These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why does nullsec care so much about what highsec is doing?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
#241 - 2012-12-12 15:17:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Khergit Deserters
As if EVE's steep learning curve doesn't already discourage new subscribers from sticking around-- some people are worried that high sec is too safe/profitable. A lot of new players start out just tooling around in high sec, trying different things in the sandbox. If they feel overpowered by the older players, and if they can't make decent isk, will they stick around and keep subscribing? No new players, no EVE, you know. Unless the last few bittervets want to pay some 100s of dollars/month for subscriptions. Not game time via PLEX, but real dollars.
Darenthul
Anstard Armory Inc.
#242 - 2012-12-12 15:19:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Darenthul
Jenn aSide wrote:
Darenthul wrote:
Here's where I'm confused as a Miner.

I currently mine in high-sec (don't lynch me, hear me out), mostly because my corp hasn't gotten a large enough security detachment or experience in low/null to begin mining there. We're slowly pushing our way out. Everyone says mining in high-sec is so much more profitable, yet 0.5 and up you only have access to half the minerals, and the most valuable ores are found in null-sec. The profit margins we've calculated show a steep and direct increase in profits for mining out in low/null, not to mention the generally larger asteroids period which cuts down on micromanaging drastically.

So I'm legitimately curious about all this, why are people saying high-sec mining is better?


For the exact same reason why High Sec lvl 4s are better than null/low sec lvl 4s. For the exact same reasons who high sec incursions are better than null/low sec incursions despite null sec incursions being the best isk in the game ON PAPER.

you can do them all day and night with no interruption other than stupid things like bumping. If someone shoots you without a wardec, THE GAME ITSELF eats their ships up.

I do high sec incursions without even having local chat up, you can't do that in low or null, which is why there ARE not real dedicated low and null sec "Incursion Communities" but several in high sec.

EVERY calculation of benefit in any discussion of High Sec must include safety/CONCORD. Sure, people can screw up your mining in high sec, but they have to put in way more effort than it would take to disrupt mining anywhere else. All i have to do is jump into a system owned by someone I'm not blue to to stop ALL mining in that system.


Quote:

There's fewer roids (due to smaller belts and smaller roids and more people), there's less access to minerals (meaning we can only craft stuff that requires the big 4 minerals, or what we can import from low/null which massively cuts profits), and the minerals we can get aren't worth as much per volume as lower security minerals.

I'd gladly give up safety to mine in lower security and get access to those things. That's why its what we plan on doing.


You could be doing that already, most null sec sov holding alliances have renter alliances your corp could rent space from and mine till you die. Like Test Friends Please Ignore, Initiative Associates, Northern Associates,Rolling Thunder, Solar Citizens, AAA Citizens etc etc. Corps within those renter alliances are always recruiting in the recruiting section. I don't know of a single renter allaince or corp that makes it's members pvp or do anything other than what they want to.

That's why i always do a double take when people talk about how "hard" it is to go to null sec, it's not hard at all unless you think you can go from 2 month of mission runner to top tier null sec pvp alliance just like that.


The problem is most renter alliances will charge absurd costs that negate any bonuses we could have as well as having the other impacts the poster that responded to my thread listed. I've heard plenty of horror stories of people with their mining gear stuck in the middle of nowhere because they couldn't mine enough to keep their landlords happy.

If I go to nullsec, I want it to be on my own, not by having my hand held by an alliance. There has to be an escalation of operations on its own merits. You can't rely on anyone else. That's why I'd be more privy to low-sec even over null-sec. Not because its "hard" to get into null-sec, but because I don't want to rely on some zerg corp to watch my back while I mine, I want to do my own mining, when I want, how I want, and the losses are MY fault and not theirs.

Edit: To note, we do calculate in the loss of mining ships into overhead to determine what the maximum potential loss we can incur without a hit to profits. The biggest issues honestly just come down to (as the responder said) if the ships get locked in a station during a prime mining time for instance.

"I find mining to be an incredibly relaxing thing to do after work. It's like fishing without waking up early. Or cold. But the beer, the beer is the same." - arramdaywalker
Silath Slyver Silverpine
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#243 - 2012-12-12 15:24:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Silath Slyver Silverpine
Khergit Deserters wrote:
As if EVE's steep learning curve doesn't already discourage new subscribers from sticking around-- some people are worried that high sec is too safe/profitable. A lot of new players start out just tooling around in high sec, trying different things in the sandbox.* If it's not fun for them, will they stick around and keep subscribing? No new players, no EVE, you know. Unless the last few bittervets want to pay some 100s of dollars/month for subscriptions. Not game time via PLEX, but real dollars.


It seems to be you make a good point here, and discover part of the problem with both High, low, and nullsec veterans.

