These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
DSpite Culhach
#401 - 2013-01-01 16:57:56 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
DSpite Culhach wrote:
Andski wrote:
DSpite Culhach wrote:
This is the whole problem.

"We don't have enough to shoot at, hence we must force players out of hisec, cause its too easy to stay there"

Hello? This is a GAME, right, so people will in fact see how a particular part of a game works, and for example decide "I just want to spend my free off work relaxing time in the market or making items" or "I just want to sub for 6 months and work up to a few Incursions".

So you want more PvP'ers but there dosn't seem to be enough of them? And you're blaming a game mechanic?

The game mechanic is what divides players into categories. If you have an mmo game that's has a 10K player base with a 50/50 pve/pvp population, and remove pve completely , do people seriously think the pve players will just go "oh well, now I have no choice but to pvp" and suddenly have 10K pvp players or do you think you'll just now have maybe 6000 pvp players and empty cities?


This isn't about forcing players out of hisec because short of CCP moving their characters and assets to nullsec entirely, that isn't happening. It's about balancing hisec to stop it from being the absolute best game in town.


What? Balance what? This is not a game where you have one base and I have a base and you say that your base is smaller and has less windows from where to shoot from. Everyone has access to the same base and can come and go as they please, and when shooting happens, we all do it somewhere else anyway like lowsec, and if you can't enter that hisec base because of your security status then you already know how that happened.


Ah, the old "$_SHIP isn't overpowered because anyone can fly it" argument that has been roundly mocked and solidly destroyed over and over and over but apparently this is your first time and I hope it was special for you too?


That was NOT the arguments. Ships aren't "places", you cant just fly any ship you like, it can take months to train a hull. Learn to read. How the hell can you compare space for objects? There's never a section of space that's not an an exact copy of somewhere else in space under a different faction, everyone has access to the same resources. If suddenly everyone wanted Amarr space because they made a mistake and put all the good missions there, it would be imbalanced.

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.
DSpite Culhach
#402 - 2013-01-01 17:12:13 UTC
I'm not defending Hisec saying "oh gees don't nerf it" I really don't give a crap about what they do to it. I'll adapt, so will everyone else.

None of you have yet produced a logical argument as to why it needs changing, and what you seem to think it will cause when it happens. Even if, prices will change, markets will adjust, biz as normal. Less people will stick their heads in low/null because it takes longer to get the isk for ships. Congrats, even less targets.

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.
DSpite Culhach
#403 - 2013-01-01 17:20:34 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
DSpite Culhach wrote:

What? Balance what? This is not a game where you have one base and I have a base and you say that your base is smaller and has less windows from where to shoot from. Everyone has access to the same base and can come and go as they please, and when shooting happens, we all do it somewhere else anyway like lowsec, and if you can't enter that hisec base because of your security status then you already know how that happened.


Picture this scenario:

You're a happy mission runner, happily running missions for the Minmatar Republic like a good freedom fighter should. It's your thing and you like it and you're happy. Your standing with Amarr is in the tank, of course, but hey, screw those slavers!

Then one day Greyscale posts a blog, and says that Amarr missions are going to be changed. First, they're going to get 75% more LP than everyone else's, second, the deadspaces are going to be locked so that no one else can enter them, and then lastly, 90% of the Minmatar LP store tiems (including almost all the good ones) will be in the Amarr LP store.

The Amarr missioners defend the change on the grounds that, hey, anyone can grind up Amarr standings and get the benefit of this change, and also it makes lore sense for Amarr missions to pay the most and have the best tech, and anyway, EVE isn't fair so ~deal with it~.

Your immediate response to that defence is exactly what we think of your post.


Don't put words in my mouth, you have no idea how I think, Even assuming I could never grind standing for Amarr with any toon I own. why the hell would I actually care. I don't complain now that mission runners with 150 million SP's can have all 4 Marouders and run any L4's in 10 minutes, or complain to CCP that my Stations never have research or invention slots "why or why didnt you add moar CCP ???"

I am dealing with it, how about you start dealing with the way hisec/lowsec/null are, it;s your damn argument.

CCP can nerf all they like. If this game stayed the same all the time, I'd go back to another game.

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#404 - 2013-01-01 17:23:42 UTC
DSpite Culhach wrote:
Less people will stick their heads in low/null because it takes longer to get the isk for ships. Congrats, even less targets.


You know, people who feel that they need to stick their heads out into low/null in ships that are an unreasonable burden to replace are already going about it wrong, no matter how much ISK they can make in hisec. So while we might see less late-generation players cluelessly roaming solo in T3s whose fits they found on Battleclinic, we'd have more nullsec players actually making their ISK in 0.0 rather than funding their PvP with hisec incursions and missions, which means more targets.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
DSpite Culhach
#405 - 2013-01-01 17:49:21 UTC
Andski wrote:
DSpite Culhach wrote:
Less people will stick their heads in low/null because it takes longer to get the isk for ships. Congrats, even less targets.


