These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

You CANT Nerf HighSec!

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1181 - 2012-12-26 16:19:00 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Falcon
Don't troll - CCP Falcon

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1182 - 2012-12-26 16:33:32 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:

CCP says all sorts of things.


The people that design and make the game state that they want to take the game in a certain direction. You can't brush that off they are literally in charge of where the game goes.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#1183 - 2012-12-26 16:36:44 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:

CCP says all sorts of things.


The people that design and make the game state that they want to take the game in a certain direction. You can't brush that off they are literally in charge of where the game goes.

Yes, and as I said, if they make a change that obviously stupid I'll quit even though it doesn't effect me directly.

People are complaining that nullsec rewards are too low, so they are talking about lowering them further? That doesn't even make sense in bizarro world.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1184 - 2012-12-26 16:40:30 UTC  |  Edited by: La Nariz
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

It's not a whine, it's your future and I haven't talked about any ISK faucet so I don't know where you got that notion.

Edit: also as I have said in previous posts and nobody has had the guts to reply it, bringing in line hi sec with its risk means either removing hi sec or nerf hi sec by 1000%+. Because there's NO WAY to nerf a "safe" place enough to make an unsafe people more enticing.
You earn 5M per hour in hi sec doing L4 missions (a 400% nerf)? Still people won't find doing null sec content "worth it because in hi sec it's less ISK but safe".


I disagree that it is impossible to nerf industry in highsec so that it is not capable of being perfect while nullsec industry can be made perfect with work will fix the disparity. The other good ideas like making it so T2 production cannot be done in empire are decent as well. We're in agreement that the intention of the nerfs/buffs will not make anyone move and that's good because that is not the intention.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1185 - 2012-12-26 16:43:12 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:

CCP says all sorts of things.


The people that design and make the game state that they want to take the game in a certain direction. You can't brush that off they are literally in charge of where the game goes.

Yes, and as I said, if they make a change that obviously stupid I'll quit even though it doesn't effect me directly.

People are complaining that nullsec rewards are too low, so they are talking about lowering them further? That doesn't even make sense in bizarro world.


Yeah no one is talking about lowering nullsec rewards I have no idea how you thought of that. To answer your "I'll quit" argument that the OP already answers:

16) I’ll quit if you nerf High Sec, so will many others, the game will crash and CCP will go bankrupt!

- Firstly if you are a person who will rage quit when they don’t get what they want how long will you stay in the game for anyway? You’re probably not a legacy player.

- Secondly people subscribe to EVE because it is awesome, and it’s gameplay makes it into the gaming press because of it’s awesomeness. This is what CCP need to protect for the long term health of the game and overall profitability, not pandering to an irrational few.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#1186 - 2012-12-26 16:53:11 UTC
Buzzy Warstl said "If that isn't enough for you, if you can't raise your rewards well past highsec levels using capital ships in their intended environment, the problem might not be with the game."
La Nariz said "So now we change to carrier ratting. Yeah CCP doesn't want that its been said in a dev blog before."

Now La Nariz Says "Yeah no one is talking about lowering nullsec rewards I have no idea how you thought of that. "


I may be a mere pubbie, but I do have an attention span of more than a page. Do try to stay consistent.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1187 - 2012-12-26 17:00:58 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Buzzy Warstl said "If that isn't enough for you, if you can't raise your rewards well past highsec levels using capital ships in their intended environment, the problem might not be with the game."
La Nariz said "So now we change to carrier ratting. Yeah CCP doesn't want that its been said in a dev blog before."

Now La Nariz Says "Yeah no one is talking about lowering nullsec rewards I have no idea how you thought of that. "


I may be a mere pubbie, but I do have an attention span of more than a page. Do try to stay consistent.


There is a big difference between us saying something and CCP saying something. None of us have argued for a nullsec reward nerf. That attention span needs a little work.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#1188 - 2012-12-26 17:05:41 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Buzzy Warstl said "If that isn't enough for you, if you can't raise your rewards well past highsec levels using capital ships in their intended environment, the problem might not be with the game."
La Nariz said "So now we change to carrier ratting. Yeah CCP doesn't want that its been said in a dev blog before."