It's easy to forget what life was like before you had, literally, billions of ISK and tens of millions of SP. It's also easy to fall into that sort of "Well in MY day . . . " mentality, of 'If things were hard for me, and I made it, they damned well better be hard for any newcomers too!'

And, well, that's just silly. Just because you suffered through something doesn't necessarily mean that new players should suffer through it too; that's just being vindictive and spiteful.

I'm not saying EVE should go the route of WoW and make things rediculously easy over time to pull in every possible subscriber, and by and large, EVE hasn't done that. As far as security status of systems goes, that's changed very little, so all these worries seem moot when it comes to that particular issue.

And as far as people not wanting to go into nullsec from highsec . . . it's all about profits. If you're a solo player or in a small corporation, it's probably a lot more profitable to stay in highsec. That's not the players fault; it's a result of game mechanics.
Of course, they could band up to form huge corporations, then alliances, then duke it out. But not every has the time, inclination, or energy to do that. I don't think people should be punished for having different social obligations or preferences.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#244 - 2012-12-12 15:25:49 UTC
Silath Slyver Silverpine wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Darenthul wrote:
Here's where I'm confused as a Miner.

I currently mine in high-sec (don't lynch me, hear me out), mostly because my corp hasn't gotten a large enough security detachment or experience in low/null to begin mining there. We're slowly pushing our way out. Everyone says mining in high-sec is so much more profitable, yet 0.5 and up you only have access to half the minerals, and the most valuable ores are found in null-sec. The profit margins we've calculated show a steep and direct increase in profits for mining out in low/null, not to mention the generally larger asteroids period which cuts down on micromanaging drastically.

So I'm legitimately curious about all this, why are people saying high-sec mining is better? There's fewer roids (due to smaller belts and smaller roids and more people), there's less access to minerals (meaning we can only craft stuff that requires the big 4 minerals, or what we can import from low/null which massively cuts profits), and the minerals we can get aren't worth as much per volume as lower security minerals.

I'd gladly give up safety to mine in lower security and get access to those things. That's why its what we plan on doing.


The downsides to mining in nullsec are as follows. You can evaluate the effective overhead imposed

(1) You can't mine all the time whenever you want, because hostiles may move through the area. Although you can avoid losing ships if you're alert, watch local and read intel channels, you don't make any ISK whilst you're sat in a POS. Solo mining is also an issue because 0.0 belt rats are much tougher than hi-sec ones and can easily kill a mining barge.

(2) You can only have 1 outpost in a system, and it's only worth refining at minmatar outposts. So if you want to mine most of the belts, you'll have to haul the ore. And you'll need all-V skills and implants to get close to the refine levels you can achieve at the good NPC stations. And once you've refined it, you'll probably have to haul the minerals to an Amarr outpost to use them to build anything; prepare to be surprised and disappointed with the number of build slots available.

(3) If you're in sov space, there is the everpresent risk that you'll lose your space. Before giving too much credence to the burblings of people who don't live in 0.0 about how "it's all blue", I would look at a DOTLAN map of a year ago, and look at today's, and see how much space changed hands. Quite a lot, I think you'll agree. Even if the space hasn't changed Alliance hands, there's the risk that your corp will fall apart, leaving you stranded.

(4) Most 0.0 ores are worth less than Scordite. In fact only the MABC ones are worth more, and they're not available in all systems; most top out at Spodumain and Gneiss.

By all means, go and see for yourself. There's nothing like first hand information. But I think you'll find that we're not just making this **** up.



It seems like any problems with mining boil down to profitability of the ore.

As it stands right now, there's a high demand for pyerite, for example, which means scordite is selling almost as well (not per unit, but per cycle, which is what should matter to any good miner :P ) as the lowsec ores.

Of course, this means that in terms of risk/reward, lowsec is not neccesarily worth it.

Thing is, this is a result of two factors, as I see it:
1) Functions of the market, IE; Supply and Demand. So far the supply of pyerite hasn't, amazingly, exceeded demand; prices for scordite for example have remained remarkably stable over the last several months.
2) The fact that ships etc need vast amounts of tritanium and pyerite to be produced. If CCP were to reduce the number of these minerals for manufacturing, it stands to reason demand, and therefor prices, would go down. Whether or not CCP should do this, I won't get into here.

Edit: Alternatively they could increase the amount of lowsec minerals needed for manufacturing -Shrug.-


In fact there are incredible quantities of low-ends going unused in the belts of 0.0. Seriously - the rocks there are like moons. This is for the very good reason that the logistics are such a pain (even with jump freighters and titans and yadda yadda) that it's really only cost effective to mine for Mercoxit, Zydrine and Megacyte, sell those in hi-sec, and import the low ends.

If local mining and production conditions improved in 0.0, there would be more incentive to mine the low and mid end minerals there, and their relative price would fall as less would be needed from hi-sec.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#245 - 2012-12-12 15:28:34 UTC
Scatim Helicon wrote:
Of course, that will bring us to our next Fox News talking point, that 'highsec is actually the most dangerous space' with snide references to 'nullbears' and 'blue lists'.

Sometimes even your blues shoot you, heh heh.

Nerf blues.

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 ?
Darenthul
Anstard Armory Inc.
#246 - 2012-12-12 15:28:49 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Silath Slyver Silverpine wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Darenthul wrote:
Here's where I'm confused as a Miner.

I currently mine in high-sec (don't lynch me, hear me out), mostly because my corp hasn't gotten a large enough security detachment or experience in low/null to begin mining there. We're slowly pushing our way out. Everyone says mining in high-sec is so much more profitable, yet 0.5 and up you only have access to half the minerals, and the most valuable ores are found in null-sec. The profit margins we've calculated show a steep and direct increase in profits for mining out in low/null, not to mention the generally larger asteroids period which cuts down on micromanaging drastically.

So I'm legitimately curious about all this, why are people saying high-sec mining is better? There's fewer roids (due to smaller belts and smaller roids and more people), there's less access to minerals (meaning we can only craft stuff that requires the big 4 minerals, or what we can import from low/null which massively cuts profits), and the minerals we can get aren't worth as much per volume as lower security minerals.

I'd gladly give up safety to mine in lower security and get access to those things. That's why its what we plan on doing.


The downsides to mining in nullsec are as follows. You can evaluate the effective overhead imposed

(1) You can't mine all the time whenever you want, because hostiles may move through the area. Although you can avoid losing ships if you're alert, watch local and read intel channels, you don't make any ISK whilst you're sat in a POS. Solo mining is also an issue because 0.0 belt rats are much tougher than hi-sec ones and can easily kill a mining barge.

(2) You can only have 1 outpost in a system, and it's only worth refining at minmatar outposts. So if you want to mine most of the belts, you'll have to haul the ore. And you'll need all-V skills and implants to get close to the refine levels you can achieve at the good NPC stations. And once you've refined it, you'll probably have to haul the minerals to an Amarr outpost to use them to build anything; prepare to be surprised and disappointed with the number of build slots available.

(3) If you're in sov space, there is the everpresent risk that you'll lose your space. Before giving too much credence to the burblings of people who don't live in 0.0 about how "it's all blue", I would look at a DOTLAN map of a year ago, and look at today's, and see how much space changed hands. Quite a lot, I think you'll agree. Even if the space hasn't changed Alliance hands, there's the risk that your corp will fall apart, leaving you stranded.

(4) Most 0.0 ores are worth less than Scordite. In fact only the MABC ones are worth more, and they're not available in all systems; most top out at Spodumain and Gneiss.

By all means, go and see for yourself. There's nothing like first hand information. But I think you'll find that we're not just making this **** up.



It seems like any problems with mining boil down to profitability of the ore.

As it stands right now, there's a high demand for pyerite, for example, which means scordite is selling almost as well (not per unit, but per cycle, which is what should matter to any good miner :P ) as the lowsec ores.

Of course, this means that in terms of risk/reward, lowsec is not neccesarily worth it.

Thing is, this is a result of two factors, as I see it:
1) Functions of the market, IE; Supply and Demand. So far the supply of pyerite hasn't, amazingly, exceeded demand; prices for scordite for example have remained remarkably stable over the last several months.
2) The fact that ships etc need vast amounts of tritanium and pyerite to be produced. If CCP were to reduce the number of these minerals for manufacturing, it stands to reason demand, and therefor prices, would go down. Whether or not CCP should do this, I won't get into here.

Edit: Alternatively they could increase the amount of lowsec minerals needed for manufacturing -Shrug.-


In fact there are incredible quantities of low-ends going unused in the belts of 0.0. Seriously - the rocks there are like moons. This is for the very good reason that the logistics are such a pain (even with jump freighters and titans and yadda yadda) that it's really only cost effective to mine for Mercoxit, Zydrine and Megacyte, sell those in hi-sec, and import the low ends.

If local mining and production conditions improved in 0.0, there would be more incentive to mine the low and mid end minerals there, and their relative price would fall as less would be needed from hi-sec.


I hate to say it, but the best thing I think we all can do in this situation is see what CCP has planned. We know POS's are being overhauled entirely supposedly, which will DRAMATICALLY impact null-sec, and we'll definitely see something special at Fanfest 2013 (since its the anniversary). I know a lot of people hate the "hurry up and wait" mentality, but its probably all we can do at the moment.

"I find mining to be an incredibly relaxing thing to do after work. It's like fishing without waking up early. Or cold. But the beer, the beer is the same." - arramdaywalker
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#247 - 2012-12-12 15:34:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Quote:


If I go to nullsec, I want it to be on my own, not by having my hand held by an alliance. There has to be an escalation of operations on its own merits. You can't rely on anyone else. That's why I'd be more privy to low-sec even over null-sec. Not because its "hard" to get into null-sec, but because I don't want to rely on some zerg corp to watch my back while I mine, I want to do my own mining, when I want, how I want, and the losses are MY fault and not theirs.


While this is theoretically doable, it is high unrealistic and basically setting yourselves up for failure and frustration. Many a high sec player wants to "go to null sec on their own terms".

With the exception of ninja Exploration and the like, Null sec isn't a "your terms" place, it's a "cold reality of people with guns" place. Doing what you say you want to do is like opening a Jewish Deli in Somalia "on your own terms" and expecting it to not get burned down the 1st day lol.

High Sec is the Burger King "have it your way" area of EVE, the rest of EVE is "conform to reality or die/fail". And anything CCP tries to do to open up null sec to "the little guys" will simply end up further entrenching the status quo Alliances (Malcanis' law in full effect YO).

To do what you want to do in null, you'd 1st have to create around your mining corp a huge alliance of high sec gunslingers that could challenge the established forces out there. Problem is you can't get High Sec people to coordinate long enough to make a Salad let alone organize well enough to fight in 0.0........
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#248 - 2012-12-12 15:35:09 UTC
Darenthul wrote:

The problem is most renter alliances will charge absurd costs that negate any bonuses we could have as well as having the other impacts the poster that responded to my thread listed. I've heard plenty of horror stories of people with their mining gear stuck in the middle of nowhere because they couldn't mine enough to keep their landlords happy.



Some do, some don't. And remember, you don't know how much it costs to take and hold space (hint: a lot). What might seem "absurd" to you might actually be little more than breaking even.


Darenthul wrote:

If I go to nullsec, I want it to be on my own, not by having my hand held by an alliance. There has to be an escalation of operations on its own merits. You can't rely on anyone else. That's why I'd be more privy to low-sec even over null-sec. Not because its "hard" to get into null-sec, but because I don't want to rely on some zerg corp to watch my back while I mine, I want to do my own mining, when I want, how I want, and the losses are MY fault and not theirs.


I don't want to say that it's impossible to mine on your own in nullsec, but I think you'll find it extremely challenging. Most alliances are actually quite nice to their members, contrary to what you may read in General Discussion from people who were once in one bad alliance 5 years ago. Basically, if you're in an alliance, you'll be expected to contribute to maintaining and defending alliance space, because very few alliances want freeloaders. (This lack of respect for freeloaders is what the GD crowd are referring to when they complain about being in alliances) If you're renting, you don't have to do anything, but you'll be expected to pay ISK instead. Think of it as being the difference between a homeowner and a renter.

Different alliances will have different expectations. It is worth shopping around.

Darenthul wrote:

Edit: To note, we do calculate in the loss of mining ships into overhead to determine what the maximum potential loss we can incur without a hit to profits. The biggest issues honestly just come down to (as the responder said) if the ships get locked in a station during a prime mining time for instance.


Don't forget to factor in the fact that you'll often have to import ships from 0.0, with the consequent time/ISK overhead.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Darenthul
Anstard Armory Inc.
#249 - 2012-12-12 15:36:44 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


If I go to nullsec, I want it to be on my own, not by having my hand held by an alliance. There has to be an escalation of operations on its own merits. You can't rely on anyone else. That's why I'd be more privy to low-sec even over null-sec. Not because its "hard" to get into null-sec, but because I don't want to rely on some zerg corp to watch my back while I mine, I want to do my own mining, when I want, how I want, and the losses are MY fault and not theirs.


While this is theoretically doable, it is high unrealistic and basically setting yourselves up for failure and frustration. Many a high sec player wants to "go to null sec on their own terms".

With the exception of ninja Exploration and the like, Null sec isn't a "your terms" place, it's a "cold reality of people with guns" place. Doing what you say you want to do is like opening a Jewish Deli in Somalia "on your own terms" and expecting it to not get burned down the 1st day lol.

High Sec is the Burger King "have it your way" area of EVE, the rest of EVE is "conform to reality or die/fail". And anything CCP tries to do to open up null sec to "the little guys" will simply end up further entrenching the status quo Alliances (Malcanis' law in full effect YO).

To do what you want to do in null, you'd 1st have to create around your mining corp a huge alliance of high sec gunslingers that could challenge the established forces out there. Problem is you can't get High Sec people to coordinate long enough to make a Salad let alone organize well enough to fight in 0.0........