You know, people who feel that they need to stick their heads out into low/null in ships that are an unreasonable burden to replace are already going about it wrong, no matter how much ISK they can make in hisec. So while we might see less late-generation players cluelessly roaming solo in T3s whose fits they found on Battleclinic, we'd have more nullsec players actually making their ISK in 0.0 rather than funding their PvP with hisec incursions and missions, which means more targets.


I'm all for more low/null fight, I fail to see why you think that everyone that joins up wants that. If they did, guess what, they'd get out to a corp in low/null from the start and still mission for isk in relative safety in a controlled system, with better mission payouts, and if needed, still have a fast alt for market games in a month or so in high sec.

If you just want new targets because you're bored shooting the same people, well then, this is what happens when all the people around that want to play EVE are already playing eve, and for the record, I'd just join RvB to not put up with alliances tantrums that seem to happen on a weekly basis.

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.
Mister Tuggles
Heretic Army
Sedition.
#406 - 2013-01-01 18:25:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Mister Tuggles
High sec doesn't need nerfed anymore than it has been already. It is the most dangerous place in Eve to live/play.

I firmly believe that Null should be nerfed, and have a lot of its wealth moved into low sec. You know, low sec, that place where every corp in the 50 surrounding systems aren't blue to your alliance, and you actually get attacked by other players...
Ioci
Bad Girl Posse
#407 - 2013-01-01 18:43:09 UTC
Title is accurate. Scan down a Grav in High Sec and 5 other people want it.

Null lacks competition.

R.I.P. Vile Rat
Zaraz Zaraz
Zontik Paraphernalia Inc
#408 - 2013-01-01 23:38:34 UTC
Andski wrote:
DSpite Culhach wrote:
Less people will stick their heads in low/null because it takes longer to get the isk for ships. Congrats, even less targets.


You know, people who feel that they need to stick their heads out into low/null in ships that are an unreasonable burden to replace are already going about it wrong, no matter how much ISK they can make in hisec. So while we might see less late-generation players cluelessly roaming solo in T3s whose fits they found on Battleclinic, we'd have more nullsec players actually making their ISK in 0.0 rather than funding their PvP with hisec incursions and missions, which means more targets.



But thats the WHOLE POINT!

They don't want to be TARGETS!

You are objectifying other human beings and seeing them as some kind of amazing toy doll that cries when you hurt them.


Heres news for you; other people don't play this game for the purposes of YOUR entertainment.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#409 - 2013-01-01 23:43:44 UTC
Mister Tuggles wrote:
High sec doesn't need nerfed anymore than it has been already. It is the most dangerous place in Eve to live/play.


Fact: 0.0 is over 4 times more dangerous than 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
Zaraz Zaraz
Zontik Paraphernalia Inc
#410 - 2013-01-01 23:50:16 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Mister Tuggles wrote:
High sec doesn't need nerfed anymore than it has been already. It is the most dangerous place in Eve to live/play.


Fact: 0.0 is over 4 times more dangerous than hi-sec


Only if you want it to be...

By 'dangerous' you probably mean 'risk of getting your ship blown up'. You might want to take 'on purpose' (ie by consensual pvp) or 'by accident' (ie nonconsensual pvp) into that. I think more ship losses in low/null happen when people engage in fights willingly than in high but a LOT more happen in high when people are ganked.

So yes 0.0 is more dangerous when you want danger; but if you want to hole up in your safe system with only blues around and when someone non blue shows up you gtfo then 0.0 is way safer than high.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#411 - 2013-01-01 23:54:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Zaraz Zaraz wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Mister Tuggles wrote:
High sec doesn't need nerfed anymore than it has been already. It is the most dangerous place in Eve to live/play.


Fact: 0.0 is over 4 times more dangerous than hi-sec


Only if you want it to be...

By 'dangerous' you probably mean 'risk of getting your ship blown up'. You might want to take 'on purpose' (ie by consensual pvp) or 'by accident' (ie nonconsensual pvp) into that. I think more ship losses in low/null happen when people engage in fights willingly than in high but a LOT more happen in high when people are ganked.

So yes 0.0 is more dangerous when you want danger; but if you want to hole up in your safe system with only blues around and when someone non blue shows up you gtfo then 0.0 is way safer than high.



It sure is, and I clung to that incorrect belief last week while being awoxed by a light blue guy in a system full of blues....

The only people who think null sec is safer than null are people hiding under the protection of CONCORD...in high sec. No magical npc spaceships spawned to punish my null sec awoxxer.

I should have taken a note out of the high sec player handbook and instantly ran to the forums asking for changes rather than what I actually did (changed my ratting ship fit to give me more of a chance next time, and there WILL be a next time).
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#412 - 2013-01-01 23:55:39 UTC  |  Edited by: EI Digin
Zaraz Zaraz wrote:
purestrain highsec pubbie trash


Since more people get ganked in highsec, it is more dangerous?
Zaraz Zaraz
Zontik Paraphernalia Inc
#413 - 2013-01-02 00:03:02 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
Zaraz Zaraz wrote:
purestrain highsec pubbie trash


Since more people get ganked in highsec, it is more dangerous?


As I was saying it all depends how you define danger. Those poor hisec pubbies (gods do you use that expression on reddit now as well as sa?) have a different definition to you. So what? Does everyone have to see this game the same way you do?

That is the whole problem on this thread; people who think that other people playing with space toys should play with those toys in the way THEY think they should.

Thats your whole nullsec/hisec argument problem right there. Once you can get over that issue you can get on with enjoying the game the way YOU want to play it.

But other people having fun and relaxing does not, should not, make you have less fun unless you are a sadist. If you are then you need to encourage masochists to play the game instead of trying to turn other players into masochists.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#414 - 2013-01-02 00:10:48 UTC
encouraging game balance is a sign of sexual peversion
Zaraz Zaraz
Zontik Paraphernalia Inc
#415 - 2013-01-02 00:12:39 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
encouraging game balance is a sign of sexual peversion


Well otherwise its gonna end up like this:

Quote:

"Executing the cost-reduction plan CEO Mark Pincus announced in November, Zynga has shut down, pulled from the app stores, or stopped accepting new players to more than 10 games such as PetVille, Mafia Wars 2, FishVille, Vampire Wars, Treasure Isle, Indiana Jones Adventure World, Mafia Wars Shakedown, Forestville, Montopia, Mojitomo, and Word Scramble Challenge. Comments from gamers on the shutdown notices included things like 'my daughter is heartbroken' and 'Please don't remove petville. I been playing for 4 yrs. and I'M going to miss my pet Jaime.why do you want cause depression for me and others. Why do you want to kill my pet?' For players that have invested a lot of microtransactions and/or time, this comes as a heavy blow."
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#416 - 2013-01-02 00:14:41 UTC
Zaraz Zaraz wrote:

As I was saying it all depends how you define danger. Those poor hisec pubbies (gods do you use that expression on reddit now as well as sa?) have a different definition to you. So what? Does everyone have to see this game the same way you do?


No, you don't get to redefine "danger". Try again.

Zaraz Zaraz wrote:

But other people having fun and relaxing does not, should not, make you have less fun unless you are a sadist. If you are then you need to encourage masochists to play the game instead of trying to turn other players into masochists.


No, but when others "fun" is exploiting bad game mechanics ruining other parts of the game it needs to be addressed. People who want changes are not asking highsec to be eliminated, which you and others are implying. We are asking it to be balanced.
Count of MonteCylon
Anti-Pirate Enforcement
#417 - 2013-01-02 00:15:35 UTC
Hi-sec can't really be nerfed for the following reasons:

1. Veldspar and scordite value makes it possible for new players to get started in Eve even if playing solo. They don't have the support or the skills to survive in low-sec or null-sec.

2. Team-based PvE is a big part of any MMO so you can't get rid of incursions etc.

3. Freighter hauling is an important part of the Eve economy so you can't really get rid of that either.

You can't buff null-sec because they are making incredible amounts of ISK as it is.

All this really leaves is to buff low-sec profitability so that it matches the risk.

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. -- Ephesians 6:12
Zaraz Zaraz
Zontik Paraphernalia Inc
#418 - 2013-01-02 00:23:17 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
Zaraz Zaraz wrote:

As I was saying it all depends how you define danger. Those poor hisec pubbies (gods do you use that expression on reddit now as well as sa?) have a different definition to you. So what? Does everyone have to see this game the same way you do?


No, you don't get to redefine "danger". Try again.


There are many different kinds of danger. Theres the danger that in fooling around with a girl I'll get her pregnant, theres the danger that some chavs at the bus stop will stab me. Theres the danger that I'll lose my ship in a gf, theres the danger that my hauler will get ganked undocking from Jita44.

These are different kinds of danger and different people see them differently.

I don't need to redefine danger, its diverse enough as it is.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#419 - 2013-01-02 00:34:44 UTC
Mister Tuggles wrote:
High sec doesn't need nerfed anymore than it has been already. It is the most dangerous place in Eve to live/play.

I firmly believe that Null should be nerfed, and have a lot of its wealth moved into low sec. You know, low sec, that place where every corp in the 50 surrounding systems aren't blue to your alliance, and you actually get attacked by other players...

Wow, you actually believe everything you said.
That's pretty scary.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#420 - 2013-01-02 00:36:54 UTC
Zaraz Zaraz wrote:
That is the whole problem on this thread; people who think that other people playing with space toys should play with those toys in the way THEY think they should.

Don't you dare presume to tell me what I think. I don't give a damn what you do in this game, I do however care about the mechanics you're exploiting and how they affect me.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)