These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why all the hate against Hisec?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#101 - 2013-02-16 14:12:58 UTC
Ankles McGlashan wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
So you'd be OK with CCP giving the Amarr FW guys 20x as many LP as minmatar for their activities because everyone can join amarr FW if they really want to?


again, you're talking about balance when I'm talking about privilege. quite obviously I could resign and join the amarr side after some standings repair.

if I chose to remain loyal to the minmatar side then that would be an arbitrary and self-imposed restriction on my gameplay where I have chosen to put myself at an economic disadvantage because I have other reasons, perhaps because I feel that choice is more in the spirit of the game.

likewise those who wish to be self-sufficient in null may do so at an economic disadvantage. if that is making anyone unhappy about playing then I suggest they change their ways and instead leverage the advantage they get from controlling that territory in combination with the benefits of high sec manufacture and trading.

So the answer to his question is "yes".
Ankles McGlashan
Doomheim
#102 - 2013-02-16 14:15:29 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
So the answer to his question is "yes".


My answer to his question is stop changing the subject.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#103 - 2013-02-16 14:17:12 UTC
Ankles McGlashan wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
So you'd be OK with CCP giving the Amarr FW guys 20x as many LP as minmatar for their activities because everyone can join amarr FW if they really want to?


again, you're talking about balance when I'm talking about privilege. quite obviously I could resign and join the amarr side after some standings repair.

if I chose to remain loyal to the minmatar side then that would be an arbitrary and self-imposed restriction on my gameplay where I have chosen to put myself at an economic disadvantage because I have other reasons, perhaps because I feel that choice is more in the spirit of the game.

likewise those who wish to be self-sufficient in null may do so at an economic disadvantage. if that is making anyone unhappy about playing then I suggest they change their ways and instead leverage the advantage they get from controlling that territory in combination with the benefits of high sec manufacture and trading.


Why should they have to be at an economic disadvantage in the first place? Why is it wrong to fix an obvious imbalance between choice A and choice B? It's just as arbitrary as saying that it's OK for minmatar FW members to make 95% than amarr FW because it's a self-imposed choice. There's no intrinsic reason why amarr should be 20x as profitable, and there's no intrinsic reason why nullsec should be economically crippled.

Indeed, I'd love to hear your explaination as to why the economic disadvantage shouldn't be with those who stay in hi-sec rather than those who leave it?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Josef Djugashvilis
#104 - 2013-02-16 14:17:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Josef Djugashvilis
Malcanis wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
The bad feeling comes because hi-seccers just don't comprehend how privileged they are. They're the equivalent of Mitt Romney saying that if poor people don't want to be poor, they should just borrow a couple of million bucks from their dad, go to an Ivy League college and set up their own business. If money runs short, they should just sell a few grand worth of shares from their inheritence!


How do you know what I do, or do not comprehend?


Well OK, maybe you know how privileged you are and just don't care? That's not going to make you any friends either.



Hi-sec is open to all, not just the 'privileged'

It is high time we all remembered that we inhabit the one Eve universe, and that where players choose to spend their playtime is a choice they make, not something imposed upon them by CCP.

This is not a signature.
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#105 - 2013-02-16 14:22:32 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Ankles McGlashan wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
'Privilege' is an unearned advantage. Free stations certainly count here.

Also, not everyone has access to hi-sec.


Those free stations are available to you also. If you can think of a reason you might not be able to access them then I can suggest a solution.


So you'd be OK with CCP giving the Amarr FW guys 20x as many LP as minmatar for their activities because everyone can join amarr FW if they really want to?


After a while the Minmatar LP would drift towards 20x the worth.
Ankles McGlashan
Doomheim
#106 - 2013-02-16 14:29:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Ankles McGlashan
Malcanis wrote:
Why should they have to be at an economic disadvantage in the first place? Why is it wrong to fix an obvious imbalance between choice A and choice B? It's just as arbitrary as saying that it's OK for minmatar FW members to make 95% than amarr FW because it's a self-imposed choice. There's no intrinsic reason why amarr should be 20x as profitable, and there's no intrinsic reason why nullsec should be economically crippled.