Now La Nariz Says "Yeah no one is talking about lowering nullsec rewards I have no idea how you thought of that. "


I may be a mere pubbie, but I do have an attention span of more than a page. Do try to stay consistent.


There is a big difference between us saying something and CCP saying something. None of us have argued for a nullsec reward nerf. That attention span needs a little work.

If you are merely the messenger for CCP's message you are still saying it.

You might not like it (I know I wouldn't were I in your shoes), but it's where I would have gotten the idea that someone was talking about it.

Reading for comprehension, you might try it some time.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1189 - 2012-12-26 17:11:24 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

It's not a whine, it's your future and I haven't talked about any ISK faucet so I don't know where you got that notion.

Edit: also as I have said in previous posts and nobody has had the guts to reply it, bringing in line hi sec with its risk means either removing hi sec or nerf hi sec by 1000%+. Because there's NO WAY to nerf a "safe" place enough to make an unsafe people more enticing.
You earn 5M per hour in hi sec doing L4 missions (a 400% nerf)? Still people won't find doing null sec content "worth it because in hi sec it's less ISK but safe".


I disagree that it is impossible to nerf industry in highsec so that it is not capable of being perfect while nullsec industry can be made perfect with work will fix the disparity. The other good ideas like making it so T2 production cannot be done in empire are decent as well. We're in agreement that the intention of the nerfs/buffs will not make anyone move and that's good because that is not the intention.


T2 in low/null only would also most likey change the economics of T1 items. If the resulting production of T2 in low/null can`t meet the usual demand, the price would grow but it would most likely also drive up the demand for T1 as some people would not want to pay the extra for T2. This would actaully put soem value back in producing T1 for new industrialist.

This is only happening if producing in low/null really is harder or if enough JF gets popped while hauling to sell in empire. If this is not true, then it will not really affect much.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#1190 - 2012-12-26 19:01:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
La Nariz wrote:

I disagree that it is impossible to nerf industry in highsec so that it is not capable of being perfect while nullsec industry can be made perfect with work will fix the disparity.


How? Even using the currently worst available type of station refining %, hi sec will still be efficient enough to blow null sec (and low sec even more) out of the water.


La Nariz wrote:

The other good ideas like making it so T2 production cannot be done in empire are decent as well.


Low sec would quickly replace high sec, most T2 production with good revenue is small sized and a blockade runner is enough to make a number of T2 mods at a time. WHs after low sec and before null sec.

At this point you'd be forced to demand T2 to become exclusive to "pure" null sec but then, the "center-periphery" EvE economy model will short circuit, as the periphery now is the center, and the center is a.... non center any more.


La Nariz wrote:

We're in agreement that the intention of the nerfs/buffs will not make anyone move and that's good because that is not the intention.


Yes but please explain me, why this intentions change? For years it used to be "let's push people out of hi sec because [reason]" and now it's been changed.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1191 - 2012-12-26 19:01:20 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
If you are merely the messenger for CCP's message you are still saying it.

You might not like it (I know I wouldn't were I in your shoes), but it's where I would have gotten the idea that someone was talking about it.

Reading for comprehension, you might try it some time.


Yeah I'm not a CCP spokesperson I'm repeating what's been said in devblogs. Now you can continue trying to be pedantic and insulting, which I will now being to ignore, or you can bring another properly supported argument.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
ihcn
Life. Universe. Everything.
#1192 - 2012-12-26 19:08:02 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Low sec would quickly replace high sec, most T2 production with good revenue is small sized and a blockade runner is enough to make a number of T2 mods at a time. WHs after low sec and before null sec.

At this point you'd be forced to demand T2 to become exclusive to "pure" null sec but then, the "center-periphery" EvE economy model will short circuit, as the periphery now is the center, and the center is a.... non center any more.


This is a slippery slope argument, which is a logical fallacy. Forcing t2 production into lowsec does not automatically mean everyone will start crying for t2 production to be pushed into nullsec.

Maybe a few would, but ccp is smart enough to avoid listening to vocal minorities (unless that vocal minority is crying for making hisec safer Blink).

I don't like the idea of arbitrary restrictions though, and I think forcing people to do most refining/production in hisec pos is good enough, while still allowing them to do it in stations with much greater overhead.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1193 - 2012-12-26 19:10:18 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

1. How? Even using the currently worst available type of station refining %, hi sec will still be efficient enough to blow null sec (and low sec even more) out of the water.

2. Low sec would quickly replace high sec, most T2 production with good revenue is small sized and a blockade runner is enough to make a number of T2 mods at a time. WHs after low sec and before null sec.

At this point you'd be forced to demand T2 to become exclusive to "pure" null sec but then, the "center-periphery" EvE economy model will short circuit, as the periphery now is the center, and the center is a.... non center any more.

3. Yes but please explain me, why this intentions change? For years it used to be "let's push people out of hi sec because [reason]" and now it's been changed.


1. Experiment, use your change then watch approach to find out the ratio between the sec areas that works as intended.

2. This is a good thing they are now taking greater risks, the most important being lack of CONCORD, to produce and gaining greater reward for doing so. T2 will be come scarce which will increase its price via supply and demand. The lowsec stations would still be worse than nullsec stations so with that experimentation process I referenced in point 1 it really wouldn't be that hard to do.

3. There was no intention change in the first place, these changes had nothing to do with "forcing people out of highsec" (Please put the rebuttal to that argument in the OP if you wouldn't mind Bump Truck). The changes have to do with bringing risk:reward in line with the other sec areas. It will allow nullsec players using highsec industry alts to move back to their own space, but that is not "forcing people out of highsec."

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#1194 - 2012-12-26 19:12:40 UTC
For nullsec to be a battleground there needs to be a place outside nullsec for people to gather resources to attack entrenched nullsec interests. That place has to allow the acquisition of sufficient resources to be a credible threat.

Entrenched nullsec interests can and should argue for this not to be the case because it is in their interests to do so, and they should always fail or the game will become static and die the same death that has happened to every other game that became static.

If that is not a good enough argument for you, that's OK, but it's the truth.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#1195 - 2012-12-26 19:18:23 UTC
Like npc nullsec or lowsec, where most invasions actually base from, even ones between neighboring established sov holders.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#1196 - 2012-12-26 19:21:15 UTC
Ignoring the mechanics that would or could bring it about and focusing only on the result of much t2 manufacturing moving to lowsec, this would be an unqualified "good thing" even from the perspective of most nullsec players. The only place more starved for basic canned content than nullsec is lowsec. I can't imagine most nullsec players begrudging lowsec being tossed a bone more than once every five years.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1197 - 2012-12-26 19:21:20 UTC
Varius Xeral wrote:
Like npc nullsec or lowsec, where most invasions actually base from, even ones between neighboring established sov holders.

NPC nullsec, mm. Remember when TEST was basing from that npc null station and we set up a station next door to them in our sov.

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 ?
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#1198 - 2012-12-26 19:27:08 UTC
Varius Xeral wrote:
Like npc nullsec or lowsec, where most invasions actually base from, even ones between neighboring established sov holders.


There's a vast difference between a staging area and a resource collection area, and if what you are saying is true from a resource collection standpoint then highsec is obviously fairly balanced with NPC null and lowsec, so no problem.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#1199 - 2012-12-26 19:29:42 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
There's a vast difference between a staging area and a resource collection area, and if what you are saying is true from a resource collection standpoint then highsec is obviously fairly balanced with NPC null and lowsec, so no problem.


Your posting is literally nonsense.

It's cute how you think you're part of the actual conversation that actually knowledgeable people are having.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1200 - 2012-12-26 19:46:32 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
There's a vast difference between a staging area and a resource collection area, and if what you are saying is true from a resource collection standpoint then highsec is obviously fairly balanced with NPC null and lowsec, so no problem.


This is not true and a red herring.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133