These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Null is Broken, Hisec working as intended.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Peter Raptor
Galactic Hawks
#261 - 2012-12-29 00:14:52 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
True enough, even if nullsec industry were buffed, the materials would still have to be brought to hisec to sell
Nullsec is the end consumer of the vast majority of materials in the game, even with its smaller population. What would happen is that with proper secondary economic support in nullsec, tertiary economies (retail) would emerge in 0.0. WIth highsec manufacturing fit in order to replenish highsec's level of material consumption (aka ship loss) and not all of New Eden's with space to spare, there would still be a need for highsec markets to facilitate trade for things like region-specific moon goo, faction items (both navy and pirate) and T3 product.

Quote:
few are going to venture to null sec to buy stuff, moving stuff to hisec is risky and would result in killmails , now thats fine, but if hisec is nerfed to the ground, then all those extra killmails will result in a depressed economy, all is really balanced now,
Increased demand would hurt the EVE economy? Quite the opposite. Increased demand for goods means suppliers can command a higher wage.

Quote:
And these nullsec alts in hisec that people are talking about, if it finances their fun in nullsec, then its all good. Don't fix stuff that works.
Nobody but you believes it's good, hth.



Theres a lot of risk moving stuff around in null sec in freighters, its just not possible that null sec hubs will ever be on par with hisec hubs.

Evelopedia; 

The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion  †  
Frying Doom
#262 - 2012-12-29 00:18:08 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Quote:
And these nullsec alts in hisec that people are talking about, if it finances their fun in nullsec, then its all good. Don't fix stuff that works.
Nobody but you believes it's good, hth.

Everyone agrees you must never try to nerf highsec, it's perfectly fine.

While I must admit I do like the new tag team sarcasm approach, who has actually said Hi-sec must never be nerfed?

I will admit it will require care to do and my own bias is that I feel it should be NPC owned stuff that is nerfed not a sector per say.

But has anyone actually said "Hi-sec must never be nerfed"

Sorry I might have just missed it.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#263 - 2012-12-29 00:25:46 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Quote:
And these nullsec alts in hisec that people are talking about, if it finances their fun in nullsec, then its all good. Don't fix stuff that works.
Nobody but you believes it's good, hth.

Everyone agrees you must never try to nerf highsec, it's perfectly fine.

While I must admit I do like the new tag team sarcasm approach, who has actually said Hi-sec must never be nerfed?

I will admit it will require care to do and my own bias is that I feel it should be NPC owned stuff that is nerfed not a sector per say.

But has anyone actually said "Hi-sec must never be nerfed"

Sorry I might have just missed it.


Many claim that nerfing hi sec will end EVE because of mass unsubs, so yes.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
Frying Doom
#264 - 2012-12-29 00:32:46 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Quote:
And these nullsec alts in hisec that people are talking about, if it finances their fun in nullsec, then its all good. Don't fix stuff that works.
Nobody but you believes it's good, hth.

Everyone agrees you must never try to nerf highsec, it's perfectly fine.

While I must admit I do like the new tag team sarcasm approach, who has actually said Hi-sec must never be nerfed?

I will admit it will require care to do and my own bias is that I feel it should be NPC owned stuff that is nerfed not a sector per say.

But has anyone actually said "Hi-sec must never be nerfed"

Sorry I might have just missed it.


Many claim that nerfing hi sec will end EVE because of mass unsubs, so yes.

Even I am in that camp if you nerf the crap out of it. It needs a gentle touch or as I have proposed the ability to replace the NPC facilities with player owned ones that are comparable to the current NPC facilities.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#265 - 2012-12-29 00:38:52 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Quote:
And these nullsec alts in hisec that people are talking about, if it finances their fun in nullsec, then its all good. Don't fix stuff that works.
Nobody but you believes it's good, hth.

Everyone agrees you must never try to nerf highsec, it's perfectly fine.

While I must admit I do like the new tag team sarcasm approach, who has actually said Hi-sec must never be nerfed?

I will admit it will require care to do and my own bias is that I feel it should be NPC owned stuff that is nerfed not a sector per say.

But has anyone actually said "Hi-sec must never be nerfed"

Sorry I might have just missed it.


Many claim that nerfing hi sec will end EVE because of mass unsubs, so yes.

Heh, like it wasn't blatantly obvious. Silly rhetorical question is silly.

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
#266 - 2012-12-29 00:52:48 UTC
Peter Raptor wrote:
Theres a lot of risk moving stuff around in null sec in freighters, its just not possible that null sec hubs will ever be on par with hisec hubs.

Gee, I never thought of that. If only we had a ship that was like a freighter but had a jump drive in exchange for somewhat less cargo space...

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#267 - 2012-12-29 00:54:43 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
Theres a lot of risk moving stuff around in null sec in freighters, its just not possible that null sec hubs will ever be on par with hisec hubs.

Gee, I never thought of that. If only we had a ship that was like a freighter but had a jump drive in exchange for somewhat less cargo space...


If only we could fit a module to vastly improve hulk tank at a reduced mining yield.

That was too complex, CCP rebalanced an entire line of ships because of that. I expect they'll "rebalance" regular freighters to have 2x the HP, 99% resists, etc. For the children.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
Frying Doom
#268 - 2012-12-29 00:56:57 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
Theres a lot of risk moving stuff around in null sec in freighters, its just not possible that null sec hubs will ever be on par with hisec hubs.

Gee, I never thought of that. If only we had a ship that was like a freighter but had a jump drive in exchange for somewhat less cargo space...


If only we could fit a module to vastly improve hulk tank at a reduced mining yield.

That was too complex, CCP rebalanced an entire line of ships because of that. I expect they'll "rebalance" regular freighters to have 2x the HP, 99% resists, etc. For the children.

The mining barge re-balance was one of the best things ever done.

I love my 127K ehp skiff :)

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#269 - 2012-12-29 01:06:14 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
Theres a lot of risk moving stuff around in null sec in freighters, its just not possible that null sec hubs will ever be on par with hisec hubs.

Gee, I never thought of that. If only we had a ship that was like a freighter but had a jump drive in exchange for somewhat less cargo space...


If only we could fit a module to vastly improve hulk tank at a reduced mining yield.

That was too complex, CCP rebalanced an entire line of ships because of that. I expect they'll "rebalance" regular freighters to have 2x the HP, 99% resists, etc. For the children.

Why is having a special case tank mod for hulks a better solution than the rebalance? Or were you hoping that they best case tank was still 30k EHP after the balance?
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#270 - 2012-12-29 01:09:49 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
Theres a lot of risk moving stuff around in null sec in freighters, its just not possible that null sec hubs will ever be on par with hisec hubs.

Gee, I never thought of that. If only we had a ship that was like a freighter but had a jump drive in exchange for somewhat less cargo space...


If only we could fit a module to vastly improve hulk tank at a reduced mining yield.

That was too complex, CCP rebalanced an entire line of ships because of that. I expect they'll "rebalance" regular freighters to have 2x the HP, 99% resists, etc. For the children.

Why is having a special case tank mod for hulks a better solution than the rebalance? Or were you hoping that they best case tank was still 30k EHP after the balance?


Lol special case mod.

I was talking about DAMAGE CONTROL 2

Things are only impossible until they are not.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#271 - 2012-12-29 01:10:29 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
Theres a lot of risk moving stuff around in null sec in freighters, its just not possible that null sec hubs will ever be on par with hisec hubs.

Gee, I never thought of that. If only we had a ship that was like a freighter but had a jump drive in exchange for somewhat less cargo space...


If only we could fit a module to vastly improve hulk tank at a reduced mining yield.

That was too complex, CCP rebalanced an entire line of ships because of that. I expect they'll "rebalance" regular freighters to have 2x the HP, 99% resists, etc. For the children.

Why is having a special case tank mod for hulks a better solution than the rebalance? Or were you hoping that they best case tank was still 30k EHP after the balance?


Lol special case mod.

I was talking about DAMAGE CONTROL 2

So yes to the 30k EHP max then?
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#272 - 2012-12-29 01:11:33 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:


I was talking about DAMAGE CONTROL 2
So yes to the 30k EHP max then?


