These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

A High Sec Manifesto
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#101 - 2011-11-13 22:25:43 UTC
All I can say is that I can make that 600 mill in a single evening while Darkside - an alliance that few people would describe as anything less than highly competent - are actively trying to stop me and my friends. It's difficult, but it's possible.

That said, I strongly agree with your post.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Seamus Donohue
EVE University
Ivy League
#102 - 2011-11-13 22:33:51 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
All I can say is that I can make that 600 mill in a single evening while Darkside - an alliance that few people would describe as anything less than highly competent - are actively trying to stop me and my friends. It's difficult, but it's possible.

That said, I strongly agree with your post.

Taking your word for that, it sounds like that's reasonably balanced, then. Would it be correct to assume that you lose ships frequently in such activity, but you generate enough ISK to replace them just as rapidly? Also, would this be in your alliance's sovereign space?

I have no personal experience with Null Security income sources (personal, corporate, or alliance), except for what I've seen from a little bit of playing around on Singularity.

Survivor of Teskanen.  Fan of John Rourke.

I have video tutorials for EVE Online on my YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/SeamusDonohueEVE
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#103 - 2011-11-13 22:46:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
Seamus Donohue wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
All I can say is that I can make that 600 mill in a single evening while Darkside - an alliance that few people would describe as anything less than highly competent - are actively trying to stop me and my friends. It's difficult, but it's possible.

That said, I strongly agree with your post.

Taking your word for that, it sounds like that's reasonably balanced, then. Would it be correct to assume that you lose ships frequently in such activity, but you generate enough ISK to replace them just as rapidly? Also, would this be in your alliance's sovereign space?

I have no personal experience with Null Security income sources (personal, corporate, or alliance), except for what I've seen from a little bit of playing around on Singularity.



Nope, over the course of 6 months of industrious Angel LP collection, they've never yet caught me in a PvE ship. I don't flatter myself that this is because I'm superspecialsauce, because they've caught plenty of my alliance mates. I attribute this partly to luck, and partly to my meticulous security hygiene. The fact is that it is possible to make a very good living in hostile circumstances, but the trick is to remember to follow the right procedures all the time: Always scan the outgate, always have bookmarks prepared, never jump thought without a scout, always double check that your sig radius/sensor strength is still less than 1.08, always check intel, always refresh DSCAN, always warp out and don't come back if the probes get within 2AU, change your ship name when you warp, always carry 240 CN Heavy of each type to deal with tacklers, always rep your shield up before warping to celestial, and a few more I'm not going to tell you.

In short, there's nothing particularly special about what I do, only that I actually bother to do it.

Sooner or later people get lazy or careless or impatient, or simply unlucky, and lose a 9-digit Tengu. When I feel lazy or careless or impatient or unlucky, I leave the Tengu docked, and join a PvP fleet which is a far safer place for a ship to be.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Seamus Donohue
EVE University
Ivy League
#104 - 2011-11-14 16:11:38 UTC
Ah, Angel Cartel missioning. That makes sense.

Thank you for taking the time to reply.

Survivor of Teskanen.  Fan of John Rourke.

I have video tutorials for EVE Online on my YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/SeamusDonohueEVE
Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#105 - 2011-11-16 20:03:39 UTC
/bump for lots of good ideas.

Really wish there was some functional differences to make things *more profitable* rather than less...

o7 Malc.

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.
Zircon Dasher
#106 - 2011-11-17 18:20:12 UTC
God-damnit. I really wanted to troll and derail this thread.

In the end I just couldnt bring myself to do it.

Seriously. Nice work.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Myxx
The Scope
#107 - 2011-11-21 17:20:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Myxx
Malcanis wrote:
Introduction:



(5) "Carebears". These are players - often with significant assets and skills - who simply won't accept the risk of losing a ship to PvP at any price, regardless of other considerations. Economic, gameplay and game balance considerations are not of interest to them; the idea that other players can destroy their ship is revolting to them.




For the carebears, I honestly have no ideas. The psychology of being emotionally invested in your ship to such an extent that you won't accept losing it for any reason is so foreign to what I believe EVE is about that I can't think of a good way to integrate that lifestyle into a fully connected, single shard PvP game with a player driven economy. Let's just hope that there aren't really as many of these guys as we fear, and that most of the people in hi-sec aren't quite so risk averse as we're led to believe.



