These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1941 - 2013-01-02 09:23:52 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
I let the developers plan their game, I guess I am doing something wrong.

Should jump in the forums and create 100000000000000 photocopy cry threads to force them change the game ASAP, of course in my favor!

You're absolutely right, this entire time I've been holding CCP Soundwave's pet cat hostage, the ransom being massive buffs to nullsec and nerfs to highsec.


Where did I mention any kind of causation between creating 100000000000000 photocopy cry threads and actually getting any kind of effect off them?

In fact you are wasting your time, if CCP EVER makes a buff or nerf based on forums claims they would be falling down to Blizzard levels.

0/10

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#1942 - 2013-01-02 09:28:31 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
I let the developers plan their game, I guess I am doing something wrong.

Should jump in the forums and create 100000000000000 photocopy cry threads to force them change the game ASAP, of course in my favor!

You're absolutely right, this entire time I've been holding CCP Soundwave's pet cat hostage, the ransom being massive buffs to nullsec and nerfs to highsec.


Where did I mention any kind of causation between creating 100000000000000 photocopy cry threads and actually getting any kind of effect off them?

In fact you are wasting your time, if CCP EVER makes a buff or nerf based on forums claims they would be falling down to Blizzard levels.

0/10


That's the depth I was expecting from the reply.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1943 - 2013-01-02 09:29:41 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
I let the developers plan their game, I guess I am doing something wrong.

Should jump in the forums and create 100000000000000 photocopy cry threads to force them change the game ASAP, of course in my favor!

You're absolutely right, this entire time I've been holding CCP Soundwave's pet cat hostage, the ransom being massive buffs to nullsec and nerfs to highsec.


Where did I mention any kind of causation between creating 100000000000000 photocopy cry threads and actually getting any kind of effect off them?

In fact you are wasting your time, if CCP EVER makes a buff or nerf based on forums claims they would be falling down to Blizzard levels.

0/10

Yeah, go miners ! Gotta love those EHP buffs.

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 ?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1944 - 2013-01-02 09:30:21 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
I let the developers plan their game, I guess I am doing something wrong.

Should jump in the forums and create 100000000000000 photocopy cry threads to force them change the game ASAP, of course in my favor!

You're absolutely right, this entire time I've been holding CCP Soundwave's pet cat hostage, the ransom being massive buffs to nullsec and nerfs to highsec.


Where did I mention any kind of causation between creating 100000000000000 photocopy cry threads and actually getting any kind of effect off them?

In fact you are wasting your time, if CCP EVER makes a buff or nerf based on forums claims they would be falling down to Blizzard levels.

0/10


That's the depth I was expecting from the reply.

It mirrors the depth of your post.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Frying Doom
#1945 - 2013-01-02 09:38:52 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
I personally love the changes that happened after a hell of a lot of players bitched on the forums.

Now I have a choice high yield and weak tank, medium tank and the ability to afk a bit or massive tank and a yield lower than a covetor.

Yep, look at all the different Mackinaws in the belts.

Actually I don't own one

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#1946 - 2013-01-02 09:40:51 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
I let the developers plan their game, I guess I am doing something wrong.

Should jump in the forums and create 100000000000000 photocopy cry threads to force them change the game ASAP, of course in my favor!

You're absolutely right, this entire time I've been holding CCP Soundwave's pet cat hostage, the ransom being massive buffs to nullsec and nerfs to highsec.


Where did I mention any kind of causation between creating 100000000000000 photocopy cry threads and actually getting any kind of effect off them?

In fact you are wasting your time, if CCP EVER makes a buff or nerf based on forums claims they would be falling down to Blizzard levels.

0/10

Yeah, go miners ! Gotta love those EHP buffs.

127k ehp skiff.

Hell I am not bitching.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1947 - 2013-01-02 09:51:32 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
I suggest you re-read my post.

Never in that post I stated it's convenient or even good to "let the industrialist come", I just mentioned at the *stigma*, which is a different shade of approach towards the same guy.