Yep.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#273 - 2012-12-29 01:13:07 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

So yes to the 30k EHP max then?

It doesn't take much to make ganking unprofitable, before OR after the exhumer buff.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#274 - 2012-12-29 01:13:26 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:


I was talking about DAMAGE CONTROL 2

So yes to the 30k EHP max then?


Yep.

Glad they didn't share your opinion. Procurer is quite nice @ 90K EHP.
Frying Doom
#275 - 2012-12-29 01:14:23 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
Theres a lot of risk moving stuff around in null sec in freighters, its just not possible that null sec hubs will ever be on par with hisec hubs.

Gee, I never thought of that. If only we had a ship that was like a freighter but had a jump drive in exchange for somewhat less cargo space...


If only we could fit a module to vastly improve hulk tank at a reduced mining yield.

That was too complex, CCP rebalanced an entire line of ships because of that. I expect they'll "rebalance" regular freighters to have 2x the HP, 99% resists, etc. For the children.

Why is having a special case tank mod for hulks a better solution than the rebalance? Or were you hoping that they best case tank was still 30k EHP after the balance?


Lol special case mod.

I was talking about DAMAGE CONTROL 2

To be honest the thing that was actually best about the rebalance was the rebalance its self.

After so many years of watching PvP ships get rebalanced time and again it was nice to see something done for mining or manufacturing.

After all that has been promised, one click manufacturing, ring mining ect.. it was good to see something.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#276 - 2012-12-29 01:17:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

So yes to the 30k EHP max then?

It doesn't take much to make ganking unprofitable, before OR after the exhumer buff.

In a .5 it pretty much took every slot the ship had, a non-compromise most other ships didn't have to make. It's like a combat ship without a single damage mod, no ewar and no tackle. Doesn't seem "balanced" to me. Maybe I'm overestimating the ganking potential but especially during permageddon this became true to a real extent.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#277 - 2012-12-29 01:21:45 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

So yes to the 30k EHP max then?

It doesn't take much to make ganking unprofitable, before OR after the exhumer buff.

In a .5 it pretty much took every slot the ship had, a non-compromise most other ships didn't have to make. It's like a combat ship without a single damage mod, no ewar and no tackle. Doesn't seem "balanced" to me. Maybe I'm overestimating the ganking potential but especially during permageddon this became true to a real extent.

So don't go to 0.5
ohnoeschoices

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#278 - 2012-12-29 01:24:16 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

So yes to the 30k EHP max then?

It doesn't take much to make ganking unprofitable, before OR after the exhumer buff.

In a .5 it pretty much took every slot the ship had, a non-compromise most other ships didn't have to make. It's like a combat ship without a single damage mod, no ewar and no tackle. Doesn't seem "balanced" to me. Maybe I'm overestimating the ganking potential but especially during permageddon this became true to a real extent.

So don't go to 0.5
ohnoeschoices

I prefer having options like lower yield but more tank.
Peter Raptor
Galactic Hawks
#279 - 2012-12-29 02:25:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Peter Raptor
To tell you the truth, if they "slightly" nerf hisec, it wont make any difference to player distribution, hisec has been mini-nerfed for years (lvl 4 nerfs, datacore nerfs etc etc) people are still not going to nullsec, nullsec needs a MASSIVE overhaul to attract players, nullsec is the problem.

Evelopedia; 

The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion  †  
Frying Doom
#280 - 2012-12-29 02:43:16 UTC
Peter Raptor wrote:
To tell you the truth, if they "slightly" nerf hisec, it wont make any difference to player distribution, hisec has been mini-nerfed for years (lvl 4 nerfs, datacore nerfs etc etc) people are still not going to nullsec, nullsec needs a MASSIVE overhaul to attract players, nullsec is the problem.

To be honest the whole thing is do do with player distribution but the need has to be to make players want to go rather than forcing them too.

Take wormholes

They are now getting kind of full, it is becoming rarer to find an uninhabited system. Why because they work, this risk vs reward while more dangerous than Null and only slightly more rewarding is acceptable as we have no blobs and no need to join super alliances to live.

If the same could be done for Null and lo-sec made better it would be great.

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