Indeed, I'd love to hear your explaination as to why the economic disadvantage shouldn't be with those who stay in hi-sec rather than those who leave it?


your analogy with fw isn't appropriate because being part of the amarr or minmatar militia is mutually exclusive. being in a sov space corp/alliance and operating in high-sec is not. you talk about leaving high-sec as if you're leaving your starter school, but it is not a one-way door. you can clonejump up there or fly around in a cov-ops if the JC timer fouls your availability for CTAs.

like i said, this is an abitrary restriction you place on yourself and then demand others also adopt. that is clearly not a rational position. whether or not the different areas of the game are balanced is another issue.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#107 - 2013-02-16 16:38:17 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
The bad feeling comes because hi-seccers just don't comprehend how privileged they are. They're the equivalent of Mitt Romney saying that if poor people don't want to be poor, they should just borrow a couple of million bucks from their dad, go to an Ivy League college and set up their own business. If money runs short, they should just sell a few grand worth of shares from their inheritence!


How do you know what I do, or do not comprehend?


Well OK, maybe you know how privileged you are and just don't care? That's not going to make you any friends either.



Hi-sec is open to all, not just the 'privileged'

It is high time we all remembered that we inhabit the one Eve universe, and that where players choose to spend their playtime is a choice they make, not something imposed upon them by CCP.


Ever tried being an industrialist or an inventor or a trader in 0.0?

Operating in hi-sec is pretty much imposed by CCP.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#108 - 2013-02-16 16:41:49 UTC
Ankles McGlashan wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Why should they have to be at an economic disadvantage in the first place? Why is it wrong to fix an obvious imbalance between choice A and choice B? It's just as arbitrary as saying that it's OK for minmatar FW members to make 95% than amarr FW because it's a self-imposed choice. There's no intrinsic reason why amarr should be 20x as profitable, and there's no intrinsic reason why nullsec should be economically crippled.

Indeed, I'd love to hear your explaination as to why the economic disadvantage shouldn't be with those who stay in hi-sec rather than those who leave it?


your analogy with fw isn't appropriate because being part of the amarr or minmatar militia is mutually exclusive. being in a sov space corp/alliance and operating in high-sec is not. you talk about leaving high-sec as if you're leaving your starter school, but it is not a one-way door. you can clonejump up there or fly around in a cov-ops if the JC timer fouls your availability for CTAs.

like i said, this is an abitrary restriction you place on yourself and then demand others also adopt. that is clearly not a rational position. whether or not the different areas of the game are balanced is another issue.


So you'd be perfectly happy to accept it if CCP reduced hi-sec facilities by 90% and imposed "realistic" charges to use lines, because staying in hi-sec is "an abitrary restriction you place on yourself"?

Would it be OK for all Amarr ships to have 10x the DPS and Resists that ships of other races do, because not flying amarr ships is "an abitrary restriction you place on yourself"?

Would it be OK for sales tax in all stations not owned by Caldari NPC corps to be 25% because not trading in Caldari stations is "an abitrary restriction you place on yourself"?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#109 - 2013-02-16 16:52:30 UTC
Malcanis wrote:

Ever tried being an industrialist or an inventor or a trader in 0.0?

Operating in hi-sec is pretty much imposed by CCP.


Tell us what 0.0 is lacking to make those professions easier, then.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#110 - 2013-02-16 16:58:06 UTC
Takseen wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

Ever tried being an industrialist or an inventor or a trader in 0.0?

Operating in hi-sec is pretty much imposed by CCP.


Tell us what 0.0 is lacking to make those professions easier, then.


To start, station slots, a good source of low ends and good refineries.

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
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#111 - 2013-02-16 17:05:31 UTC
Takseen wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

Ever tried being an industrialist or an inventor or a trader in 0.0?

Operating in hi-sec is pretty much imposed by CCP.


Tell us what 0.0 is lacking to make those professions easier, then.


They've been telling CCP for years, and in turn CCP have ignored them.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#112 - 2013-02-16 17:21:15 UTC
Takseen wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

Ever tried being an industrialist or an inventor or a trader in 0.0?

Operating in hi-sec is pretty much imposed by CCP.


Tell us what 0.0 is lacking to make those professions easier, then.


The system of Nonni has more production slots than the entire region of Deklein. And it's not exceptional. That's a good start.

Another factor is the gigantic subsidies hi-sec producers get, making it almost impossible for 0.0 producers to compete. Asking hi-sec producers to pay a fair price for the use of those stations they didn't have to pay to build or spend any effort to protect would be a good start.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Ankles McGlashan
Doomheim
#113 - 2013-02-16 17:41:50 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
So you'd be perfectly happy to accept it if CCP reduced hi-sec facilities by 90% and imposed "realistic" charges to use lines, because staying in hi-sec is "an abitrary restriction you place on yourself"?