People tend to project failings in game design as moral weakness of the person effected. You included.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#1948 - 2013-01-02 11:09:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

Where did I mention any kind of causation between creating 100000000000000 photocopy cry threads and actually getting any kind of effect off them?

In fact you are wasting your time, if CCP EVER makes a buff or nerf based on forums claims they would be falling down to Blizzard levels.


It mirrors the depth of your post.


So, you support those who create game balance based on who cries louder on the forums? Got it.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#1949 - 2013-01-02 11:12:15 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
I suggest you re-read my post.

Never in that post I stated it's convenient or even good to "let the industrialist come", I just mentioned at the *stigma*, which is a different shade of approach towards the same guy.

People tend to project failings in game design as moral weakness of the person effected. You included.


Stigma is not a game design issue (nor I mentioned it first).

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Frying Doom
#1950 - 2013-01-02 11:22:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:


It works for the denizens of highsec & a lot quicker too. They only need to complain for 6 months to get the change they desire. We need to complain for years before the idea is considered.


They take 6 months because their ideas are stupid, yours take longer because your ideas are so partisan even CCP realizes they are.

They benefit you, therefore they're wrong.


I let the developers plan their game, I guess I am doing something wrong.

Should jump in the forums and create 100000000000000 photocopy cry threads to force them change the game ASAP, of course in my favor!

I think that the cry to nerf NPC facilities in favor of player owned as well as making industry viable in the non-hi-sec areas has been building for some time.

Much like miners we took the crap and the fact that you just did not log in for a month of the year with grace, until it just got to much and so forum threads started to get massive.

It is much the same for industry as a whole at this point. Players love to call this a PVP game but even CCP don't actually call it that they describe it as

CCP wrote:
EVE Online is a massive multiplayer online game that offers limitless potential to discover, explore and conquer an amazing science fiction universe where you pilot spaceships, fight, trade, and form corporations and alliances with other players.

But their actions have. For years all industry has gotten was well nothing at all, pvp has gotten more fixes and upgrades than I can mention and finally last year CCP finally gave us something, it wasn't much but it was something. We got a frigate and the hitpoints on the barges changed.

Finally so yes industry is better than it was but it could be so much more and as CCP Greyscale said "We want POS to be something everyone wants to own."

Now a great design and flashy bits like a customizable CQ will help to make it a home and will help people wanting them but if they suck at industry well then not everyone will want one. After all I think Incarna showed very well that EvE players wont put up with shiny things with no game play.

On top of this CCP is apparently making Null and other space more casual friendly which to me (And the second CSM Null meeting) means Sov changes and for casuals to be useful it means usage based Sov (unless they have something completely different.

So change is coming and no not everyone will like it but it will be best for the game in the long term.
Yes there will be pain as the game changes from what it was into what it will be and their will be bitching on the forum and probably a sub drop to begin with but if Incarna has shown CCP anything it is that over time other people will fill those holes if they make the game better(Not that they would want them).

So as the old expression goes "You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs"

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#1951 - 2013-01-02 11:50:28 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
So as the old expression goes "You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs"


It's all a matter of timing.

For the fairest game possible, hi sec should only have been a couple of starting systems. After a decade and having designed the whole game on hi sec being the center of a center-periphery model, breaking few eggs will actually break more than few.

There's a lot of decisions thet were taken and cannot be wiped out.
Imagine this, CCP put themselves in a corner with AFK mining. With the small playerbase they closed one or two eyes for years about botters and even now the big subs numbers come from multi-accounters.
This is bad, because every multi-accounter (and miners are some of the most prolific) that unsubs, it's suddenly 3-4-6 subs that go.
Now, after having grabbed and held those multi-accounts are you sure they are going to abruptly change the status quo and suddenly lose them? I would not bet on that.
I would not also bet on CCP saying "let's nuke all those hi seccers from orbit, we didn't want their subs anyway".