I feel that these types of people need to be "re-educated" as it were to be less risk averse, or to be capable to be more accepting of combat. I feel that this attitude is detrimental to EVE as a whole going forward.


Other than that, well written, Malcanis.

Edit: Re-educated, or forced to cope or leave/die.
Riedle
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#108 - 2011-11-21 19:56:31 UTC
Fully support!
Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#109 - 2011-11-23 02:15:50 UTC
With all the threads I've seen over the years here, I can't believe that a thread like this doesn't get more attention...

blows my mind.

Drama sells better than intelligence I guess...Ugh

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#110 - 2011-11-23 07:44:03 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
Malcanis for CSM7

(unironically)

Malcanis is the HIGHSEC candidate we need.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#111 - 2011-11-23 08:53:40 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
always double check that your sig radius/sensor strength is still less than 1.08
Where does one find that information? Sig radius is listed in metres on the fitting window and could not find a row giving a different value on show info. Am very curious about this. I'm assuming this number ensures that you're not lockable in some X amount of time? (Not instantly, I suppose, by someone with excellent skills and mods.)
Marcus JuniusBrutus
Martial Artisans
#112 - 2011-11-23 09:42:43 UTC
Good Post and supported +1


One thing I've not seen in the thread so-far (apologies if missed) is views around the NPC corporation role in Empire Space. There are a lot of players in NPC corps operating in Hi-Sec, and if looking at a High-Sec manifesto, it would seem a good opportunity to consider if players are happy with the status quo - ie:

For SQ: NPC membership supports casual gameplay
Against SQ: NPC corps facilitate the stagnation of dynamic Eve gamplay in High-Sec

(just two random opposing ideas for illustration purposes only)


Essentially, given the number of players in NPC Corps who operate in Hi-Sec and who would be impacted by any of the proposed changes above, it would be a missed opportunity, I think, not also to consider NPC Corps role in Hi-Sec at the same time as drafting a Hi-Sec manifesto.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#113 - 2011-11-23 10:16:22 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
always double check that your sig radius/sensor strength is still less than 1.08
Where does one find that information? Sig radius is listed in metres on the fitting window and could not find a row giving a different value on show info. Am very curious about this. I'm assuming this number ensures that you're not lockable in some X amount of time? (Not instantly, I suppose, by someone with excellent skills and mods.)


You can see your sensor strength in the fitting window also, near the bottom right.

1.08 used to be the "unprobeable" threshold. Now you can be probed out with that ratio, but it takes a maxed out covops pilot with virtue implants to do it, and even then it will take them a couple of minutes - easily long enough for you to GTFO if you're alert.

But it's all too easy to assume that your ship is "unprobeable" when actually you're not at all because you forgot to activate an ECM/ didn't notice you were being target painted by NPC/forgot to swap into your Halo clone/etc. Always check, especially when you start picking up probes on DSCAN.

"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.
#114 - 2011-11-23 10:37:20 UTC
Marcus JuniusBrutus wrote:
Good Post and supported +1


One thing I've not seen in the thread so-far (apologies if missed) is views around the NPC corporation role in Empire Space. There are a lot of players in NPC corps operating in Hi-Sec, and if looking at a High-Sec manifesto, it would seem a good opportunity to consider if players are happy with the status quo - ie:

For SQ: NPC membership supports casual gameplay
Against SQ: NPC corps facilitate the stagnation of dynamic Eve gamplay in High-Sec

(just two random opposing ideas for illustration purposes only)


Essentially, given the number of players in NPC Corps who operate in Hi-Sec and who would be impacted by any of the proposed changes above, it would be a missed opportunity, I think, not also to consider NPC Corps role in Hi-Sec at the same time as drafting a Hi-Sec manifesto.



Whilst I'm instinctively inclined to agree with you, I'm reluctantly forced to state that it's meaningless to reconsider NPC corps until the wardec & bounty systems have been convincingly reformed.