Would it be OK for all Amarr ships to have 10x the DPS and Resists that ships of other races do, because not flying amarr ships is "an abitrary restriction you place on yourself"?

Would it be OK for sales tax in all stations not owned by Caldari NPC corps to be 25% because not trading in Caldari stations is "an abitrary restriction you place on yourself"?


Not sure really what you're trying to get at here. I do stuff in high-sec that makes sense. if they make that not make sense anymore then I would do something else. that's just an economic decision.

Presumably you're just going to keep arguing about balance because claiming that high sec resources are off-limit to you is indefensible. It's your decision not to use them.
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#114 - 2013-02-16 17:47:18 UTC
Malcanis wrote:

The system of Nonni has more production slots than the entire region of Deklein. And it's not exceptional. That's a good start.

Another factor is the gigantic subsidies hi-sec producers get, making it almost impossible for 0.0 producers to compete. Asking hi-sec producers to pay a fair price for the use of those stations they didn't have to pay to build or spend any effort to protect would be a good start.


Right I see. It is an odd scenario where the Empires provide practically free access to their manufacturing facilities. Throwing on a hefty PI style Empire tax would make sense. Maybe reduce the number of slots using the argument that the Navies etc need them to replace their own losses.

If you wanted to get really mean you could start charging for docking and cargo storage rights per station.
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#115 - 2013-02-16 17:49:05 UTC
La Nariz wrote:

To start, station slots, a good source of low ends and good refineries.


Empire refineries should really take a better cut of the proceeds, NPC 0.0 a smaller amount, with perfect refining only on your own POS.
By low ends you mean Veldspar, Plag etc, do these not grow in null?
Ankles McGlashan
Doomheim
#116 - 2013-02-16 17:55:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Ankles McGlashan
Malcanis wrote:
Another factor is the gigantic subsidies hi-sec producers get, making it almost impossible for 0.0 producers to compete. Asking hi-sec producers to pay a fair price for the use of those stations they didn't have to pay to build or spend any effort to protect would be a good start.


I don't understand why you would put the effort into holding sovereignty just to do stuff a carebear corporation or even an NPC corp character can achieve. that just seems like a waste of time to me, since you can buy all their stuff on the open market.
Leper ofBacon
HELP GRANDMA SMASH HER LEGS IN
#117 - 2013-02-16 18:12:12 UTC
Probably because the game would be much better if risk actually equalled reward. If you can just become rich and be isolated and safe, what does this add to the game? You may love to play this way but just having created this environment undermines the 'one server, harsh world' part of eve that really sets it apart from other mmo's.
Ankles McGlashan
Doomheim
#118 - 2013-02-16 18:20:34 UTC
Leper ofBacon wrote:
Probably because the game would be much better if risk actually equalled reward. If you can just become rich and be isolated and safe, what does this add to the game? You may love to play this way but just having created this environment undermines the 'one server, harsh world' part of eve that really sets it apart from other mmo's.


well, it also underpins the market economy of eve. people don't set up trade hubs in failed states. a degree of law and order has to exist.

maybe some people want the game to be about competing command economies and resource wars but that is not the game that you're logging in to.
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#119 - 2013-02-16 18:24:31 UTC
Ankles McGlashan wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Another factor is the gigantic subsidies hi-sec producers get, making it almost impossible for 0.0 producers to compete. Asking hi-sec producers to pay a fair price for the use of those stations they didn't have to pay to build or spend any effort to protect would be a good start.


I don't understand why you would put the effort into holding sovereignty just to do stuff a carebear corporation or even an NPC corp character can achieve. that just seems like a waste of time to me, since you can buy all their stuff on the open market.


Cos building a self-sustaining nation is fun. But not really possible when everything is too cheap from Empire.
Ankles McGlashan
Doomheim
#120 - 2013-02-16 18:39:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Ankles McGlashan
Takseen wrote:
Cos building a self-sustaining nation is fun. But not really possible when everything is too cheap from Empire.


that's going to be a problem even if highsec were less lucrative for industry. some alliance will gain a comparative resource advantage peculiar to their geography, like say having more ice fields or more manufacturing slots and be able to crank out certain types of items cheaper than your basic Socialist Worker's Corp.

basically you can compete within a market economy but you can't compete with a market economy. also, having a super liquid market is a real boon for null sec if you're actually playing the game as it is currently compiled, as all that officer loot can be shifted due to high sec's supposed riches and market traders.