That's why imo CCP should have a cautious approach, breaking too many eggs can break the bank. Had they had a public plan detailing a transition from the hybrid "safe zones + unsafe" towards a full PvP game then people could see it coming and would have acted accordingly years ago.
But now? With subs peaked and now barely keeping their numbers up? Unlikely they can afford to break eggs.
They may just want to see what happens creating homelettes in null first and see what happens next.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#1952 - 2013-01-02 12:04:26 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:



That's why imo CCP should have a cautious approach, breaking too many eggs can break the bank. Had they had a public plan detailing a transition from the hybrid "safe zones + unsafe" towards a full PvP game then people could see it coming and would have acted accordingly years ago.


This really. However we are talking about CCP, they don't seem to have any sort of roadmap or one that they keep too. It almost seems like that once a expansion is released they throw a dart to pick whats next.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden
Frying Doom
#1953 - 2013-01-02 12:06:30 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
So as the old expression goes "You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs"


It's all a matter of timing.

For the fairest game possible, hi sec should only have been a couple of starting systems. After a decade and having designed the whole game on hi sec being the center of a center-periphery model, breaking few eggs will actually break more than few.

There's a lot of decisions thet were taken and cannot be wiped out.
Imagine this, CCP put themselves in a corner with AFK mining. With the small playerbase they closed one or two eyes for years about botters and even now the big subs numbers come from multi-accounters.
This is bad, because every multi-accounter (and miners are some of the most prolific) that unsubs, it's suddenly 3-4-6 subs that go.
Now, after having grabbed and held those multi-accounts are you sure they are going to abruptly change the status quo and suddenly lose them? I would not bet on that.
I would not also bet on CCP saying "let's nuke all those hi seccers from orbit, we didn't want their subs anyway".

That's why imo CCP should have a cautious approach, breaking too many eggs can break the bank. Had they had a public plan detailing a transition from the hybrid "safe zones + unsafe" towards a full PvP game then people could see it coming and would have acted accordingly years ago.
But now? With subs peaked and now barely keeping their numbers up? Unlikely they can afford to break eggs.
They may just want to see what happens creating homelettes in null first and see what happens next.

Having players change from NPC to Player owned yes it will take a shift of thinking and there will be those who will refuse to adapt to change, like there were those that refused to change to the barge buff or the different UI or any change CCP has ever made. Actually I think you underestimate the majority of the industrialists.

As to us multi accounters, have you considered that those of us who are throwing cash into the game hand over fist already make enough isk that the change would actually be a welcome one as it allows us to further specialize in industry and allows us to run a hi-sec pos if we chose to for the right reason. Profit.

So no I think CCP is very safe with multi-account industrialists who will be able to outlay some isk to gain a larger profit margin over those that only dabble in industry.

And this has nothing to do with nuking Hi-sec it is about changing players to POS rather than the NPC stations. So stop bothering with that one as it is just a pointless emotional argument.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#1954 - 2013-01-02 12:17:12 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
As to us multi accounters, have you considered that those of us who are throwing cash into the game hand over fist already make enough isk that the change would actually be a welcome one as it allows us to further specialize in industry and allows us to run a hi-sec pos if we chose to for the right reason. Profit.

So no I think CCP is very safe with multi-account industrialists who will be able to outlay some isk to gain a larger profit margin over those that only dabble in industry.

And this has nothing to do with nuking Hi-sec it is about changing players to POS rather than the NPC stations. So stop bothering with that one as it is just a pointless emotional argument.


You (and others who seem to have convinced you) are so convinced that having people run POSes is some magic cure. Let me tell something as someone who had a BPC research service for years (now I can't be arsed, I can earn more with trading):

It's not. Putting up a POS is as easy as creating a 1 man corp to evade NPC corp taxes. You pay 200M (if you don't have 7+ standings) and pronto, with 50M you have bought a small caldari tower and 80-90M you get a lab.

Moreover, the more POSes are put in game, the safest it becomes having one, because the individual becomes "hidden" within a big number of others.