Hence why I think I'm going to stay with Lowsec. I'd rather my fate be more determined by my own capabilities. This kinda cements my decision after reading all this ;)

"I find mining to be an incredibly relaxing thing to do after work. It's like fishing without waking up early. Or cold. But the beer, the beer is the same." - arramdaywalker
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#250 - 2012-12-12 15:49:49 UTC
Darenthul wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


If I go to nullsec, I want it to be on my own, not by having my hand held by an alliance. There has to be an escalation of operations on its own merits. You can't rely on anyone else. That's why I'd be more privy to low-sec even over null-sec. Not because its "hard" to get into null-sec, but because I don't want to rely on some zerg corp to watch my back while I mine, I want to do my own mining, when I want, how I want, and the losses are MY fault and not theirs.


While this is theoretically doable, it is high unrealistic and basically setting yourselves up for failure and frustration. Many a high sec player wants to "go to null sec on their own terms".

With the exception of ninja Exploration and the like, Null sec isn't a "your terms" place, it's a "cold reality of people with guns" place. Doing what you say you want to do is like opening a Jewish Deli in Somalia "on your own terms" and expecting it to not get burned down the 1st day lol.

High Sec is the Burger King "have it your way" area of EVE, the rest of EVE is "conform to reality or die/fail". And anything CCP tries to do to open up null sec to "the little guys" will simply end up further entrenching the status quo Alliances (Malcanis' law in full effect YO).

To do what you want to do in null, you'd 1st have to create around your mining corp a huge alliance of high sec gunslingers that could challenge the established forces out there. Problem is you can't get High Sec people to coordinate long enough to make a Salad let alone organize well enough to fight in 0.0........


Hence why I think I'm going to stay with Lowsec. I'd rather my fate be more determined by my own capabilities. This kinda cements my decision after reading all this ;)


That's probably sensible. I wish you the best of luck and I wish there were more like you.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Firestorm Delta
Aphotic Machina
#251 - 2012-12-12 15:52:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Firestorm Delta
Stopped reading at about page 4 as I'm sure not much was said that would change my opinion.

I will start of by saying I am a High Sec Dweller. Some might say carebear but I have stepped out into low sec, and the cold void of wormhole space a few times, and properly punished for not being ready for such endeavors, and rewarded for when I was. At this point in time though I have little personal reason to leave high sec due to long term goals, so it has been some time since I stepped out of high sec. Is there something wrong with this? No, I mine, run missions, and build up isk to buy the things that will be needed in the future.

What is wrong is that there are people who only do a small part of this so often, that they can make as much if not more isk, then those who have to fight wars from time to time just to simply keep control of their space. This is wrong, and coupled with everyone tendency to kill anything that is not friendly on sight, does not draw people out of high sec.

There are 100's of things that could be done to fix these various issues. However the people in high sec, who seem to enjoy running lvl 4 missions non stop for days on end, should realize that things shouldn't get better for them.

Instead of nerfing high sec, (although there are a few changes to missions and npc pirates in general I would like to see), we need to focus on making low sec, and null sec, both more fun, and more rewarding. Those of you who live in such areas need to speak up and pin down every reason why this should be and how to best do it, but those of us who live in high sec need to back them on this. If only one side is supporting these changes then it will be much harder to push them through. I want a reason to do missions in lowsec, I want to know that the extra risk I take heading down into lowsec for the same thing I can do in high sec will be worth my time if I can avoid getting ganked. I'm sure those who live in null and low would appreciate being able to survive better while being less tied to high sec. Not completely removed, but less reliant.

One thing that may help with this is doing something about npc corporations. Thousands of people sit in those and never leave, why not give them an incentive for them to get out after a few months. When they realize they can easily find and form groups with people who would be willing to visit low sec or even null, they might have a reason to try it then.
Darenthul
Anstard Armory Inc.
#252 - 2012-12-12 15:56:55 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Darenthul wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


If I go to nullsec, I want it to be on my own, not by having my hand held by an alliance. There has to be an escalation of operations on its own merits. You can't rely on anyone else. That's why I'd be more privy to low-sec even over null-sec. Not because its "hard" to get into null-sec, but because I don't want to rely on some zerg corp to watch my back while I mine, I want to do my own mining, when I want, how I want, and the losses are MY fault and not theirs.


While this is theoretically doable, it is high unrealistic and basically setting yourselves up for failure and frustration. Many a high sec player wants to "go to null sec on their own terms".

With the exception of ninja Exploration and the like, Null sec isn't a "your terms" place, it's a "cold reality of people with guns" place. Doing what you say you want to do is like opening a Jewish Deli in Somalia "on your own terms" and expecting it to not get burned down the 1st day lol.

High Sec is the Burger King "have it your way" area of EVE, the rest of EVE is "conform to reality or die/fail". And anything CCP tries to do to open up null sec to "the little guys" will simply end up further entrenching the status quo Alliances (Malcanis' law in full effect YO).

To do what you want to do in null, you'd 1st have to create around your mining corp a huge alliance of high sec gunslingers that could challenge the established forces out there. Problem is you can't get High Sec people to coordinate long enough to make a Salad let alone organize well enough to fight in 0.0........


Hence why I think I'm going to stay with Lowsec. I'd rather my fate be more determined by my own capabilities. This kinda cements my decision after reading all this ;)


That's probably sensible. I wish you the best of luck and I wish there were more like you.


As to you, I'm happy to find a null-sec player that represents the values I expect from the "real" null-sec majority.

"I find mining to be an incredibly relaxing thing to do after work. It's like fishing without waking up early. Or cold. But the beer, the beer is the same." - arramdaywalker
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#253 - 2012-12-12 16:02:51 UTC
Firestorm Delta wrote:
Stopped reading at about page 4 as I'm sure not much was said that would change my opinion.

I will start of by saying I am a High Sec Dweller. Some might say carebear but I have stepped out into low sec, and the cold void of wormhole space a few times, and properly punished for not being ready for such endeavors, and rewarded for when I was. At this point in time though I have little personal reason to leave high sec due to long term goals, so it has been some time since I stepped out of high sec. Is there something wrong with this? No, I mine, run missions, and build up isk to buy the things that will be needed in the future.

What is wrong is that there are people who only do a small part of this so often, that they can make as much if not more isk, then those who have to fight wars from time to time just to simply keep control of their space. This is wrong, and coupled with everyone tendency to kill anything that is not friendly on sight, does not draw people out of high sec.

There are 100's of things that could be done to fix these various issues. However the people in high sec, who seem to enjoy running lvl 4 missions non stop for days on end, should realize that things shouldn't get better for them.

Instead of nerfing high sec, (although there are a few changes to missions and npc pirates in general I would like to see), we need to focus on making low sec, and null sec, both more fun, and more rewarding. Those of you who live in such areas need to speak up and pin down every reason why this should be and how to best do it, but those of us who live in high sec need to back them on this. If only one side is supporting these changes then it will be much harder to push them through. I want a reason to do missions in lowsec, I want to know that the extra risk I take heading down into lowsec for the same thing I can do in high sec will be worth my time if I can avoid getting ganked. I'm sure those who live in null and low would appreciate being able to survive better while being less tied to high sec. Not completely removed, but less reliant.

One thing that may help with this is doing something about npc corporations. Thousands of people sit in those and never leave, why not give them an incentive for them to get out after a few months. When they realize they can easily find and form groups with people who would be willing to visit low sec or even null, they might have a reason to try it then.


You are the kind of player I had in mind when I wrote this: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=26049

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#254 - 2012-12-12 19:11:32 UTC
knobber Jobbler wrote:
Without high sec EVE would still be EVE. Without null sec (or low!) it would be WoW in space.


There's a few answers:

Materials and Industry - Null sec is affected by what people do in high sec with materials and industry.

Markets - Leading from that point is markets, the market is player driven so high sec affects that.

ISK - Income in null is meant to reward for the risk pay off but sadly high sec pays out pretty well too with no risk (there is no risk in high sec unless you're an AFK autopilot/miner). Guys in null who fight for space resent that and the fact that many null sec residents have high sec alts to make ISK reinforces this point of view.

High sec care bears don't get it - Allot of guys in null say that high sec guys just don't get EVE. They don't get the player driven economy or the fact EVE is about the meta game, violence, greifing and the fact you can be the bad guy and its within the rules which no other MMO allows you to do. I think its the fact that running endless level 4 missions isn't what EVE is about and anyone who does that is missing out. They look down on high sec because of that.

To be honest I'm a null sec resident but former high sec carebear and go by some of those points. I don't look down on high sec dwellers but I do think you're missing out on what this game is actually about. It's not about the endless grinding of level 4's, high sec incursions or cosmos missions (although they're about the only fun PVE content) but the fights in null sec which transcend the game itself. The risk, the danger, the evil or want to be evil ego manic overlords etc.



That's sort of incorrect. The reason you get more isk in null is because there is a very dry market. The risk factor is justification for it. That BS rat is still worth 800k isk whether it takes 20 people to kill it or 1 frigate.

Highsec bears don't need to "get it" that's the point. If people wanted to "get it" they'd leave highsec and either get into politics and political warfare (sov space) or if they wanted to be left alone, get into WH space. Highsec is about simple, easygoing isk. Period.

Some also go on sojourns into null, or low, as it happens to dabble in those same said aspects, and have quite a bit of fun doing it (myself included), but also enkoy the benefits of highsec.

The point, however, from what I'm reading of this thread and by it's OP, is the HATRED nullsec bears have for their highsec brethren. And I agree, it doesn't make sense.

Highsec breeds industrialists, nullsec breeds the fights to use that equipment. Neither side is meant to be autonomous. It;s symbiotic.

Even grocery stores in ghettos just want to be able to sell their wares. And crime still happens on Rodeo Drive.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#255 - 2012-12-12 19:25:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Silath Slyver Silverpine wrote:
Eh, screw it. No point feeding the trolls.

At least I discovered something from this; that the problem really is more in our mentalities, and our handling of the various issues, than from any patent or logical cause.


You didn't get the point of it.

People crying about changes to one area of the game, tend to ignore the potential impact of that change on other areas of the game. They tend to not care because it's "their playstyle" they're only interested in, as apposed to actually considering the game as a whole, were null needs high sec and high sec needs null.

The essense of the article you read.



And I'm perfectly aware that when put up against real logic and intelligence, it's much easier to just through out "troll" as if it makes you right.

It's not my fault you didn't get it.
I used the word narsistic early. It's spot on here.



If you reread your post, you don't really differentiate the differences between null or high sec space pilots. Both sides would be equally true concerning your statement. And I don't see where she is being narcissitic. Every post of her's has actually been quite inquisitive and polite. Even to the point of thanking others in each reply.

The "trolls" she refers to, are the kneejerk reacting "because it is" replies that people post thinking they are including some sort of insight because they were told what they wanted and think that's their entire world. IE- closeminded.

And yet you are hammering the very same ingorance into her head? Seriously? Read what she said, stop reacting to what you think she means. I had to reread her post and most others' numerous times to realize that; most who are replying aren't reading. They are responding (not replying, big difference) and assuming.


Just say you have anger towards highsec because you can, and call it a day instead of trying to find complex justifications to explain why you SHOULD, when it isn't true.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#256 - 2012-12-12 19:35:04 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Darenthul wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


If I go to nullsec, I want it to be on my own, not by having my hand held by an alliance. There has to be an escalation of operations on its own merits. You can't rely on anyone else. That's why I'd be more privy to low-sec even over null-sec. Not because its "hard" to get into null-sec, but because I don't want to rely on some zerg corp to watch my back while I mine, I want to do my own mining, when I want, how I want, and the losses are MY fault and not theirs.


While this is theoretically doable, it is high unrealistic and basically setting yourselves up for failure and frustration. Many a high sec player wants to "go to null sec on their own terms".

With the exception of ninja Exploration and the like, Null sec isn't a "your terms" place, it's a "cold reality of people with guns" place. Doing what you say you want to do is like opening a Jewish Deli in Somalia "on your own terms" and expecting it to not get burned down the 1st day lol.

High Sec is the Burger King "have it your way" area of EVE, the rest of EVE is "conform to reality or die/fail". And anything CCP tries to do to open up null sec to "the little guys" will simply end up further entrenching the status quo Alliances (Malcanis' law in full effect YO).

To do what you want to do in null, you'd 1st have to create around your mining corp a huge alliance of high sec gunslingers that could challenge the established forces out there. Problem is you can't get High Sec people to coordinate long enough to make a Salad let alone organize well enough to fight in 0.0........


Hence why I think I'm going to stay with Lowsec. I'd rather my fate be more determined by my own capabilities. This kinda cements my decision after reading all this ;)


That's probably sensible. I wish you the best of luck and I wish there were more like you.

And he'll fail in low sec as much as he would in null.

You need "friends" to watch your back in low as much as you need them in null, and if you think you can just take a small indi corp into low and "do it your way" you're going to be sadly dissapointed to learn that low can actually be more dangerous a place for that sort of activity than null.

Not every null alliance functions the same way.
Do you have an indi corp? Do you want to get out of high sec and experience the wider game? Don't have the armed backing to protect you from pirates?

Then learn a little diplomacy.

Not every corp and alliance charges rent, and you don't need your own station to be an indi corp in null. Get in touch with some diplomats, and talk to them. Tell them you're a realatively small indi corp and that you'd like to run mining ops and were wondering if they'd be interested in working with you. Some null corps and alliances actually NEED indi groups in thier space.

A low sec belt is no different than a null one. There isn't a gate or station parked near low sec belts, and every single person in the system is free to blow up your ship as much as they are in null, and just as likely.

If you don't have the guns to protect your mining ops in null, then you don't have the guns to do it in low.
And if you don't have the diplomatic skills to negotiate and work with others, you'll never going to leave high sec.