My personal sentiment is that NPC corps should really be for new starters, but again we run into the core theme of the manifesto that hi-sec isn't primarily used by and shouldn't be constructed around the needs of new players, but "convenience" players. So, again, what we should be looking to do is open up opportunities for chosing a level of risk and reward appropriate to their requirements rather than simply punish people for not wanting to join a player corp. One obvious way of doing this is to allow players a free choice of NPC corp and then attach different terms and conditions to membership of those corps.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Velicitia
XS Tech
#115 - 2011-11-23 13:57:30 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
always double check that your sig radius/sensor strength is still less than 1.08
Where does one find that information? Sig radius is listed in metres on the fitting window and could not find a row giving a different value on show info. Am very curious about this. I'm assuming this number ensures that you're not lockable in some X amount of time? (Not instantly, I suppose, by someone with excellent skills and mods.)


You can see your sensor strength in the fitting window also, near the bottom right.

1.08 used to be the "unprobeable" threshold. Now you can be probed out with that ratio, but it takes a maxed out covops pilot with virtue implants to do it, and even then it will take them a couple of minutes - easily long enough for you to GTFO if you're alert.

But it's all too easy to assume that your ship is "unprobeable" when actually you're not at all because you forgot to activate an ECM/ didn't notice you were being target painted by NPC/forgot to swap into your Halo clone/etc. Always check, especially when you start picking up probes on DSCAN.



If I'm understanding this right ... you're stating to check that the ratio of sig radius to sensor strength is 1.08 or less?

so if you had say, 20 sensor strength ... to have a sig of 21.6 or less?

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#116 - 2011-11-23 14:02:38 UTC
Velicitia wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
always double check that your sig radius/sensor strength is still less than 1.08
Where does one find that information? Sig radius is listed in metres on the fitting window and could not find a row giving a different value on show info. Am very curious about this. I'm assuming this number ensures that you're not lockable in some X amount of time? (Not instantly, I suppose, by someone with excellent skills and mods.)


You can see your sensor strength in the fitting window also, near the bottom right.

1.08 used to be the "unprobeable" threshold. Now you can be probed out with that ratio, but it takes a maxed out covops pilot with virtue implants to do it, and even then it will take them a couple of minutes - easily long enough for you to GTFO if you're alert.

But it's all too easy to assume that your ship is "unprobeable" when actually you're not at all because you forgot to activate an ECM/ didn't notice you were being target painted by NPC/forgot to swap into your Halo clone/etc. Always check, especially when you start picking up probes on DSCAN.



If I'm understanding this right ... you're stating to check that the ratio of sig radius to sensor strength is 1.08 or less?

so if you had say, 20 sensor strength ... to have a sig of 21.6 or less?


Or in my case a Tengu with 144 sensor, 152 sig, yes.

(A happy side effect of such an outrageously high sensor strength is that you can pretty much laugh at Guristas.)

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Velicitia
XS Tech
#117 - 2011-11-23 14:26:20 UTC
so ... now all I need to do is somehow get my hulk's sensor strength to ~140 then you can never find me! Bear

We shall call this new marvel a super-hulk! yeah, that'll never happen...

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#118 - 2011-11-23 14:31:49 UTC
Velicitia wrote:
so ... now all I need to do is somehow get my hulk's sensor strength to ~140 then you can never find me! Bear

We shall call this new marvel a super-hulk! yeah, that'll never happen...


You're looking at this the wrong way round. Don't try to make your Hulk unprobeable; fit mining lasers to your T3.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Velicitia
XS Tech
#119 - 2011-11-23 15:09:22 UTC
would be an amusing project though ... kind of like a battle-badger fleet :)

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Nevryn Takis
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#120 - 2011-11-23 17:28:15 UTC
MalcanisWhilst I'm instinctively inclined to agree with you, I'm reluctantly forced to state that it's meaningless to reconsider NPC corps until the wardec & bounty systems have been convincingly reformed.

My [i wrote:
personal [/i]sentiment is that NPC corps should really be for new starters, but again we run into the core theme of the manifesto that hi-sec isn't primarily used by and shouldn't be constructed around the needs of new players, but "convenience" players. So, again, what we should be looking to do is open up opportunities for chosing a level of risk and reward appropriate to their requirements rather than simply punish people for not wanting to join a player corp. One obvious way of doing this is to allow players a free choice of NPC corp and then attach different terms and conditions to membership of those corps.


You're ignoring alts on primary accounts or alt alts on alt accounts...
Any self respecting player corp is not going to accept an alt who is only on for an hour or so at a time a couple of times a week,
and there are good reasons for not having all your alts in one corp..