These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

High Sec Income vs Null Sec Income - the reality

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#361 - 2013-10-18 09:55:32 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Can I call one of my bomber children Little Baltec or not?


Will you use it to confuse and troll people into thinking its me?
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#362 - 2013-10-18 09:59:38 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Can I call one of my bomber children Little Baltec or not?


Will you use it to confuse and troll people into thinking its me?

Nope Ill put a disclaimer in bio saying no relation. Gonna take them to Branch and kill Faildalis Constans peeps.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#363 - 2013-10-18 10:04:13 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Can I call one of my bomber children Little Baltec or not?


Will you use it to confuse and troll people into thinking its me?

Nope Ill put a disclaimer in bio saying no relation. Gonna take them to Branch and kill Faildalis Constans peeps.


A pity.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#364 - 2013-10-18 12:14:18 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
I see the OP still hasn't corrected the mistake in comparing complexes with missions yet.

Its not a mistake thats why. Combat sites are unlimited, they respawn in other systems. Missions are unlimited. They spawn randomly too.

Whether there is a potential bottleneck if everyone moved to null and started doing combat sites is irrelevant since that will never happen.

I believe it was you Baltec who asked me to provide this information about a month ago. So I want to thank you for helping me expose the hypocrisy of the nullets who ask for highsec to be nerfed to be inline with null, and on a personal level for providing me with the opportunity and incentive to try out null farming.

It's given me a new absurdly profitable source of income stream and made it possible for me to sub up and train the remaining cov bomber pilots I need to form my 10 account ISBoxer bomber wing.

I would like to ask your permission to call one of them Little Baltec?


The bolded part is the length you'll go to to bend reality to fit into your preconceived belief system.

It's not surprising that a person would can't tell the difference between unlimited (agent missions, 1 agent could supply a mission to every single eve player at once) and limited (complexes, of which only a few can exist at once) would also be the typ of person who would think that null sec is "safer" than high sec despite null sec have 7+ times the ship death frequency while holding less than 1/5th of EVE's character population.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#365 - 2013-10-18 12:20:02 UTC
Quote:
Plenty of people to shoot in low and null and wormholes. He simply wants easy to kill targets without having to worry about non war targets, IE he wants to be protected in high sec by concord but at the same time doesn't want to be in the same position as the war targets he's decced, IE attacked in a non-consensual manner other than by the corp he's decced. And he wants to kill non pvp targets because they're easy.


Wrong, as usual. I don't want "easy kills". I just don't want people to be immune. The current mechanics allow them to be immune to everything but suicide ganks. That is wrong, PvP should not be consensual, it goes against the spirit of the game.

As you pro carebear people are so fond of saying when asked to pay for a permit, it's the principle of the thing.


Quote:

You're really bitter about high sec aren't you. I think you need to understand that this is just a computer game. You're angry that people can avoid wars you declare on them - why? Are you paying their sub?

Do you not understand that since 2003 its been this way. That was the way it was designed. You joined a game that had these rules already and now you're whinging about it? Why did'nt you just look for a different game?

You're angry that high sec is safe. In the words of the original lead developer Oveur - "High sec is supposed to be relatively safe". Relatively to low and null sec. If you want to fight people who can't avoid wars, do it in low and null.

That's also a design that has been in place since 2003 when I started playing.

Don't try to adapt the game to your playstyle, adapt your playstyle to the game.

And before you say "oh but you try to change it", I suggest changes, I don't demand them or get all hateful and nasty towards others because they don't play to my style...


For someone who claims to have played since 2003, most of your statements to that effect sure are easily googled.

And no, I am not bitter about highsec. I am passionate about the game as a whole, however. So I don't want to see highsec continue to eclipse other areas of the game as it has come to do. I'd like to see EVE as a whole flourish, not just small portions here and there while the rest languish.

This was the funniest. "Don't try to adapt the game to your playstyle, adapt your playstyle to the game."

This, from the person who posted in Assembly Hall absolutely insisting that reinforcement timers should go to 48 hours so that you could hurt the goonies(nevermind that anyone with actual experience knows it would do the opposite). The person who thinks that asset attack notifications are the problem with sov. From the person who demands to use a shield tanked Proteus. From the person who seems to believe that being told that they are wrong is a personal attack. The person who "suggests" such ludicrous things in the same breath as spouting some of the most tinfoil hat craziness since Ace Uoweme got chased off of these forums. If Herzog went off his medication again we might see some crazier crap, but you're far more prolific, so right now you have the crown.

My congratulations. I have come to the conclusion that you are, in fact, king of the loonies. Bask in the adulation of the unworthy.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#366 - 2013-10-18 12:46:48 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:

You're really bitter about high sec aren't you. I think you need to understand that this is just a computer game. You're angry that people can avoid wars you declare on them - why? Are you paying their sub?

Do you not understand that since 2003 its been this way. That was the way it was designed. You joined a game that had these rules already and now you're whinging about it? Why did'nt you just look for a different game?
...


It is so fun to be able to point out rank hypocricy.

You see, there is this "features and ideas" forum. And in that forum you have a poster, one "Infinity Ziona" or some such that likes to go on and on and on about the evils of local chat and cloaking. which of course are things that have been around since something like 2003 or so. The game was designed to have local chat. Infinity joined a game that had these rules already and now he's whinging about it? why doesn't infinity just look for a different game?

So this Infinity person thinks it's perfectly fine for HIM to ask for changes to things even though these things have been around for ever, but when Kaarous Aldurald Does the exact same thing, well, that's just out of bounds, ain't it.......
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#367 - 2013-10-18 13:01:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
Could I instead be Queen of the Loonies, just that that would suit my avatar better.

Edit: actually when I joined local chat was still just a channel for talking and no cloaking was not around in 2003.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#368 - 2013-10-18 13:27:26 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Could I instead be Queen of the Loonies, just that that would suit my avatar better.

Edit: actually when I joined local chat was still just a channel for talking and no cloaking was not around in 2003.


You joined a game with local chat, it makes no difference that people hadn't figured out how to use it lol.

You also joined a game that didn't provide a place for neutrals to dock up in someone else's space, yet you asked for that. You joined a game with structures that had hit points that needed grinding as well as (later) reinforcement timers (added to keep the game from being dominated by one time zone).

Time and time again you've asked for self serving changes to the game, changes that would make what you do easier. And it's of course ok when you do it, but someone else does the same thing, well they should just find another game. That's that underlying selfishness I mentioned about you a while back. It's one of your biggest problems.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#369 - 2013-10-18 15:40:43 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Could I instead be Queen of the Loonies, just that that would suit my avatar better.

Edit: actually when I joined local chat was still just a channel for talking and no cloaking was not around in 2003.


You joined a game with local chat, it makes no difference that people hadn't figured out how to use it lol.

You also joined a game that didn't provide a place for neutrals to dock up in someone else's space, yet you asked for that. You joined a game with structures that had hit points that needed grinding as well as (later) reinforcement timers (added to keep the game from being dominated by one time zone).

Time and time again you've asked for self serving changes to the game, changes that would make what you do easier. And it's of course ok when you do it, but someone else does the same thing, well they should just find another game. That's that underlying selfishness I mentioned about you a while back. It's one of your biggest problems.

You're failing to understand suggesting vs demanding. I'm quite fine with local as it is, would it be easier for me, no, quite a bit harder but it would make space more fun. Did I suggest removing reinforcement timers, I'm pretty sure I said they sucked, did I demand, nope. Did CCP read that and think perhaps we should be able to hurt alliances? Maybe, they're adding pos vampire modules.

Did I suggest being able to refit and so on, sure, did I demand it? Yes I went to war solo with an alliance in their hub system demanding I be allowed to dock, did I get to dock? Yes. Did CCP perhaps read my suggestion and also think it should be changed? Maybe. They introduced new modules that allow us to refit.

The difference is, where I can take it upon myself to adapt I do. Where I cant I suggest. What comes or doesn't from that Im happy to accept either way.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#370 - 2013-10-18 15:52:57 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:

You're failing to understand suggesting vs demanding. I'm quite fine with local as it is, would it be easier for me, no, quite a bit harder but it would make space more fun. Did I suggest removing reinforcement timers, I'm pretty sure I said they sucked, did I demand, nope. Did CCP read that and think perhaps we should be able to hurt alliances? Maybe, they're adding pos vampire modules.

Did I suggest being able to refit and so on, sure, did I demand it? Yes I went to war solo with an alliance in their hub system demanding I be allowed to dock, did I get to dock? Yes. Did CCP perhaps read my suggestion and also think it should be changed? Maybe. They introduced new modules that allow us to refit.

The difference is, where I can take it upon myself to adapt I do. Where I cant I suggest. What comes or doesn't from that Im happy to accept either way.


And you miss the point (by trying to evade it with splitting hairs) again. the difference between "suggesting" and "demanding" are, well, nothing, both have the same effect on these forums.

The bolded part is just plain delusional. The new deployables have nothing to do with you what so ever, any old member of the CSM can tell you that CCP has been planning stuff like this for a long time.

The last sentence is outright false. There are plenty of other things you could have "adapted to" (like bringing an alt or friend before "suggesting" CCP change the game to accommodate you in enemy space) that you didn't.

At the end of the day, your not honest enough to see the truth, which is ok because, well, most folks aren't. That doesn't change the fact that what you said to Kaarolous demonstrated a terrible double standard. You complain about stuff way more than he does, it's you who should leave the game if anyone. Your words, not mine.
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#371 - 2013-10-18 16:14:24 UTC
Onictus wrote:


You don't get it high sec is 28 jumps away.....That is with jump bridges.


Your network sucks. Get/negotiate a better one. Hell I've been in BFE and never more than a dozen jumps or so from HS.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#372 - 2013-10-18 16:15:54 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

You're failing to understand suggesting vs demanding. I'm quite fine with local as it is, would it be easier for me, no, quite a bit harder but it would make space more fun. Did I suggest removing reinforcement timers, I'm pretty sure I said they sucked, did I demand, nope. Did CCP read that and think perhaps we should be able to hurt alliances? Maybe, they're adding pos vampire modules.

Did I suggest being able to refit and so on, sure, did I demand it? Yes I went to war solo with an alliance in their hub system demanding I be allowed to dock, did I get to dock? Yes. Did CCP perhaps read my suggestion and also think it should be changed? Maybe. They introduced new modules that allow us to refit.

The difference is, where I can take it upon myself to adapt I do. Where I cant I suggest. What comes or doesn't from that Im happy to accept either way.


And you miss the point (by trying to evade it with splitting hairs) again. the difference between "suggesting" and "demanding" are, well, nothing, both have the same effect on these forums.

The bolded part is just plain delusional. The new deployables have nothing to do with you what so ever, any old member of the CSM can tell you that CCP has been planning stuff like this for a long time.

The last sentence is outright false. There are plenty of other things you could have "adapted to" (like bringing an alt or friend before "suggesting" CCP change the game to accommodate you in enemy space) that you didn't.

At the end of the day, your not honest enough to see the truth, which is ok because, well, most folks aren't. That doesn't change the fact that what you said to Kaarolous demonstrated a terrible double standard. You complain about stuff way more than he does, it's you who should leave the game if anyone. Your words, not mine.

I'm really getting under that skin aren't I? :) Good.

Fortunately there is quite a big difference between demanding and suggesting. Lot of people would find themselves unemployed if all their suggestions became demands I think. That can be your homework for today, checking the dictionary for that difference.

As for the new changes, like I said "maybe"; also a big difference between that word and "definitely". I have been "suggesting" refitting ability in null for quite some time, likely before you even subscribed.

And the difference between my posts and your wonderboy is he would like nothing better than to take away the right to play in highsec without being constantly harassed and killed while I simply would like to participate in all areas of the game without being cockblocked by the server at every turn, especially in null.

I am however happy to continue to play as is.




CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#373 - 2013-10-18 16:23:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Quote:

And the difference between my posts and your wonderboy is he would like nothing better than to take away the right to play in highsec without being constantly harassed and killed while I simply would like to participate in all areas of the game without being cockblocked by the server at every turn, especially in null.

I am however happy to continue to play as is.


One could easily argue again, (thus demonstrating your double standard) that I would merely like to engage in the lawful and accepted method of highsec PvP without being "cockblocked" by the mechanics.

You, on the other hand, want to dock in space that doesn't belong to you, want reinforcement timers bafflingly changed for your personal benefit, and are doing your best to take credit for the implementation of an idea that's been around for a long, long time.

I, on the other hand, would just like to play the game the way it was meant to be.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#374 - 2013-10-18 16:26:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Infinity Ziona wrote:

I'm really getting under that skin aren't I? :) Good.


Im sorry, some dude on the internet can't get under my skin, I deal with real bad people all night son.. I just think it's sad that an obviously smart person has so many internal issues that they can't see the truth of a situation. In this case, it's the blatant double standard you threw at another poster


Quote:

Fortunately there is quite a big difference between demanding and suggesting. Lot of people would find themselves unemployed if all their suggestions became demands I think. That can be your homework for today, checking the dictionary for that difference.

As for the new changes, like I said "maybe"; also a big difference between that word and "definitely". I have been "suggesting" refitting ability in null for quite some time, likely before you even subscribed.

And the difference between my posts and your wonderboy is he would like nothing better than to take away the right to play in highsec without being constantly harassed and killed while I simply would like to participate in all areas of the game without being cockblocked by the server at every turn, especially in null.

I am however happy to continue to play as is.


Show me anywhere where the "right" to play a sandbox MMO without interference from other players is listed, I';d like to make a poster out of it.

No, all Kaaoluous wants (as do I) is a game with a consistent rule-set. High sec muddies EVE's rule-set and allows some clowns to believe utterly ridicules things, like the "right" to be safe in a sandbox pvp game.

What you want is a game to cater to your wants which is why your every suggestion is self serving drivel that if implemented would only serve to HELP the people and "cartels" of null sec shut more people out 9for example, your "being able to dock somewhere in sov space" idea would only serve to make ALL space an npc staging area like NPc Delve for Huge coalitions like CFC).. If your thinking wasn't so backwards, you see it.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#375 - 2013-10-18 16:27:29 UTC
Oh, come on! My name isn't that tricky. Now you're just all over the place. :P

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#376 - 2013-10-18 16:30:03 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Oh, come on! My name isn't that tricky. Now you're just all over the place. :P


I spelled it right. Kaatoxyuoulous. See.
Angeal MacNova
Holefood Inc.
Warriors of the Blood God
#377 - 2013-10-18 16:41:41 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

Wrong, as usual. I don't want "easy kills". I just don't want people to be immune. The current mechanics allow them to be immune to everything but suicide ganks. That is wrong, PvP should not be consensual, it goes against the spirit of the game.

As you pro carebear people are so fond of saying when asked to pay for a permit, it's the principle of the thing.



Really....

Corp A war decs Corp B, and corp B disbands to npc corp(s). Corp A just won. Players being able to drop corp and thus drop the war by joining an NPC corp has been around since before I first started playing on my other (inactive, older and currently characterless) account.

Also,

Sports = Consensual PvP
War = Consensual PvP

When one group goes to war against another group and that other group tries to run and hide while the first group comes by and kills them all, that is not 'war'. It is called a massacre which is often concidered a 'war crime'.

So to start, your notion of PvP not being consensual is completely out of touch with reality and simply your own sadistic tendancies while your belief of such being the "spirit of the game", is in complete contradiction to CCP's as demonstrated through current game mechanics.

After all, each race would have their own default npc corp for players who are not in a player corp, and these npc corps would all be at constant war with each other. When you make a new character, if you don't join a player corp within a couple months, you get transfered from the starter npc corp to the default corp.

Also, Concord could be made to deny service to player corps, even those in hi-sec.

Seeing as how the game is NOT like this, CCP clearly sees the "spirit of the game" to be quite different to your own sadistic view.

http://www.projectvaulderie.com/goodnight-sweet-prince/

http://www.projectvaulderie.com/the-untold-story/

CCP's true, butthurt, colors.

Because those who can't do themselves keep others from doing too.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#378 - 2013-10-18 16:52:11 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

I'm really getting under that skin aren't I? :) Good.


Im sorry, some dude on the internet can't get under my skin, I deal with real bad people all night son.. I just think it's sad that an obviously smart person has so many internal issues that they can't see the truth of a situation. In this case, it's the blatant double standard you threw at another poster


Quote:

Fortunately there is quite a big difference between demanding and suggesting. Lot of people would find themselves unemployed if all their suggestions became demands I think. That can be your homework for today, checking the dictionary for that difference.

As for the new changes, like I said "maybe"; also a big difference between that word and "definitely". I have been "suggesting" refitting ability in null for quite some time, likely before you even subscribed.

And the difference between my posts and your wonderboy is he would like nothing better than to take away the right to play in highsec without being constantly harassed and killed while I simply would like to participate in all areas of the game without being cockblocked by the server at every turn, especially in null.

I am however happy to continue to play as is.


Show me anywhere where the "right" to play a sandbox MMO without interference from other players is listed, I';d like to make a poster out of it.

No, all Kaaoluous wants (as do I) is a game with a consistent rule-set. High sec muddies EVE's rule-set and allows some clowns to believe utterly ridicules things, like the "right" to be safe in a sandbox pvp game.

What you want is a game to cater to your wants which is why your every suggestion is self serving drivel that if implemented would only serve to HELP the people and "cartels" of null sec shut more people out 9for example, your "being able to dock somewhere in sov space" idea would only serve to make ALL space an npc staging area like NPc Delve for Huge coalitions like CFC).. If your thinking wasn't so backwards, you see it.

No Im definitely getting under your skin. I can tell by the increasing frequency of your personal attacks against me as a person rather than the topic. But thats cool, Im enjoying this.

Now let's not straw man what I said, I said "without constantly being harassed and killed". A long time ago Zombie corp discovered a way to get into highsec and kill people without Concord intervention. Those involved were banned. Why? Because players in high do have a right to play without being constantly harassed and killed. As stated earlier in this thread Ovuer, the lead developer published a Dev Blog on the incident and stated that "highsec was supposed to be relatively safe". This lends support to my argument that people in high have a right to not be constantly harassed and killed.

It also very strongly negates your opinion that high low null and wormhole I assume you would include need or should have consistent rules. I'll assume that was a "suggestion". Did you manage to look that word up yet? I think your suggestion is nonsensical.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#379 - 2013-10-18 17:02:50 UTC
Angeal MacNova wrote:


Really....

Corp A war decs Corp B, and corp B disbands to npc corp(s). Corp A just won. Players being able to drop corp and thus drop the war by joining an NPC corp has been around since before I first started playing on my other (inactive, older and currently characterless) account.



Were it about getting their corp to disband, yes. But it's not. I don't give a hoot about their corp, I want to kill them. Clearly, they don't want to be killed. A mechanism currently exists preventing me from killing them despite declaring war on them.

Why is it the case that a player can make themselves immune to PvP? Why does anyone, not just highsec players, get to say "yes" or "no"? If you get to actually have a say in the matter after I have gone to the lengths necessary to wardec you, that's not a war, that's a tennis match.

Generate killrights on dec dodgers.


Quote:

Also,

Sports = Consensual PvP
War = Consensual PvP


Sports are. Wars are rarely, if ever, consensual. Pretty sure WW2 wasn't consensual for most of Europe.

Quote:


When one group goes to war against another group and that other group tries to run and hide while the first group comes by and kills them all, that is not 'war'. It is called a massacre which is often concidered a 'war crime'.

So to start, your notion of PvP not being consensual is completely out of touch with reality and simply your own sadistic tendancies while your belief of such being the "spirit of the game", is in complete contradiction to CCP's as demonstrated through current game mechanics.


Fortunately, in EVE, seeing as capsuleers exist apart from their empires, nothing is or can be considered a war crime. There are also no such things as a war crime in a video game, with the possible exception of the Planetside 1 funeral bombing.

But apparently EVE is real, to you.

Oh, and here we go, I'm a sadist. Last time it was a sociopath. I wonder what I'll be next week, for wanting to shoot spaceships in a game about shooting spaceships. What an awful person I am...

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#380 - 2013-10-18 17:06:11 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:

No Im definitely getting under your skin. I can tell by the increasing frequency of your personal attacks against me as a person rather than the topic. But thats cool, Im enjoying this.

Now let's not straw man what I said, I said "without constantly being harassed and killed". A long time ago Zombie corp discovered a way to get into highsec and kill people without Concord intervention. Those involved were banned. Why? Because players in high do have a right to play without being constantly harassed and killed. As stated earlier in this thread Ovuer, the lead developer published a Dev Blog on the incident and stated that "highsec was supposed to be relatively safe". This lends support to my argument that people in high have a right to not be constantly harassed and killed.

It also very strongly negates your opinion that high low null and wormhole I assume you would include need or should have consistent rules. I'll assume that was a "suggestion". Did you manage to look that word up yet? I think your suggestion is nonsensical.


See the bolded part?

rel·a·tive·ly
ˈrelətivlē/
adverb
adverb: relatively

1.
in relation, comparison, or proportion to something else.

The only time a player has a right to not get repeatedly killed is when the killer is doing it specifically to them over and over to cause that single individual grief. There is no general right to safety in high sec.

Yes, high sec rules should be consistent with the underlying rule of EVE online: flying in space is dangerous everywhere. The only suitable exceptions to that are the rule I listed about against intentional targeted individual griefing and in newbie systems/ noob mission arc.

As many do in real life, you imagine a right where no such right exists.