EVE General Discussion

Look. Clearly you don't enjoy nullsec. So go live in highsec, which you think is so much "better."

Those of us who enjoy nullsec, and enjoy actively playing EVE and not running repetitive missions over and over, will continue to live and play in nullsec and make plenty enough ISK doing so.

Well, it's just the one shiny ship vs the combined effect of 10+. Granted you may personally be fielding the same assets, but rewarding group play is supposed to have some meaning there. The only real issue is the fact that the income scales perfectly per member unlike any other activity.

it scales completely wrong lol. To make the kind of isk dinsdale talks about in null, you have to be in a shiney ship that can do dps.

Or you can do the same isk, in high sec, protected by concord and other players, flying nothing more expensive to you personally than a Basilisk or Scimitar.

As in individual who wants isk to buy plex and ships for other things like pvp or exploration or industry, which is the better choice, null sec chance based PVE or what I describe above with the Basi/Scimitar? The answer to this question describes the existance of high sec alts, when having those same alts in danager in null sec would imo be better for the game (a game that needs things to blow up for everyone to have something to do).

Is the imbalance ok because it's a group activity? What if I could make the same kind of isk solo doing missions.....Because you can, Sisters and Trust Partners and Cosmos farming are things.

Ah, so forcing people to do stuff is OK? Awesome!!!

Thanks, Dinsy! To the CSM channel with this breakthrough insight!

Oh man, so many people gonna be forced to do so much stuff. Can you guess who's first? Can you? Can you?


I bet you can!

But I don't believe there is any significant imbalance.

I find nullsec to be hilariously profitable.

Also: CCP doesn't have to listen to these insane claims. They can just straight look at the data and actuality of the situation. Don't they have a PhD economist working with them?

How much ISK do you need, really? 10b? 100b? a trillion? What are you going to do with it?

Who'se making a claim about the economy beyond "power creep is bad, buffing null when it's high sec is the problem is stupid"?

I've explained the imbalance in a couple ways, you're not open to listening to them, too busy defending your status quo maybe?



And where did I say i want more isk? Did you not read the part where I said null sec rewards are fine?

What you are trying to do is pin some selfish motive on me, because you seem to need some way to dismiss the truths I'm telling you. It's a sign that deep down you get what I'm telling you and don't like the reality of it.

Just using the same logic that the null sec cartels have been applying for years in their campaign to wipe out high sec.

No - that is the precise issue.

From my personal perspective renting a -0.17, if I recruit 10 people, then we split the sigs 10 ways (meaning I personally lose most of my income compared to "do no recruiting"), and we can't all be on at the same time if we want to use my system to make good isk ratting anoms.

If I recruit 10 people to fit into 10 timezones across the server, so that we can all access the best anoms in my system, then I don't actually have a corp, I just have ghosts who read corp mail and shoot things when I'm not there to keep the military 5 status up but we don't otherwise cooperate, in fact best bet is to work out where the largest TZ gap of nobody logged in is, and log in first after that.

That structure is also plainly evident in the largest ratting based concerns that rent, ie the renter of the biggest rathole in vale has 250 characters, and since they rent a big rathole, 10 - 15 of them are what you will see online at any time, rather than any particularly large TZ presence, its just self limiting to recruit yourself into peak TZ, or for the corp to recruit more into peak TZ.

So if you were an alliance that wanted to contest timers on arbitrary large hitpoint lumps, you'd want to have recruited all into a TZ, and then you have a peak demand problem when those pilots need to make isk.

ie dominion income systems significantly disjointed compared to dominion sov systems, therefore very hard to start from nothing and produce a force that contests dominion sov systems, as one thing produces an organisation that is very inefficient at the other. This is plain in goons opinions of isk-making in sov, and plain in isk-makers opinions of sov structure bashing tasks.

I suppose you mine?

Get a decent battleship, and try doing some L4s. Between the LP and the salvage, you will be swimming in money within hours. If I cared to, I could plex all of my accounts over the course of a weekend of normal play time.

I don't, because I hate boredom, but nonetheless the ridiculous earning potential is still there. You can get to 80 mil an hour without even bringing a salvage alt.

Right, cuse let me tell you all those null npc agents are clearly breaking the game and everyone is rolling in money there... *eye roll*

High sec if anything isn't safe enough, given how much more prevalent suicide ganking has become since 2008.

The real problem here is that no one can agree on what the real problem is.

It seems that the devs are content to make modest changes and keep both sides pissed. Seems like a good solution to me.

Frankly, easy mode PVE exists in null just as much as it does in hi. If it should exist anywhere, empire is def the place it should be.