As I posted many pages ago, I am ALL for "nerfing" hi sec NPC facilities so that who use them has to pay as much as POS owners. That's a far harsher nerf than those asked for in this thread.

I am still completely not convinced that this would change anything in the hi sec vs null sec competitivity matters.
It's a long due thing but not a solution.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Frying Doom
#1955 - 2013-01-02 12:32:43 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
As to us multi accounters, have you considered that those of us who are throwing cash into the game hand over fist already make enough isk that the change would actually be a welcome one as it allows us to further specialize in industry and allows us to run a hi-sec pos if we chose to for the right reason. Profit.

So no I think CCP is very safe with multi-account industrialists who will be able to outlay some isk to gain a larger profit margin over those that only dabble in industry.

And this has nothing to do with nuking Hi-sec it is about changing players to POS rather than the NPC stations. So stop bothering with that one as it is just a pointless emotional argument.


You (and others who seem to have convinced you) are so convinced that having people run POSes is some magic cure. Let me tell something as someone who had a BPC research service for years (now I can't be arsed, I can earn more with trading):

It's not. Putting up a POS is as easy as creating a 1 man corp to evade NPC corp taxes. You pay 200M (if you don't have 7+ standings) and pronto, with 50M you have bought a small caldari tower and 80-90M you get a lab.

Moreover, the more POSes are put in game, the safest it becomes having one, because the individual becomes "hidden" within a big number of others.

As I posted many pages ago, I am ALL for "nerfing" hi sec NPC facilities so that who use them has to pay as much as POS owners. That's a far harsher nerf than those asked for in this thread.

I am still completely not convinced that this would change anything in the hi sec vs null sec competitivity matters.
It's a long due thing but not a solution.

Actually it is not a magic cure it is fair, yes you can dodge taxes in a 1 man corporation and yes if there are more POSs you will be safer as there is safety in numbers but given the fact that War decing a 1 man corp costs little and a 1 man corp has no defense it is only a matter of time before someone decides to splat your POS. It makes good kill board padding for budding pvp corps.

Plus to put up your POS in Hi-sec you have to have worked up your standings so while you may have evaded what is currently a tiny amount of tax you have risked hundreds of millions of isk and had to build up your standings or if you paid someone else you have still had to outlay hundreds of millions of isk and the hundred of millions well actually about 1 billion to run it for a year.

So yes if people go for the one man corp to dodge taxes or as i said earlier so that it is cheaper to run a POS, great. They are having to out lay isk and assuming risk to get a reasonable benefit back, .

As to what is asked for in this thread, there is a lot over the whole but I specifically asked for the NPC cost of a slot to be the running cost of a POS divided by the average slots (assuming some defense) +10% so they are 10% more than a POS as the cost is not ongoing.

So to sum it up in a nut shell players who dabble in manufacturing will be almost the same as players who are fully invested into it, the only difference being that those with a POS will require less skills for perfect refine and no standings (If they pay to have the tower put up) and an on going bill while people who dabble will have more waste unless they skill up higher but lower over all costs.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#1956 - 2013-01-02 13:29:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Frying Doom wrote:
Actually it is not a magic cure it is fair, yes you can dodge taxes in a 1 man corporation and yes if there are more POSs you will be safer as there is safety in numbers but given the fact that War decing a 1 man corp costs little and a 1 man corp has no defense it is only a matter of time before someone decides to splat your POS. It makes good kill board padding for budding pvp corps.

Plus to put up your POS in Hi-sec you have to have worked up your standings so while you may have evaded what is currently a tiny amount of tax you have risked hundreds of millions of isk and had to build up your standings or if you paid someone else you have still had to outlay hundreds of millions of isk and the hundred of millions well actually about 1 billion to run it for a year.

So yes if people go for the one man corp to dodge taxes or as i said earlier so that it is cheaper to run a POS, great. They are having to out lay isk and assuming risk to get a reasonable benefit back, .