Null isn't about the small indipendant group, it's empire building. To build an emprie you need diplomacy.

Null sec, is nothing more than the player driven counterpart to high sec.
And if you don't have the ability or desire to make in null then there's no way you're going to do it in a WARZONE; because that's what low is supposed to be.
Darenthul
Anstard Armory Inc.
#257 - 2012-12-12 19:35:27 UTC
Was just thinking about something kinda related.

If certain highsec sub areas (let's say higher level missions and certain sites) were "out of CONCORD's scan range" and thereby open to PvP inside of them, would anyone be opposed to there being nearly lower-sec rewards and such at said sites? I feel like it would also introduce midrange areas between high/low, where people could get a taste of the risk of low sec.

Also it would make the higher end high-sec missions riskier, the ones that people from null tend to hate that high can run or such.

"I find mining to be an incredibly relaxing thing to do after work. It's like fishing without waking up early. Or cold. But the beer, the beer is the same." - arramdaywalker
Yusef Yeasef Yosef
Doomheim
#258 - 2012-12-12 19:50:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Yusef Yeasef Yosef
Darenthul wrote:
Was just thinking about something kinda related.

...where people could get a taste of the risk of low sec.

.



Most players are already aware of the risk of Low Sec. The risks are always far greater than the rewards.
Low Sec is frequently more dangerous than most areas of Null Sec.

Not everyone who chooses to do things in Hi Sec are risk adverse all the time. I would say most have been to other areas of the game.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#259 - 2012-12-12 19:55:52 UTC
Yusef Yeasef Yosef wrote:
Darenthul wrote:
Was just thinking about something kinda related.

...where people could get a taste of the risk of low sec.

Most players are already aware of the risk of Low Sec. The risks are always far greater than the rewards.

And that's really about as much as they need to know in order to reach the optimal solution:

High-Sec

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 ?
Galaxy Pig
New Order Logistics
CODE.
#260 - 2012-12-12 20:03:26 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Piugattuk wrote:
Galaxy Pig wrote:
For clarification on the many ways carebears affect null players and the threat they pose to ALL of EVE, see the manifestos and themittani.com articles of James 315

I don't hate them, I merely recognize that they must be purged. Nothing personal, I'm just operating under the pretense that carebears are the enemy and must be indiscriminately slaughtered until there are no more left. You guys should be happy you have a competent enemy.

\o/ CAREBEAR HOLOCAUST! (because highsec isn't going to cleanse itself)


So you take one guys dogma and it's the only way to go huh...no real insight for yourself?
Ok, remove all carebears from the game....now what, prices fall to an all time low because many players whom chosen to have their fun playing their way and not live the dogma james 315 spouts not buying any T-2 items or ships prices fall for null materials cause the supply and demand thingy getting in the way and we all know null players PVP only exclusively in T-2 pimp ships, no carebears no more lol from ganking which removes that fun thing to do for people that do that (and don't point to barge buffs) cause the skiff and procurer are the only barges that are tough every thing else is still easily killed for lol.
And prices fall even more for T-1 items because who would buy meta 0 or 1, well industrialist get flushed mostly. Oops lets not forget the trade profession there's that too, and you believe the mittens Romney ground, they broke the winmatar LP with the LP from FW by using a loophole do you understand how much value in isk and LP they got now try being a FW pilot who wants to profit from LP items from FW, how are carebears responsible for that drop, don't believe the dogma spewing from some person or group with an agenda of their own, use your mind to figure out what's really going on.Bear


This is an example of the personality flaw that leads to ...well....EVE General Discussion lol. Galaxy (and people like James) are aobvioulsy screwing with you, but you leap to the conclusion that what they say is gospel truth and thus proof that these other people are "somehow out to get you" because they have "an agenda of their own".

The thinking that leads to this crap is totally self-serving, and unfortunately not confined to video game forums.


No, actually I'm not screwing with them, just being honest. I mentioned the James 315 writing for those who are legitimately curious about how carebears threaten EVE, because James does a pretty good job explaining the feedback-loop theory and highlighting the evidence.

Personally though, I've been dedicated to the genocide of the carebears since long before James 315 outlined a bunch of legitimate reasons to kill them.

I kill them because they are phytoplankton, and I'm a krill, it's the natural order of things. Also, I mean, someone has to shoot them right? They're in EVE and they undocked, so someone should be trying to kill them, I humbly adopt this responsibility.

The one way out is following the code, join the New Order or accept the destruction of your exhumer.

Highsec is owned by players now. Systems 0.5-1.0 are New Order Territory. All miners and other residents of Highsec must obey The Code. Mining without a permit is dangerous and harmful to the EVE community. See www.MinerBumping.com