POS's. I would LOVE CCP to provide the actual number, but that would just blow this other lie on your part out of the water, and it is extremely unlikely CCP will provide them.

Suffice to say, I ran a high sec POS that allowed me to have 40 different production lines at once. There were 28 moons in that system. Guess how many had POS? Every one of them. There were 3 stations in that system, with 50 each.
So lets say only half the moons POS's were operational. That makes 14 x 40 = 560 mfg slots, compared to 150 mfg slots at the stations.
Indeed, inequal risk for, as you pointed out, identical reward.

I agree, they need to fixed as well. Noone could have made my case better then you, Dinsdale. Large scale POSs should be 'seventhed' or removed from highsec entirely.

I love how people manipulate statistics

Maybe you can show me I am missing something
High Sec lost 6,317,926 ships to PVE
Null Lost 568,353 ships to PVE

Between the 2 areas as well as Lo-sec and Wormholes, a total of 1,738,142 Frigates were killed.
so you took out a the complete NPC kills of Hi sec being 6,317,926 ships and Nulls 568,353 kills to show that Null losses more ships

Even though it does not say anywhere the percentage of those that were destroyed in Hi-sec compared to Null.

So effectively you got caught out in a lie.

As the second most destroyed ship is Battlecruisers with 1,299,488 destroyed all up.

So facts are facts but saying a frigate is the most a hi-sec dweller will risk is kind of crap as most PvE is lvl 3s and 4s done in Hi-sec and you cant do them in a frigate.

So no Null is an import user of minerals but not the be all and end all of the game in any respect.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
#255 - 2012-12-12 05:17:04 UTC
AndromacheDarkstar wrote:
And to be honest who really gives a **** if you choose to unsubscribe..


CCP does.




http://youtu.be/t0q2F8NsYQ0
Amarra Mandalin
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#256 - 2012-12-12 05:29:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Amarra Mandalin
Pointing out that all of Null isn't created equal. So quit perpetrating the myth about how hard you all have it. *All* of you don't. My respect to those who do.

This is a long post so just move on if that is a problem, please.

I was in a now defunct corp/alliance that you may have heard of, BDEAL (aka Internet Spaceship League). It was part of the CFC in Fountain.

Was? Why yes. And their demise was due to risk-adverse behaviors, largely.

Once a strong, semi well-known group, when I was there most the people didn't undock for a defense fleet, though plenty mined and ratted nearly *risk-free* -- such that it was before The G0dfathers became serious.

Do you know I actually had to go on roams with a nearby corp to look for PvP? This while many fat and lazy people were making untold Isk? (Ok, so I was the stupid one).

They didn't undock for CTAs or to hunt a war target in local, let alone for sport.

It really wasn't that risky navigating the Jump Bridge network. ***I have lost more non-combat ships in non-afk high-sec ganks (in my very limited mining experience) then I did PvP ships there.***

But there are your entitled carebears, they are not just in high-sec.

There are other parts of Null I've been in where you couldn't undock w/o being ejected and killed. I realize this. But this isn't the case for well- established SOV holders and people buried deep in Null. This includes renters.

LOW-SEC, PvP & High Sec Missioners

Also, I'll say that while in a low-sec PvP corp, some of the ex-null pilots we accepted were no better (and some worse) than any carebear that grew claws and joined. For the most part, they made better scouts due to paranoia but that was the extent of their superiority in PvP. They weren't used to risky fleets and being outnumbered.

***Overall, low-sec seems the most risky with the least reward.*** (hold for the connection to high-sec)

It is either blobby or dead, (unless you join FW) and hot drops make it less fun.

But here you will find hardcore PvPers that have a much harder time grinding up sec status etc. Some make good money on wormholes, or travel ad nauseum to rat, but those who don't, do you know how they fund their PvP?

***Grinding missions in high-sec is how.***
Many give a rat's tail about Indy, they just want to pew pew.
Many RvBers and FW pilots earn their PvP funding the same way.
These are the people that buy your ships, mods etc.
Some of these pilots venture to Null for their PvP.
Null sec is not your only customer.

Think about that next time you generalize who high-sec is -- these whiny, bunch of people who take no risks. I have 2 other toons with kllboards full of risk -- in ALL secs be it voluntary, war etc.

In Eve, it really doesn't matter where you are -- if you don't have big alliance muscle (or some backwater system), you're taking a risk every time you undock. Granted some blood and considerable isk was shed for alliances and corps to get where they are and maintain, but you'll also find many station spinners and profiteers in all of Eve who have vested little to nothing for their presence.

And don't say they are booted, as they are not, esp. if they pay taxes or rent. Some join minimal CTAs.

Otherwise, it is more risky flying in Jita or mining in much of Empire then many areas of Null.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#257 - 2012-12-12 05:36:39 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Quote:


In short, losses to NPCs are from a material consumption standpoint (and ISK standpoint), insignificant; which is why I didn't bother to include them. I could of course argue that since statistically the most a highsec player will even seriously risk is a frigate, therefore they should receive a frigate-level reward. Is that what you think?

Quote:
2nd, A Manufacturing POS in null sec works just the same as a high sec POS.
It can be configured for just as many manufacturing slots, just as many invention slots.

The amount of total manufacturing and invention slots available at high sec stations is a pittance compared to the overall slots in the high sec manufacturing POS's. I would LOVE CCP to provide the actual number, but that would just blow this other lie on your part out of the water, and it is extremely unlikely CCP will provide them.

Suffice to say, I ran a high sec POS that allowed me to have 40 different production lines at once. There were 28 moons in that system. Guess how many had POS? Every one of them. There were 3 stations in that system, with 50 each.
So lets say only half the moons POS's were operational. That makes 14 x 40 = 560 mfg slots, compared to 150 mfg slots at the stations.
Indeed, inequal risk for, as you pointed out, identical reward.

I agree, they need to fixed as well. Noone could have made my case better then you, Dinsdale. Large scale POSs should be 'seventhed' or removed from highsec entirely.


Righht....when challenged with facts, switch gears.
You have presented no facts, merely inferences against CCP staff of some sort of overarching goon conspiracies.

Quote:
I am not even going to begin with how many cyno alts are lost in null, because it is utterly pointless getting into it with you regarding ship losses and the ISK generation in null.
Also because you don't know and can't cite it.
Quote:
Oh, and I will keep looking for those high sec POS's parked next to a tech moon churning out 7 billion / month, that require 1 hour of work / month.
So go capture one. See if it takes you more then one hour a month to capture and maintain it.
Frying Doom
#258 - 2012-12-12 05:51:45 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Quote:


In short, losses to NPCs are from a material consumption standpoint (and ISK standpoint), insignificant; which is why I didn't bother to include them. I could of course argue that since statistically the most a highsec player will even seriously risk is a frigate, therefore they should receive a frigate-level reward. Is that what you think?

Quote:
2nd, A Manufacturing POS in null sec works just the same as a high sec POS.
It can be configured for just as many manufacturing slots, just as many invention slots.

The amount of total manufacturing and invention slots available at high sec stations is a pittance compared to the overall slots in the high sec manufacturing POS's. I would LOVE CCP to provide the actual number, but that would just blow this other lie on your part out of the water, and it is extremely unlikely CCP will provide them.

Suffice to say, I ran a high sec POS that allowed me to have 40 different production lines at once. There were 28 moons in that system. Guess how many had POS? Every one of them. There were 3 stations in that system, with 50 each.
So lets say only half the moons POS's were operational. That makes 14 x 40 = 560 mfg slots, compared to 150 mfg slots at the stations.
Indeed, inequal risk for, as you pointed out, identical reward.

I agree, they need to fixed as well. Noone could have made my case better then you, Dinsdale. Large scale POSs should be 'seventhed' or removed from highsec entirely.


Righht....when challenged with facts, switch gears.
You have presented no facts, merely inferences against CCP staff of some sort of overarching goon conspiracies.


What I want to know is to keep risk vs. reward at a proper balance.

If they give Null sec all the outpost and POS upgrades as well as all the Hi-sec minerals they want, given that they already have gates, local, the ability to cyno in friends for back up, the ability to claim sov, build supers, tech moons, titan bridges, missions, NPC and Pirate BPOs and lets face it the list goes on.

Does this mean you just get a free billion deposited into your account for entering a wormhole? and a few trillion to live there?

You know just to keep risk vs. reward that the Null bunnies keep going on about level and fair for all.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#259 - 2012-12-12 06:06:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Frying Doom wrote:

Maybe you can show me I am missing something
High Sec lost 6,317,926 ships to PVE
Null Lost 568,353 ships to PVE

Between the 2 areas as well as Lo-sec and Wormholes, a total of 1,738,142 Frigates were killed.
so you took out a the complete NPC kills of Hi sec being 6,317,926 ships and Nulls 568,353 kills to show that Null losses more ships
Incorrect. My point was to say Null loses more resources (in the form of goods and ships). 17 out of the top 20 ships killed by NPCs were frigates, noobships and destroyers; a trend that does not follow with PVP losses, which start with the Hurricane (not a frigate). If you want to claim that battlecruisers do not consume more or an equal amount of resources as frigates, feel free.

Quote:
So facts are facts but saying a frigate is the most a hi-sec dweller will risk is kind of crap as most PvE is lvl 3s and 4s done in Hi-sec and you cant do them in a frigate.
The two statements are not mutually exclusive: Once a highsec player has gained the ability to do lvl3 missions, he has passed the biggest source of highsec NPC lossmails - level 2 missions.

Or, as Diagoras himself says about the source of NPC kills: "And what do NPCs manage to destroy? Well, from the looks of things, the tutorials are killing quite a few players:"

Quote:
So no Null is an import user of minerals but not the be all and end all of the game in any respect.
The majority of everything produced in EVE is ultimately consumed by way of nullsec players shooting other nullsec players. According to you and Dinsdale's metric of including NPC kills, the truest risk in highsec is apparently found within the highsec tutorials.
Frying Doom
#260 - 2012-12-12 06:21:26 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

Maybe you can show me I am missing something
High Sec lost 6,317,926 ships to PVE
Null Lost 568,353 ships to PVE

Between the 2 areas as well as Lo-sec and Wormholes, a total of 1,738,142 Frigates were killed.
so you took out a the complete NPC kills of Hi sec being 6,317,926 ships and Nulls 568,353 kills to show that Null losses more ships
Incorrect. My point was to say Null loses more resources (in the form of goods and ships). 17 out of the top 20 ships killed by NPCs were frigates, noobships and destroyers; a trend that does not follow with PVP losses, which start with the Hurricane (not a frigate). If you want to claim that battlecruisers do not consume more or an equal amount of resources as frigates, feel free.

No what I want to say is that the mineral requirements for
Condor 416,008

Atron 370,865

Slasher 262,312

Rifter 225,672

Kestrel 222,612

Catalyst 212,036

Drake 198,481

Thrasher 191,311

Merlin 173,076

Raven 161,661

Cormorant 159,616

Crucifier 155,691

Tristan 144,963

Executioner 113,012

Caracal 109,367

Punisher 108,685

Dominix 100,247

Coercer 99,493

Incursus 87,827

Vexor 74,613

Is not insignificant, yes there are a lot of frigates here and a lot of Battleships.

Hardly an insignificant amount of minerals

Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Quote:
So facts are facts but saying a frigate is the most a hi-sec dweller will risk is kind of crap as most PvE is lvl 3s and 4s done in Hi-sec and you cant do them in a frigate.
The two statements are not mutually exclusive: Once a highsec player has gained the ability to do lvl3 missions, he has passed the biggest source of highsec NPC lossmails - level 2 missions.

Or, as Diagoras himself says about the source of NPC kills: "And what do NPCs manage to destroy? Well, from the looks of things, the tutorials are killing quite a few players:"

Quote:
So no Null is an import user of minerals but not the be all and end all of the game in any respect.
The majority of everything produced in EVE is ultimately consumed by way of nullsec players shooting other nullsec players. According to you and Dinsdale's metric of including NPC kills, the truest risk in highsec is apparently found within the highsec tutorials.

Look more babble, funny I didnt mention tutorials and people lost hundreds of thousands of battleships in tutorials did they?

Another Null lets screw up facts and talk dribble post. You guys need new material.Lol

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!