As to what is asked for in this thread, there is a lot over the whole but I specifically asked for the NPC cost of a slot to be the running cost of a POS divided by the average slots (assuming some defense) +10% so they are 10% more than a POS as the cost is not ongoing.

So to sum it up in a nut shell players who dabble in manufacturing will be almost the same as players who are fully invested into it, the only difference being that those with a POS will require less skills for perfect refine and no standings (If they pay to have the tower put up) and an on going bill while people who dabble will have more waste unless they skill up higher but lower over all costs.


Well I have to disagree about the "KB padding for budding PvP corps" because one of the great advantages of a 1 man corp POS is being able to pull the POS down and just wait it out with no real risk.
But I'll leave these "discovering" and more out so that the changes go in place and prove they were not as effective at "bringing in risk" as hoped.

The rest you say is quite easy to agree to, but that's not what they requested for this whole thread (refining nerf, slots removal and so on).
I have indeed already invested some 40B into stuff that will appreciate come the POS oriented expansion (gotta make money on stuff, even when not totally agreeing with it Pirate) but imo I am still not convinced that nerfing NPC stations will solve *a single one* of the null sec issues.
Adding slots in null will help 100 times as more and making "private" POSes might help the casual player live in in sov space... as long as the sov holders are not asshats who are against "private" POSes raging all over the SPAYs building enemy titans in their own home.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#1957 - 2013-01-02 14:06:04 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

You mean like how they did a wonderful job of updating exhumers and mining barges over the years, all by them selves?


Hey I debunked that Baltec1 invented fallacy 3-4 times in the last weeks, you may as well find those references instead of going cassette playback mode.

I tracked a lot of the "buff exhumers/nerf gankers" threads over time, and the changes they made were quite surprising.

Almost like they decided to solve for a different set of problems than the players involved in those discussions were talking about. For instance: if anyone ever asked for a mining barge with more carrying capacity than an Itty 5 I missed that thread completely.

The Hulk itself was barely changed at all.

As usual, they looked at what players were asking for, looked at the game, and answered their own question.

The same sort of thing is going to happen with the POS changes and any industry changes they make on the heels of that.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1958 - 2013-01-02 17:32:41 UTC
Why don't you guys just do another Jitageddon about it all? Best form of a temper tantrum I have seen to date.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1959 - 2013-01-02 17:40:42 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
Why don't you guys just do another Jitageddon about it all? Best form of a temper tantrum I have seen to date.

You seem really bitter.

I wonder why that is...

NC dot guy.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1960 - 2013-01-02 17:50:58 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
Frying Doom wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:

Making it possible (and advantageous from both an alliance and industrialist standpoint) to mine and build ships used by nullsec actually in nullsec would end the stigma against industrial corps in 0.0, for one. As it stands they're tolerated at best, abused at worst.


Inconvenience or even downright saying "no" to somebody asking to join as industrial would be a sensible reaction.

"Stigma" towards industrialists who would have wanted to risk and move in null, instead, is exactly part of what I call ~ideology~ and tells much more about a sh!t mentality and attitude than about deficiencies in the game and is a big part of the null sec "problem".

It's also worrysome when reading a portion of the GS posts, it seems to read BoB players sentences.

Actually Alliances like GS will actually suffer due to there reputations in getting enough hard core Indy types, the smaller less known alliances will probably get more as the players will be less worried about getting out there only to be blown up by GS.

GS reputation will have preceded it, except apparently by people wanting a third party for titans.


Actually not. We have plenty of players who are or would be industrial minded in the alliance already, if only doing it didn't drive one to insanity.

That's something you and many others don't seem to get. Many of us advocating for these changes don't give a rip about attracting new players to nullsec and frankly know it won't happen, but already have players who would take advantage of it. If it does happen, great. New blood is always good. It's just not the primary goal.


e: Regarding hilarious and arbitrary sandbox restrictions ("You can only take 5% of space" lol), who here remembers when CCP implemented a limit of five POS per day per system in an attempt to limit things? Yeah that worked out great.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal