EVE General Discussion

SP really helps in null. it factors on how much "effort" you have to put in.

You can use a carrier and that makes it so much easier to do things in Null. Your post proved it, thank you. Now that you have justfied my point, let me refine it.

Mobility is life in Null, if you need to move somewhere and you don't need to rely on someone else, that means you can move on YOUR terms, in YOUR time. Easy for someone with the SP, much harder for someone who can just barely fly a battleship.

Maybe it is because you think you put so much effort into living in null, so you feel entitled to brag about your effort to those who hardly put any effort in (comparatively) and make isk in highsec.

This is completely wrong.

One, you're pulling the persecution card. No one cares where you play.

Two, no one is forcing anyone anywhere. Providing an incentive to go elsewhere, yes. Balancing the risk and reward, yes. Magically transporting every hisec player to null, low, and wormhole space and closing all the stargates to hisec, no.

Three, no one is even saying that hisec needs to be nerfed. Null and Low's issues could theoretically be fixed by straight buffs. But right now, as it stands, the risk vs. reward ratio is hilariously stupid in every possible way.

Am I the only one that sees null sec guys trying to give rational and thoughfull answers, only to met with mostly insult?

Maybe not so much insult as deflection. Just like the guy I'm in the "effort" discussion with, you see him quote my posts out of context rather than actually talk about the actual issues.

I think that in GD we see people's personalities play out. The type of person who enjoys the whole game (the so called null bear or whatever) is used to thinking about issues and problems critically and posts that way (because like real life, low/null/WHs PUNISH stupidity where as high sec/government protection perpetuates bad/reckless behaviors).

The players who practice the most "avoidance of discomfort" (the high sec dweller who avoids the nastier parts of EVE) practices the most "avoidance of discussion" as well. We're all playing to type in a way.

Deflection is a much better choice of word. You are correct.


Insults from the null side, as far as I'm concerned, tend to come about from trying to make a point and encountering the situation Jenn points out here, and extreme stupidity and ignorance.

Sometimes, being a smart ass after trying to be mature and running into walls, is just more satisfying.

So with the exception of the two things null players say is the biggest problem with making Null Sec work (markets and dev time) please tell you what the problem is?

Well, there isn't one, which is why the two things you have chosen to ignore are the things null players complain about.

Not disagreeing with the principle, but what is the point or purpose of "the game as a whole"?

If it's vital to consider, we should at least agree on what it is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_attribution_error

please, tell us more about the randian supermen in null

High sec economics aren't explicit to high sec.

As a null player I, and most others, are bound to high sec through NEED. We HAVE TO be a part of high sec in some way; typically through economics, the importing of goods to function in null sec.

As a high sec player, you don't need to go to null. You do not need to import from null, we export to you.

Minerals mined in high sec influence the price of minerals mined in low and null. This was clearly indicated in the dev blog in regards to the inferno changes to mining barges and exhumers that saw a drastic increase in the amount of mining in high sec and drop in high end minerals. It doesnt' really mean much to say that a high end ore is in low abundance in high sec when you can mine asteroids for hours on end with no interuption in high sec. The more it's mined in high sec, the more minerals that hit the market and the less those minerals -which are the primary source of miner income in null- are worth to mine here.

The safer it is in high sec, the less you lose, the less you replace, the less value items carry, which trickles back to null.


There is a large number of high sec dwellers that seem to think that low and null is the only place that ships need to blow up for EVE's economy to work. That's wrong.

Ships need to blow up in high sec as much as they need to blow up in any other area of the game. Miners especially, as they're one of the biggest impactors of the new eden economy, high sec miners to be specific.

A lot don't want their ships blown up in high sec, because they shouldn't be forced to play how they don't want -as false a statement as you can make about blowing up ships in EVE, sinse demanding people not blow you up is the opposite of how it should work- and the truth is it's good to lose ships. Whether it be high sec, low sec, null, or Wh space, ships blowing up is good for EVE.

Some high sec players need to learn that it's ok to lose stuff, it's what drives the game, and when you're not getting blown up in high sec you actually have a negative contribution to the economy as a whole. If you're not spending ISK to replace ships, and only run missions, ever increasing your wallet amount, you have a negative impact on EVERYONE in EVE.